[Clintons a commie]

It looks to me like the smears about anti-semitism haven't worked, so now many film critics are going to attack this film for it's violent content. Suddenly, critics discover a violent film they don't like.

Well, at least Ebert, Roeper and even Peter Travers of Rolling Stone gave the film a positive review.

[mlmr]

If it is bad it is antisemetic

[formerDem]

"It looks to me like the smears about anti-semitism haven't worked, so now many film critics are going to attack this film for it's violent content. Suddenly, critics discover a violent film they don't like."

They kept throwing stuff at the wall, seeing what would stick. First, it was anti-semitic. Then, Mel's sanity, heritage,'fringe' beliefs, and motivation were 'suspicious'. Then, it was too violent. Then, it wasn't historically accurate. Then, it was being marketed in some nefarious, under-handed way. Then, it didn't focus enough on other parts of Christ's life. Then, Mel is making money off Christ's crucifixion.
The most current anti-Christian spin: Huge box office receipts are due to churches buying huge quantities of tickets and going to see it over and over.

I pity them. They are lost souls--- hopefully they can stop lying and realize that there is transcendent truth that trumps any and all agendas ("....and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")