Post subject: Jews Protest Portman Kiss Scene in Jerusalem
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:55 pm
Got Some
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:45 pm Posts: 1481 Location: Jersey
Jews Protest Portman Scene in Jerusalem
JERUSALEM (AP) -- Dozens of ultra-Orthodox Jewish worshippers confronted Natalie Portman and her co-star, objecting to the couple kissing during the filming of a scene beside Jerusalem's Western Wall.
The incident Tuesday evening underlined the sensitivity of the site, a remnant of the biblical Jewish temples, the holiest place where Jews can pray.
The site is controlled by strictly observant Jews. Male and female worshippers are separated by a barrier perpendicular to the wall, following Orthodox Jewish rules forbidding casual contact between the sexes.
Police said they had to step in when worshippers spotted Portman and Israeli actor Aki Avni embracing and kissing as part of a scene for "Free Zone." The daily Yediot Ahronot said ultra-Orthodox Jews charged the couple, shouting, "Immoral, immoral!"
Police said they asked the actors to leave and return later, and they agreed.
The rabbi in charge of the site, Shmuel Rabinovitch, said that codes of conduct under religious and state law prohibit acting or romantic interaction near the wall. "That code was not followed," he said.
The Israeli-born Portman, 23, has been studying at Hebrew University in Jerusalem in recent months.
SMOOCH ADO: Jews praying at the Western Wall disrupted filming of Israeli native Natalie Portman's romantic movie scene with Aki Avni.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Why would they even bother coming back. Why not build a set or use a green screen? Seems more respectful than just waiting until people leave and doing it anyhow.
Oh yeah, and I Natalie Portman!
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:46 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Medford, Oregon Gender: Male
punkdavid wrote:
The filmmakers must have known that this was inappropriate, especially when there were pilgrims and worshippers around.
It's just a matter of respect, if not for the site itself, then for the people who were there who revere the site.
--PunkDavid
Not to mention that the actor is Israeli, she's Israeli-born and has been studying there for months. Yeah, pretty disresectful IMO. They'll surely burn in the eternal fires of Hell for this.
_________________ Deep below the dunes I roved Past the rows, past the rows Beside the acacias freshly in bloom I sent men to their doom
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:50 pm Posts: 3955 Location: Leaving Here
I'm surprised any US film company, assuming the film is being made by one, would be anywhere in that region of the world filming. If it is an Israel fim company, they would certainly know what is and is not appropriate for the area, one would think.
Bizarre. I'm glad they didn't go nuts and arrest the actors or something - that would not have been good.
In other Nat news, look for the movie "Free Zone":
Amos Gitai will direct Natalie Portman, currently starring in Closer with Julia Roberts, in a new movie to be called The Free Zone.
Portman, 23, was born in Jerusalem but moved to the US as a child and is probably best known for her role as Queen Amidala in the Star Wars movies.
She has never worked with an Israeli director before, although for the past few months she has been studying at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
In addition to Portman, the cast will include Israeli actors Hanna Lazlo, Tinkerbell, Haim Abbas, Makram J. Khoury and Uri Ran Klausner, as well as Spanish actress Carmen Maura.
The Free Zone will be a comedy about three women who run an armored vehicle business in the Middle East. Principal photography will begin in February in Israel. The film will be an Israeli-French co-production.
Gitai has directed dozens of movies in Israel and France. His most recent film, Promised Land, won an award at last year's Venice Film Festival.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
Quote:
In addition to Portman, the cast will include Israeli actors Hanna Lazlo, Tinkerbell, Haim Abbas, Makram J. Khoury and Uri Ran Klausner, as well as Spanish actress Carmen Maura.
Now that's a nice traditional Jewish name. I think Tinkerbell was one of the Matriarchs.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
I guess I'm the only one that doesn't think this is a big deal at all. I find it very interesting that there is a thread on the front page that had an original title about the pope dying already, and aside from the crude title no one cared at all. Yet two people kiss in front of a wall and this is something that should have been thought out and perhaps not have occurred because it is offensive to people of the Jewish faith? Please, spare me. It's a wall and a kiss.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
PJDoll wrote:
I guess I'm the only one that doesn't think this is a big deal at all. I find it very interesting that there is a thread on the front page that had an original title about the pope dying already, and aside from the crude title no one cared at all. Yet two people kiss in front of a wall and this is something that should have been thought out and perhaps not have occurred because it is offensive to people of the Jewish faith? Please, spare me. It's a wall and a kiss.
