Perfectly said Jseal...thanks.

i don't plan on seeing it, i was raised southern baptist and over the past few years i have grown apart from this denomination due to things in my life and stuff, anyway enough about me
i think this is a marketing ploy preying on the faith of millions because i feel the ones who go see it will already have faith

i don't make sense half the time so thanks for the time you took to read this

STO and jseal ... I'm always impressed by the two of you. Well reasoned and very well informed. Thanks for a marvelous discussion of the film. I'm looking forward to the time we can get to go see it. Everything I've read or heard about the film seems to be in keeping with what you've shared. Thanks.

( My wife has come down with something ... so we'll probably get delayed a bit before we can go :(. )

I disagree with this completely. Is Gibson going to make money and enjoy making that money yes. But, I think when he set out it was just to make a film of something he believed and he did that with success in my opinion.

People worked to make this film, they should be paid and paid well. Nothing wrong with making money on religious things as long as it isnt fraudulant.

I heard and I could be wrong but didn't Mel Gibson put up 30 million of his own?

He says 30-40, wont give an exact figure.

And he had every reason to believe he wouldnt make that back, most indy films rarely see more than 300 screens. Indy successes finacially are rare, the only big recent one was Big Fat Greek Wedding and it took 3 re-releases to make it big finally 2 years later.

All of those 13 studios that turned down the distribution of this film are right now kicking themselves in the ass.

That's what I heard, Lilith ... 25-30 million. And I do believe money was NOT his primary motivation. I was especially impressed with some interviews of people in the cast and how truly impressed and moved they were by Mel's focus and determination.

Lilith,

I read that $30 million was the film's budget, of which $15 million was Mr. Gibson's.

I still say that since I cannot handle films with a lot of violence and especially because I know what happens to him, it is a film that I best skip.

BlueSwede,

You wouldn't, by any chance, be suggesting that you, ah, skipthisone?

Most indy films don't directed Mel Gibson either or have such a large audience base to draw from.

Actually it would surprise you the number of Indy films that are produced or have a hand in them by big film stars. Traditionally religious film do horribly at the box office. Take for instance the Left Behind films. The book series has sold close to 60 million copies but the 2 movies (both straight to video) have not sold 1 million copies.

The controversy has brought this film to the forfront, no denying you cannot buy advertising like that.

My big boss was living in Omaha when "The Last Temptation" was released on video and he remembers people picketing his local Blockbuster store.

In Canada, we also had "Jesus of Montreal" which did well.

"The Ten Commandments" might have been successful in its day.

I'm guessing there aren't too many films nowadays that centre on a major religion. Is there an audience for them? I'd guess yes. If it's well done, you're going to attract audiences.

I'm sure there weren't a lot of people interested in Scottish history but Gibson made it interesting for them . . .

Steph,

I agree that the subject can be almost anything if the story is well told. Still, there should be SOME substance to the story.

It is a big stretch calling "The Last Temptation" a religious film. If ever a director took liberties with a story. I like it as a film, but it has almost no biblical basis.