I looked into the backgrounds of the "experts" used in the film:
1) Robert Swan, an actor -- he's no expert.
2) Michael A. Calace, performer/inventor/now movie maker -- responsible for the film, and not really an expert.
3) Dr. Wilson Bryan Key -- an expert, at least at being an alarmist: http://www.uiowa.edu/~commstud/adclass/craig/clamplate.htm
4) Dr. Stanley Monteith -- is an MD, talk show host, he's no expert on this topic.
5) Dr. Marc Oster -- psychologist, professor. An expert at what other than psychology?
6) Dr. Judith Reisman -- now here is the first "expert" I have actually heard of from the group of six. Reisman really is an expert. She has a PhD in mass communications, has done extensive studies on pornography and ripped Alfred Kinsey a new one. She is not Catholic, but Jewish by the way.
With only one expert on the stated topic, one nut, and four wannabees, I am not holding my breath to see this film.
Excellent research, thanks.
What exactly, in your opinion, would one need to be to be fully qualified to produce a film as well as get the ball rolling?
I believe that Dr. Reisman, and three other Dr's, is enough to get the ball rolling.
I wonder if Calace is an Ultra Trad who thinks the current Catholic Church is apostate.
But beyond that to think that some priests and others committed pervisions because they were exposed to art with occult symbols is nonsense. If such a theory was valid we could expect a much higher number of such pervisions because the art in question is not for the eyes of priests alone.