1  2  Next

I'm wondering if Gibson will release a special DVD edition with bonus scenes showing how Christ switched to the dark side and became a Republican?

   

Oh, they are going to do a 6 movie series. This movie was actually the 4th, now they make 2 sequals and 3 prequals. Obviously, its the way to make money.

   

Ka lame

I didnt like this movie
I am not religious but I enjoy learning about religion, I like history, so i guess i like more the history of religion. but this movie was crap.

   

Well then...PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE POPCORN!

   

I have read the book.
Wasn't overly impressed.

   

That movie was so guesome it made Braveheart look like a kids movie. I read things about how some people cried during the movie, I mostly gagged.

I wonder if Mel will finally take out the scene where the Jews take the blame upon themselves for all eternity? And I don't want to hear that the Passion isn't anti-semitic, cause it is. Maybe it's not the "let's kill em all" kind of anti-semetism. It's more the "let's keep blaming them for Christ's death" kind. Furthermore, does anyone remember what the Jewish priest is doing the first you see him? He's clutching a money bag.

   

I saw this movie with my parents and I think they were two of the people that maybe cried . I thought Gibson was trying to rely on the gruesome factor way too much to get the reaction "oh my, christ really suffered, we should honor him more" and he did. I can respect the message, but IMHO the violence was way too much and that made the movie quite tacky! I was still trying to define my take on religion at the time it came out and the movie did nothing for me (besides making me wonder why the heck I'd had to sit thru mel's gory imagination)
A new low violence version? ...can't we just forget the first one ever happened? I think most people were already starting to do that...

   

I didn't go to see the "Passion of the Gibson" for a number of reasons including I don't believe in guy's playing Jesus (The guy who did it in the passion was struck by lighting!!!).

As for this whole anti-semitism thing?! I don't know why supposed Christians blame Jews for being "Christ killers", they seem to miss the point of the whole story, a little thing called predestination!!! ie Jesus knew it was predestined to happen, and if it hadn't have happened there is no Christianity, you know the whole dying for our sins and rising again thingy. Jews are not taking the blame for the whole thing just because they where Jews, Jesus was a Jew as where all the first Christian, the other Jews represented those who had no faith in Jesus, not the entire Jewish people.

Anyway, thats my rant done!!!

   

What a bunch of BS you people post here; it was the #1 movie last year. And take a look at the major networks now they have all these christen type series. Talk about hypocrites.

   

It doesn't matter what we post.... its about the money.

   

#1 Last year? Gee lets all jump on the bandwagon!!! And since when have #1's been a measure of taste or talent? Some of the worst songs in history have been #1. And Hollywood hype is the only reason a lot of people went to see the movie.

And if someone expresses an opinion, even if it is BS, its more polite not to rub their faces in it (Just and expression). "If you cant say something nice..."

Yes TV Networks are hypocrites who said they weren't?

   

LOL Do you really think Gibson was going to make this much. ?

How many Hollywood actors would pay out of their pocket to make a movie? NONE

He had planned this 10 years ago; it's something he believed in.

Mel Gibson couldn't find anyone to make "The Passion of the Christ," so he put up $25 million of his own money to produce it.
He couldn't find a major distributor for it, either, and was forced to accept an offer from little but scrappy Newmarket Films. Now I'm told that Newmarket is putting all marketing and distribution costs on Gibson. The price tag just for that: nearly another $25 million.

Traditionally Hollywood considers anyone who puts his own money into financing a movie to be a sucker (or, I believe, in Aramaic "an investor"). The name of the game is to use other people's money to finance your movie. Although Hollywood superstars and high profile filmmakers often talk about pet projects they'd love to bring to the screen, they almost never dip into their own bank accounts to make them. If they talked to their accountants, as Gibson seems to have done, they'd understand that with their considerable incomes the tax losses from one failed film would simply offset other earnings. Of course, if the film didn't fail, they'd wind up owning the equivalent of a gold mine.

   

I'm curious AVRO why is it deemed OK to insult a person with religous convictions (Mr Christian) if they are Christian. If half the hatred towards Christians were directed at any other group you and a lot of others on this site would scream bloody murder. The man made a movie that made him a lot of money and you assume that he squirrelled it all away. You have no idea what he does with his money!
As for your comment confusing Santa Claus with God, you truly reveal how ignorant you really are. Compassion for your fellow man is another another trait you seem to be lacking.

   

What about Sylvester Stallone and Robert deNiro and COP LAND, to name one...

And yes Mr. Gibson did pour a lot of his heart (and money) into that film.

But in the end it is for the money.

   

1  2  Next