Christopher Hitchens on Charlie Rose 25-Feb-04 (Part 1)

[@bowanna63]

absolutely fantastic.......keep them coming....has anybody gotten the better of hitchens intelectually...thank you

[@ilovebaconsandwiches]

The movie should have been called "Saving Private Jesus"

[@joeylodes]

true! true!

[@saidthedog]

I love Jeusus too!

[@terratrema]

And you've countered my "clueless idiocy" with the most boring and tedious argument evar! Should've trusted your instincts.

[@sign84]

Gee, what a balance point of view. All of Rose's guest were against the film.

[@YesYou123333]

Hahahaha...Hitchens hoped nobody would go see it. How much did the movie gross? I think it was hovering around 1/2 Billion dollars.

[@terratrema]

@SeeProfileForDetails I think I was just complaining about the amount of time Hitchens has spent on Gibson, who is just a sordid showbiz personality of little relevance. Hitchens made numerous TV appearances at the time of The Passion, wrote 3 or 4 Slate articles, several Vanity Fair pieces, Gibson is the topic of the opening section of Hitchens' Daniel Pearl Foundation speech, there's stuff about him in Hitchens' anti-God book etc. It just seems like there are better targets out there.

[@DeusMerdaeEst]

This movie was almost as good as Conan The Barbarian, but much more violent.

[@bornbillsmith]

@terratrema I don't like Gibson as a person but as an actor and as a film producer he has talent.

[@terratrema]

@SeeProfileForDetails Yeah, they're kindred spirits in a way. They should get together over a bottle of Talisker and talk it over. I predict Hitchens would leave as a somewhat ardent atheist, and Gibson would remain a nutcase mega-Catholic.

[@terratrema]

Not interested in arguing with a whiny hypocrite who complains about people using insults when he is LITERALLY the only person throwing insults around. Utterly pathetic.

[@aitch3]

well Ebert liked it for some reason. I don't even want to see it And now we know that M Gibson is a real good Christian-- right!?

[@terratrema]

@SeeProfileForDetails Thanks for that, but I don't get the relevance. Gibson is not a Christian Scientist. He's some sort of ultra-Catholic. Anyway, I have no idea why I wrote what I wrote 8 months ago. Certainly can't remember writing it. And I know fine well that Hitchens has said his piece on the crazy settlers. Perhaps I was drunk when I wrote it. Both Gibson and Hitchens like a drink too, you know.

[@terratrema]

@LondonPride25 I agree whole heart ed lay. Apocalypto was thrilling, adventurous, slightly-surreal and wholly-engaging stuff. But Braveheart is almost unwatchably syrupy and exasperating (and I say this as a Scottish person eh), The Passion was actually boring, if I'm gonna be quite frank, and I can't really remember The Man With No Face, or whatever it was called, so I guess that means it's unmemorable. His movies are always "well-made" but mostly uninspired, apart from that one awesome one.

[@RoDJ99]

I don't see why Christians over the years have been so Anti-Semitic? Let's just say the Jews were responsible for the death of Christ, shouldn't they be thanking them? If Christ wasn't executed, where would Christians throw their sins and responsibilities onto?

[@LondonPride25]

Mel Gibson has directed one decent film that I've seen - Apocalypto. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I also watched The Passion of the Christ and found it to be hysterical, exploitative, manipulative shite.

[@terratrema]

Lol yes it does. (This is so easy!)

[@terratrema]

Weren't you gonna stop replying to me two whole messages ago due to my filthy "trolling"?

[@bobjones864]

I actually think the emphasis on sadism is the film's strong point. But the theology and the anti-semitic take on history is stupid. I'm obviously not a Christian though.

[@terratrema]

@SeeProfileForDetails Hitchens spent alot of time and ink on Gibson AS A PERSON. The film itself doesn't take up alot of space on Hitchens' potfolio. Look it up if you are interested. Hitchens tried to use Gibson as a symbol of all that is wrong with Christianity. To me, Gibson as a human being is a talentless, boring, pathetic, uninteresting, washed-up alcoholic who is of little or no interest. There are better targets out there; I just don't get why Hitchens uses him as a be-all and end-all.

[@Draeka]

Movie sucks. Religion sucks. Thankfully Charlie Rose doesn't.