"If it were about someone other than Jesus, would your opinions be different?"

No. Mel Gibson sucks as a director and producer in my opinion. It wouldn't matter what the subject matter was, I don't go to films made by him because the last one I saw, Braveheart, was so awful.

Also, the execution of the subject matter he chooses for films I find stultifyingly dull and ignorant.

As a rule, I don't go see films with a lot of gratuitous violence. That pretty much rules out films with Mel, Arnold, and the usual suspects anyone here can recite.

The last really violent film I went to was Dead Man Walking, and it haunted me for days. It was really well done, but I doubt I would do it again.

Even films like the Hannibal Lecter series, some of which apparently are well done, I won't go see because they just seem like glossy & slick slasher flicks, which I've never enjoyed.

But I have to say I think the hype around this particular Mel movie has been nauseating.

Or did all of you forget that this is sweeps month for the networks?

Jesus sells. Especially Jesus controversy.

BTW, plenty of folks take a risk and bankroll their own creative projects. I don't admire anyone for it. I just wish I had the ability to do it myself. It doesn't require risk at all, just a desire to creatively do your own thing, instead of hording all your millions int he bank. I don't think what Mel has done involved any risk whatsoever, to be honest. It's kind of like writing books for an academic audience. At least you know the university and college libraries will buy your book, because they are the ready made audience.

There will always be a ready made audience for this sort of film. It doesn't mean that is A Good Thing, or that films catering to that audience should be given special treatment, like this one has received.

I mean c'mon people--the acorn doesn't fall far from the "there was no Holocaust" tree.