I had a little chat at the bus stop with some Dewey parents. We were discussing Mel's little talk with Diane last night on ABC. I did not see the whole interview, but was both impressed and perplexed.
I still don't get why people respond to claims of a movie being antisemitic with the rhetoric of authorship--"I didn't intend it to be antisemitic." I agree that Mel G. is not an antisemite simply because he is a pre-Vatican II catholic. But his discourse, in this case a film, can be utilized toward antisemitic ends. Abraham Foxman, national director of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, put it well:
"This is his vision, his faith; he's a true believer, and I respect that," Foxman said. "But there are times that there are unintended consequences. I believe that this movie has the potential to fuel anti-Semitism, to reinforce it."
Posted by Frank Yamada at February 17, 2004 01:40 PMThere is an interesting article in newsweek- apparently he used more "historical sources" than the four gospels- also two very anti-semitic accounts from the middle ages. The movie is said to make Pilate out to be an awfully nice guy who just had his hands tied by those scurrilous Jews. Also, apparently when the phrase "his blood be on us and upon our children" there is a quick cut straight to Caiaphas...
not exactly promising, is it?
Posted by: dave at February 18, 2004 12:11 AM