[jocon307]

"I don't think he will ever work in that town again."

I think all this stuff is over-rated. A lot of people seem to be forgetting Mel Gibson won best picture (and best director too? don't remember) for Braveheart. That was long after he went public with his faith, his opposition to abortion, he opposition to homosexuality. I almost fell on the floor when that happened. I even made sure to watch the Oscars to the end that year, because I was CONVINCED they'd never give it to him. I'm still amazed, I would have lost a bunch of money making bets on that. And let's not forget, Gibson is not just a Christian, but a Catholic, the only religious group I know of that has been discriminated against by the gov't in the US (via the Blaine amendments). Nobody in hollywood is going to turn up their noses at a movie that takes in 50-100 million during its opening week. And what if they do? Mel Gibson doesn't need their money, he didn't need it to make this picture and he won't need it to make the next one.

The only person I'm a little concerned about is the fellow who plays Jesus (I can't spell his name), according to a friend of mine who knows a lot about movies, there is a long history of career failure after actors portray Jesus.

[Ladysmith]

Mel Gibson doesn't need their money, he didn't need it to make this picture and he won't need it to make the next one.

Which is great! After this film, people will trust Mel to give us more films filled with moral absolutes. Hollyweird will never figure it out.

[joesbucks]

I have to agree with what you say.

There has been buzz about this movie since it's conception in Mel's mind. Virtually every film goes through dismisal by many people and organizations including funding, distribution, studios and other backers. Yet every setback fo this made it become something of a "celebrity cause". It creatd buzz. It's almost as if the the trials and tribulations of this movie were scripted and promoted and hyped and worse huckstered. Every misfortune has been capitalized on. There has been a very sucessful marketing campaign since day one. Believe me.

I read an article in my morning paper that discussed the stuff now for sale in stores that are liscensed by this movie. Nails for the cross and picture books of scenes from the movie and other collectable items. Funny, for a movie going against the odds, it certainly seems ironic that all the same stuff that was available for mainstream movies like Disney films and other co-merchandised opportunities are in place like other well orchestrated marketing campaigns. For something that was against all the fundamentals of our culture, this one seems to have all the right things in place at the right time to capitalize on the market. Why would this merchandise stuff be ready to market and why would mainstream stores have it in place if this was a movie that had expectations so low and the miracle was the masses that have seen it. How did the stores get this all in place BEFORE they knew it's marketing potential? Doesn't anyone see this?

I haven't seen the movie. I will next week. If it's a powerful and factual portral of Christ's last days and the meaning of the representation, then it is worthy or our praise and support.

But will it lead to mass conversions? Probably not although a few may be touched. Will it lead to lasting conversions? Probably not. Will it lead to a definable shift in our culture that we will be able to see for years to come? Probably not.

And what happens after all the churches exhaust their flocks ability to fill the seats, (which is largely where the ticket sales are coming from)?

I don't mean to sound cynical, but for all the pushback from Hollywood there seems to be an offsetting marketing campaign. And marketing is based on the puffery of fact.

This is a much about marketing as it is a Passion movie about the ressurection of Christ.

[expatpat]

The actor who played Jesus was on with Rush Limbaugh yesterday. He said that, when he was auditioned, Mel Gibson warned him that he might never make another film again.

[joesnuffy]

The only person I'm a little concerned about is the fellow who plays Jesus (I can't spell his name), according to a friend of mine who knows a lot about movies, there is a long history of career failure after actors portray Jesus.

As Jesus is quoted by both Matthew and Mark

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

[Jaded]

I'd like to see Gibson and Icon do another film. In Dobson's interview with Gibson, they indicated the the suggestion has come up. He'd have the support.

[Poohbah]

And let's not forget, Gibson is not just a Christian, but a Catholic, the only religious group I know of that has been discriminated against by the gov't in the US (via the Blaine amendments).

This post is not a flame. I am a Catholic.

1. Re: the Catholics being the oly religion discriminated against by the US Government: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints could disagree with you with some justification. Please note the history of Fort Douglas in Salt Lake City: it was built specifically to ensure that the FedGov could bombard the s**t outta the Mormon Tabernacle if the Mormons ever got uppity.

2. What are the Blaine Amendments?

[McGavin999]

there is a long history of career failure after actors portray Jesus.

Not for this one, he did it right.