I may go to see it; but, will likely upchuck if I've got to wade through 2 hours of hearsay mislabeled as history. The only reason I'd see it is because Gibson is involved. Given my experience with the historical perspective from whence he is pursuing this, though, it isn't surprising that more voices are heard caterwalling about Jewish guilt than about historical accuracy. Braveheart is a good flick even if the Battle of Sterling Bridge didn't include the Bridge in his movie. If one looks at it from that standpoint, then the inclusion of veronica's veil is the equivelant of leaving out sterling bridge. If A&E can't get historical accuracy in their historical features, one wonders how one might expect it from Mel. On the other hand, if one is Christian, one would hope that the core story could be told without incorporating historical fictions and giving them any creedance by putting them on the big screen; but, then, I guess that's the hollywood side coming out.
Aw jj. It's not about listening "to two and a half hours of gibberish.. It's the visual story that will be told, that no one has ever done before. People all around the world will see this story and know exactly what is going on. Whether or not it is done in English is missing the point.
Don't give up on it. If you need to, catch a matinee (it'll save $) and bring your bible! ;)