Well, the dead pope thread is twice as long. And the one last week was 4 pages. You might be overestimating the shock and awe of this thread.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
I guess I'm the only one that doesn't think this is a big deal at all. I find it very interesting that there is a thread on the front page that had an original title about the pope dying already, and aside from the crude title no one cared at all. Yet two people kiss in front of a wall and this is something that should have been thought out and perhaps not have occurred because it is offensive to people of the Jewish faith? Please, spare me. It's a wall and a kiss.
Well, the dead pope thread is twice as long. And the one last week was 4 pages. You might be overestimating the shock and awe of this thread.
Maybe, but the fact that it seems more people are disturbed by this than by all the anti-Catholic and anti-Christian sentiments on this board kind of says something.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
PJDoll wrote:
I guess I'm the only one that doesn't think this is a big deal at all. I find it very interesting that there is a thread on the front page that had an original title about the pope dying already, and aside from the crude title no one cared at all. Yet two people kiss in front of a wall and this is something that should have been thought out and perhaps not have occurred because it is offensive to people of the Jewish faith? Please, spare me. It's a wall and a kiss.
I'll try to draw a few distinctions between the two that you may or may not find compelling.
Firstly, I'd say that this kiss episode is more akin to the sex in a church incident than to the "death to the Pope" comment. We are talking about a perceived desecration of a holy place, whether you or I or anyone else here thinks it's a big deal or not. Those people who do think it is a big deal obviously think it is a big deal, and they are very pissed off. The people who orchestrated both acts (the Wall and the church), should have known better, and it is apparent to me, did it for the attention it would create. I don't know what the context in the film was for the kiss, but any Israeli would presumably know that this kiss would be taboo, and I suspect that the tabooness was the purpose of it for the film.
Secondly, however offensive as the thread title that wished death on the Pope, it was merely words, and I'm inclined to give more leeway to words than to actions regardless of whether they both fall under the heading of "freedom of speech". Also, it is important to note the audience for both. The kiss took place in full view of those people who would be most offended by it, just as the sex in the church was. The comment on this message board, while it did in fact offend some people, both Catholics and non-Catholics, was not made in an especially sensitive place, like if the title of the thread had been painted on a bedsheet and paraded in St. Peter's square (which still would not be as bad as taking a shit in the square IMO).
So, to give an example of my point, imagine if Opie & Anthony had merely suggested, and not actively encouraged as they did, that someone go and have sex in a Catholic church, or even worse, go and have sex in St. Peter's square. There would no doubt have been those who would have been extremely offended by the mere suggestion, and some who would have demanded their heads for their blasphemy. However, they would been offended by mere words, and words are not enough in my opinion to justify the moral indignation that would be justified against one who would actually do the act suggested.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am Posts: 22978 Gender: Male
punkdavid wrote:
So, to give an example of my point, imagine if Opie & Anthony had merely suggested, and not actively encouraged as they did, that someone go and have sex in a Catholic church, or even worse, go and have sex in St. Peter's square. There would no doubt have been those who would have been extremely offended by the mere suggestion, and some who would have demanded their heads for their blasphemy. However, they would been offended by mere words, and words are not enough in my opinion to justify the moral indignation that would be justified against one who would actually do the act suggested.
--PunkDavid
As far as i know, the sex in the church is alleged.. and definately wasn't "witnessed" by anyone other than the person that was there with the alleged participants., however, it was broadcast over the air via radio, so there is still the possibility it could have all been a hoax.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
edzeppe wrote:
punkdavid wrote:
So, to give an example of my point, imagine if Opie & Anthony had merely suggested, and not actively encouraged as they did, that someone go and have sex in a Catholic church, or even worse, go and have sex in St. Peter's square. There would no doubt have been those who would have been extremely offended by the mere suggestion, and some who would have demanded their heads for their blasphemy. However, they would been offended by mere words, and words are not enough in my opinion to justify the moral indignation that would be justified against one who would actually do the act suggested.
--PunkDavid
As far as i know, the sex in the church is alleged.. and definately wasn't "witnessed" by anyone other than the person that was there with the alleged participants., however, it was broadcast over the air via radio, so there is still the possibility it could have all been a hoax.
