[JCEccles]

The thing about Gibson is that he picks subjects for his movies and then decides to portray them realistically.

Accuracy should be preferred over realism. Going for the audience's jugular with every cheap, shocking, and terrifying bite may be "realistic" (or even, as appears to be the case here, hyper-realistic), but accuracy demands context and balance.

I have long suspected that the fans who worship at Mel's altar of realism are likely the same people who keep detective and true crime magazines in business and who delightedly rubberneck at car crash sites hoping to see body parts strewn all over the asphalt and hanging from the trees.

Realistic it may be. Fundamentally decent it is not.

[AmericaUnited]

Well said.

[SoCal Pubbie]

You make good points. I have always laughed at violent films being peddled as "anti violence" when in fact they often do not shock but rather become little more than pornography for those who love violence. In movies like The Passion or Saving Private Ryan the violence has a purpose. Perhaps this film does too, but I've suspected from the start that this one will tank. If Mel truly thinks Mayan bloodletting is a parallel to our "raping" the environment and losing brave soldiers in Iraq then I'm sure I was right.

[freedomfiter2]

Realistic it may be. Fundamentally decent it is not.

I agree, and that's why I don't generally watch them. However, I would rather have the sick crowd watching this than Halloween 16.