"Last Supper" depiction at Olympics Opening Ceremony

LOL Dionysis is the blue guy in that tweet, not the painting.

Little to nothing to do with the thread, but go on, when/where does this happen?

….

Don't see where the creator apologized the way some people are assuming it was an acknowleding of it being the Last Supper - on the contrary he repudiated that comparison (Translated by Chrome):

Another criticism of Jean-Luc Mélenchon is the wild and much-discussed performance of Philippe Katerine in a setting and costumes that could evoke the Christian Last Supper, the last meal of Christ with his apostles. "I didn't like the mockery of the Christian Last Supper," wrote Jean-Luc Mélenchon. "It doesn't concern everyone. But I ask: what's the point of risking hurting believers? Even when you're anticlerical! We were speaking to the world that evening."

Thomas Jolly's response: "It's not my inspiration (the Christian Last Supper). There is Dionysus (Philippe Katerine painted in blue) who arrives on this table. He is there because he is the God of celebration in Greek mythology. The god of wine who is one of the jewels of France. And the father of Sequana, the goddess who is connected to the river, the Seine. The idea was to have a pagan celebration connected to the gods of Olympus. You will never find in me a desire to mock and denigrate anyone. I wanted to make a ceremony that repairs, that reconciles. And also that reaffirms the values ​​of our Republic, liberty-equality-fraternity." And the director regrets: "On the other hand, if we use our work to regenerate behind this moment of union again division, hatred while it continues to progress, then that would be a great shame."

https://fr.news.yahoo.com/sport/c%C3%A9r%C3%A9monie-d-ouverture-jo-thomas-093234037.html

It was as of they took every weird and showcased it, but forgot the wonderful…. the eiffel tower was the star of the show…. far more interesting than any of the people

What? No. That's not it at all. It was a reference to a Greek Bacchanal, not the last supper. The artistic director said so today.

I didn't get the reference at the time, so I'd say it wasn't clear enough. But what makes more sense? Going out of your way to insult millions of people during one of the most watched pageants of the year, worldwide, or something that was at worse badly performed as the intention wasn't clear enough?

Thomas Jolly's response: "It's not my inspiration (the Christian Last Supper). There is Dionysus (Philippe Katerine painted in blue) who arrives on this table. He is there because he is the God of celebration in Greek mythology. The god of wine who is one of the jewels of France. And the father of Sequana, the goddess who is connected to the river, the Seine. The idea was to have a pagan celebration connected to the gods of Olympus. You will never find in me a desire to mock and denigrate anyone. I wanted to make a ceremony that repairs, that reconciles. And also that reaffirms the values ​​of our Republic, liberty-equality-fraternity." And the director regrets: "On the other hand, if we use our work to regenerate behind this moment of union again division, hatred while it continues to progress, then that would be a great shame."

These statements are in direct contradiction. I'd lean toward the direct quote from the artist, not 'Paris 2024'

It’s a lot like a Rorschach test - if it wasn’t explained by anyone what it was meant to symbolise, people are inclined to draw their own conclusions based upon seeing what they want to see. Until I heard it was supposedly intended to represent the last supper, I would have had no idea (and I’m certainly familiar with the Gospels, and the many versions of the painting), precisely because it looks nothing like the painting, and it sure as hell doesn’t fit the description in any of the four versions of the gospels written by any of the four apostles:

https://thoughtsonpapyrus.com/2019/09/19/5-the-last-supper-paintings/

How anyone could possibly have imagined it was intended to represent the last supper has an incredibly fertile imagination, and based upon that could claim that the artistic director intended to offend them. Yet there’s no evidence whatsoever that the artistic director intended to offend anyone? The artistic director cannot be held responsible for the fertile imaginations of others and what they claim to have found offensive.

Speaking of artists and their background, while Leonardo has little connection to the city of Paris, his connection and contribution to France is undeniable. King Francis even called Leonardo his father, and Leonardo spent the last years of his life in France, where he was buried:

https://artsandculture.google.com/story/leonardo-da-vinci-and-france-ch%C3%A2teau-du-clos-luc%C3%A9/zwURhU_1pPuSIg?hl=en

How anyone could possibly have imagined it was intended to represent the last supper has an incredibly fertile imagination

meh…call me fertile so

Until I heard it was supposedly intended to represent the last supper, I would have had no idea… precisely because it looks nothing like the painting,