Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 Ok, so I saw The Passion Of The Christ, and I really thought it was anamazing film. However, I find this sick: http://www.sharethepassionofthechrist.com/jewelry.asp#Nail You can buy (from the official site) a replica crucifixion nail to wear as a pendant. That is so cynnical that it's disgusting. Anyone have an opinion on this? I am not religious (outwardly) but this made me feel so mad. Am I overreacting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clickett Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 not over reacting at all, i find it sick and disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EverettJL Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 You can buy (from the official site) a replica crucifixion nail to wear as a pendant. That is so cynnical that it's disgusting. That site offends me, I'll be sure to write them an angry mail to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 I mean, ok, people wear crosses and such, but the nail is being sold for the pure reason of financial profit. That just seems wrong! I wanna find who came up with that idea, and show him how they were supposed to be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0welly Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 I mean, ok, people wear crosses and such, but the nail is being sold for the pure reason of financial profit. That just seems wrong!I wanna find who came up with that idea, and show him how they were supposed to be used. They didnt make the film to be nice! "money makes the world go round, the world go round, the world go round" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poind Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 (edited) Uh, well, in the big scheme of things, the vast majority of Hollywood films (not to mention others) are intended to make profit in one form or another sooner-or-later, directly or indirectly. Yes, I find such clear profiteering attempts (esp. via the official website) of poor taste, and of likely long-term *harm* to profit, if that's all they care about. Would certainly alter how I view the movie and my own desire to see it. Lots of slimy / poor-taste marketing stuff comes off of any number of films these days. Is a shame a film like this is made only to turn around and try to do the equivalent of selling replicas of the ring from "Lord of the Rings". Maybe I missed it, but are they selling T-shirts too? At least there don't seem to be plastic "collector" cups at McDonald's and the like, I suppose. [Edit: Is there a videogame in the pipeline? Wouldn't be surprised....] Edited March 29, 2004 by poind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougkinzinger Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 It's just some poor bloke trying to make bling-bling out of a movie. Oh well. He'll learn one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 I realise holywood is 100% about money, but have they all sold their souls that there is no line drawn under what should be bad taste? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piercehead Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 Chill guys. It might be a bit sick, but hey......it's not like his relatives are alive to be offended by it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poind Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 I realise holywood is 100% about money, but have they all sold their souls that there is no line drawn under what should be bad taste? "Sold souls" and Hollywood (not to mention "lowest-common denominator" and "bad taste") aren't exactly lacking in familiarity, at the least.... Yes, you have a very good point in this thread, and yes, I very much would have expected official marketing to be a lot brighter and less flagrantly tasteless.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 No, but his followers are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forster Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 I actually think that they were quite tastefully done. I fail to see what is 'sick' about them. They are just memorabilia, not worth getting upset over, just close the browser window and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerox Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 I am not religious, and certainly not christian. But this was disturbing and disrespectful... Especially, i think "The Passion Nail ?" was a bit tasteles:x:x Religious jewellery is 100% ok if people want to use it for their own personal reasons. But this is a commercial spin off product from a movie, and that doesn't go well with the religious theme. The designs are very nice, and seem to be very hight quality, but... I think people will buy these because they got swept away with the strong images in the movie, and not because they have a remote idea what they really symbolize... Some of them are even in Hebrew... Like I said, I'm not a christian, but I havrespectu>, and turning Jesus? into a brand name and a commercial spin off product on this level is disrespectful... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0welly Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 How can you be offended by a nail but not by the whole cross or a crucifix pendant? surely its no better or worse than the religious jewellery that is already available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 It is different in how it is marketed. I am not offended by the cross per-se, but by the fact that the studios are making money from exploiting religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0welly Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 It is different in how it is marketed. I am not offended by the cross per-se, but by the fact that the studios are making money from exploiting religion. Im not religious so I could be missing the point. But doesnt the film make money by exploting religion, dont the Jewellers who make crosses make money by exploting religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 The jewelers: Yes, but not quite so intrinsically linked with the crucifixion - the cross has become a sign of christianity, and moreover a day to day symbol. The film: Yes, totally, 100% - but it's a lot less weird (in my mind) than "Hey, here is a replica of what they used to nail Jesus up, a stake through his hand. And now, you can wear it as a fashion accessory" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remote Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 How is this any different or more sickining then Mel Gibson profiting from the death of JC? Speillberg had the heart to donate every penny of Schindlers List to the holocust memorial fund Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Battery Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 why would anyone want one of these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeons Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 I mean, ok, people wear crosses and such, but the nail is being sold for the pure reason of financial profit. That just seems wrong!I wanna find who came up with that idea, and show him how they were supposed to be used. Doesn't your last statement go against the Christian belief of forgivening? Kinda hypocritical isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morkuma Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 people out here have been wearing the nail instead of the cross for years. nothing new about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeons Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 It is different in how it is marketed. I am not offended by the cross per-se, but by the fact that the studios are making money from exploiting religion. I guess we all have our opinions, I think religion exploits its people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 Sure, I am not against that. I am against the way it is being marketed, visit the page, see the picture of the crucifxion in the background? Maybe it's just me, but I think it's a little too much. Would you go to Auschwitz and buy a "lock of hair" keyring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted March 29, 2004 Author Share Posted March 29, 2004 aeons: Not at all, it isn't remotely hippocritical, as I stated that I am not Christian! Read on dude, you may learn a little! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeons Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 This nail is no different than the cross, they were both things used to kill Jesus. I'm failing to see the distinction between the 2. I mean, if 1900 years ago, someone chose the nail instead of the cross to be the "sign" of the Christian faith, would you be this torked about the cross on a necklace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts