Posted on 12/06/2006 7:45:53 PM PST by AngieGal
Sounds like a movie I may like to see and will if I have a chance. If I don't, I won't. Whether or not Hollywood ever makes another movie of any sort is completely irrelevant. To paraphrase an old song "They Think I Still Care"
I'd just like to point out that Mel Gibson did a great job of pre-selling his movie to his selected target audience. By the time it came out, there probably wasn't a person in the U.S. that hadn't heard about his movie. By contrast, I never heard about this new movie until about a week before it came out. Perhaps the producer should look at herself and see if she could have done a better job publicizing her movie.
"Movie producers respond to numbers and money. If they get burned by this flick, they will be reluctant to try again. "
This is not really true. The top money movies are G and PG and PG13. Yet they make over 50% R rated even though they almost always make less than PG-13 movies. Hollywood only makes a few wide appeal movies to fill the bank account and then they make 10 smut filled poopers.
The movie house that brings us this movie also brought us Death of a president, that movie lost money big time, no big deal for them, they will just make a Christen movie to fill the house while they get ready for “Death of the president II
No, he's a guy who gets points on the box office. His incentive is to get people to watch it.
Despite the enthusiastic support of Hugh Hewitt, Even folks who disliked "Passion" for religious or political reasons generally acknowledged its artistry and skill. I haven't seen that kind of benefit given to "nativity." The ugly fact is, even if you respect the filmmakers for tackling the subject and you admire their philosophy, the movie itself can still suck bilge water through a bendy straw.
When I see scary statements like Bowen's, my cynical impulse is to assume that he's trying to pressure Christians into seeing his movie, whether they want to or not, and praising it, whether they like it or not, because he knows it cannot stand on its merits. And frankly any filmmaker who's trying that hard to win over a sympathetic audience probably knows that his film is circling the drain.
Joseph is not gay in the movie. The virgin birth is exactly that.
I think also some people are waiting to get a little closer to Christmas. My church is going the 18th.
Umm, So what?
Why thank you, for the kind words. God bless you.
Dittos to that. For an industry that has mocked Christianity for decades to come along and say "Kissy, kissy, let's make up now", I have two words I can't post on FR. FWIW, the last movie I saw on the "big screen" was the original Jaws.
"People go to the movies to be entertained and not to make a political or religious statement."
I go to get my popcorn fix, eating an entire bucket and skipping the next 2 meals.
I have to drink a gallon of water afterward to purge the salt from my system, but damn I love that popcorn in the fake butter. :(
Gosh, nothing in the Bible about lying in order to shamelessly pimp your film, eh buddy?
Hollywood makes many religious films - they're just of an anti-Christian religion. Maybe it's time for someplace aside from Hollywood to make 'religious' films.
I'm sure that she thought that all she had to do was invest in a religious film and that religious people would flock to it (money in hand).
That failed, thus we get the desperation tactic posted above.
"What is with the obsession with technical virginity? Isn't virginity the result of choices about sex, having nothing to do with a divine birth?"
I'm pretty certain that virginity is defined by inbound, not outbound, uh, activity.
Imagine someone saying that about humorous movies
..."if you don't go see this we'll stop making comedies".
Movies tend to stand or fall on their own merits not their genre.
I wonder how many artist of religious art were unchaste or without sin. Seriously, people, this is a well done movie that tells the story of our Savior's birth. If you find it offensive because of the artist involved or the people who put it out there, then by all means, don't go. But I hope you're consistent and turn your face from any works by Michelangelo or any other sinful artist out there.
Can't wait for the movie about Mohammed....wonder what they'll threaten if nobody goes to see it.
Certainly I'm not sure where you are coming from here. The hymen could not possibly withstand a birth intact. The hymen is present, torn or not, until a woman delivers a baby vaginally. Then it's gone!
The virgin birth is NOT about the hymen at all. It is about the means of conception...the Holy Spirit vs intercourse.
You just don't see the incongruity, the irony of having the Blessed Virgin Mary played by a 16-year-old girl who chose to have a child out of wedlock? That doesn't strike you as ironic?
Of course we're all sinful. That's not the point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.