A minor point of dispute.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
So, to give an example of my point, imagine if Opie & Anthony had merely suggested, and not actively encouraged as they did, that someone go and have sex in a Catholic church, or even worse, go and have sex in St. Peter's square. There would no doubt have been those who would have been extremely offended by the mere suggestion, and some who would have demanded their heads for their blasphemy. However, they would been offended by mere words, and words are not enough in my opinion to justify the moral indignation that would be justified against one who would actually do the act suggested.
--PunkDavid
As far as i know, the sex in the church is alleged.. and definately wasn't "witnessed" by anyone other than the person that was there with the alleged participants., however, it was broadcast over the air via radio, so there is still the possibility it could have all been a hoax.
the two were arrested for the act while still in the church. It isn't alleged. She plead out to a charge of disorderly conduct.
I guess I'm the only one that doesn't think this is a big deal at all. I find it very interesting that there is a thread on the front page that had an original title about the pope dying already, and aside from the crude title no one cared at all. Yet two people kiss in front of a wall and this is something that should have been thought out and perhaps not have occurred because it is offensive to people of the Jewish faith? Please, spare me. It's a wall and a kiss.
I'll try to draw a few distinctions between the two that you may or may not find compelling.
Firstly, I'd say that this kiss episode is more akin to the sex in a church incident than to the "death to the Pope" comment. We are talking about a perceived desecration of a holy place, whether you or I or anyone else here thinks it's a big deal or not. Those people who do think it is a big deal obviously think it is a big deal, and they are very pissed off. The people who orchestrated both acts (the Wall and the church), should have known better, and it is apparent to me, did it for the attention it would create. I don't know what the context in the film was for the kiss, but any Israeli would presumably know that this kiss would be taboo, and I suspect that the tabooness was the purpose of it for the film.
Secondly, however offensive as the thread title that wished death on the Pope, it was merely words, and I'm inclined to give more leeway to words than to actions regardless of whether they both fall under the heading of "freedom of speech". Also, it is important to note the audience for both. The kiss took place in full view of those people who would be most offended by it, just as the sex in the church was. The comment on this message board, while it did in fact offend some people, both Catholics and non-Catholics, was not made in an especially sensitive place, like if the title of the thread had been painted on a bedsheet and paraded in St. Peter's square (which still would not be as bad as taking a shit in the square IMO).
So, to give an example of my point, imagine if Opie & Anthony had merely suggested, and not actively encouraged as they did, that someone go and have sex in a Catholic church, or even worse, go and have sex in St. Peter's square. There would no doubt have been those who would have been extremely offended by the mere suggestion, and some who would have demanded their heads for their blasphemy. However, they would been offended by mere words, and words are not enough in my opinion to justify the moral indignation that would be justified against one who would actually do the act suggested.
--PunkDavid
My point was that there were many posts in that thread commenting on how the Church is bad and the Pope is evil, etc. etc. That is why I said "aside from the crude title, no one cared". I meant that while people found wishing death upon someone a bit over the top, the church and religion bashing was a-okay.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
PJDoll wrote:
My point was that there were many posts in that thread commenting on how the Church is bad and the Pope is evil, etc. etc. That is why I said "aside from the crude title, no one cared". I meant that while people found wishing death upon someone a bit over the top, the church and religion bashing was a-okay.
Again, it's words, and we encourage opinions to be expressed here. If somebody wants to go off on how stupid it is for the Jews at the wall to be offended by something as innocuous as a kiss, I'd support that, and even agree with it.
Religion bashing is good. Desecration of sacred site, not so much.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
My point was that there were many posts in that thread commenting on how the Church is bad and the Pope is evil, etc. etc. That is why I said "aside from the crude title, no one cared". I meant that while people found wishing death upon someone a bit over the top, the church and religion bashing was a-okay.
Again, it's words, and we encourage opinions to be expressed here. If somebody wants to go off on how stupid it is for the Jews at the wall to be offended by something as innocuous as a kiss, I'd support that, and even agree with it.
Religion bashing is good. Desecration of sacred site, not so much.
--PunkDavid
So it's great to say people that believe in the Jewish faith are all morons but it's bad to kiss in front of a wall that said morons believe has spiritual value? If they're morons, why should anyone care about desecrating the site?
For the record, I don't believe people of Jewish faith are morons. I used them as an example for my question.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Natalie Portman!
