I found the Passion of Mel to be a go at the Superman
and nothing to do with Christ at all.

Thanks for raising this MikePaterson. I seem to have missed this in the summer! I found this article interesting:

http://www.archaeology.org/online/reviews/apocalypto.html

Well, what I heard today is that Mr. Gibson didn't intend to release it "just in time for Christmas". Rather, he kind of goofed up when he went on an anti-Jewish tirade. It was that event last, what, summer or fall, that delayed the release of Apocolyto until now. I think I will give it a pass.

Doesn't Mel "Jew hater" Gibson fund it himself?

He's crazy.

I won't lie, I want to see it. Not for the blood, or gore, or anything of that matter, but two reasons.

1. Im interested in the Mayan empire. I think it would be cool to see what it (may have) looked like 600 years ago.

2. Though I don't agree with his statements, Mel Gibson is one hell of a filmmaker. If anything, his films are cinematically beautiful. The Passion of the Christ had some of the best cinematography I have ever seen, and Braveheart was fantastic.

I know he was trying to get the point across that the Mayan sacrifices were no joke, and they were brutal for our standards, but I wish he would cut down on the blood and gore a little bit. If anything, it would definitly be better for his image.

judging from the article listed above, he was trying to do more than that. Giiod article, by the way.

It'll be a renter.

Jamesadin:

the problem is that Mel Gibson has YET to make a movie that has anything to do with history:
Braveheart was total tosh, The Passion of Christ was unhistoprical and unbiblical, Apoocolpto is simillarly anti-history: the level of his thinking is Md Max.

...and someone else is resposnsible for the specuial effects (see the "credits": Gibson's is just the olnly mind sick enough to think that skill should be used in this way.

I understand where you're coming from, and I think we just look for different things in films. Yeah, Braveheart was a historical atrocity, same with The Passion of the Christ. To me though, they had absolutely beautiful cinematography (more the latter)... and thats one of the focal points in what I look for in a film.

I think it may have something to do with me studying to be a cinematographer, and working on several projects as a cinematographer. Its my thang! Haha

I totally understand where your coming from, though. I don't necissarily agree with him or his views, but he's has one hell of an eye for a good shot.

There's something to be said for Gibson's way of seeing things. I do not know what ... Yet, every alarm bell in my mind goes off when I see over criticism or over belief in his works.

I deeply believe that there is something in conservative Catholicism that matters and is deeply important. I cannot for all the thought I've put to it understand WHAT, but, I know to trust that feeling, trust those alarm bells.

Mikepatterson Is it possible to sell one own soul for fame and money?