a 2004 American movie into which director/actor Mel Gibson poured his heart and soul and $30 million of his own money, should have been offered entirely in reconstructed Aramaic and Latin with vernacular subtitles.
The only conclusion I can come up with for this verbal imposition is that the director was bound and determined to make the story as true to life as possible... that he had a sense that other depictions of Christian legend fell short of the actual-factual truth of what the Christian savior lived and died within. If this was the fire that filled Gibson's belly -- if verisimilitude was a driving force, then I wonder ....
Why was the man who played Jesus Christ so blatantly Caucasian?
True, it probably contributed to the $600 million the movie made, but if verisimilitude were important, where was the nut-brown man who is the odds-on favorite when it comes to reconstructing Christian history?
I guess verisimilitude varies according to who is depicting it....
A fact that seems to mock the notion of "verisimilitude."
Post a Comment