Those xians who believe that "Passion of the Christ" was made just for them and that Mel-baby wanted to send gawd's message to the world should read the following article. It's like I said in a "Gibson, who produced and directed the blockbuster "The Passion of the Christ," took the 47th spot with 850 million dollars, making him the top actor on the list."
Steven Spielberg, Mel Gibson among 50 richest LA media moguls
2 comments:
Gibson is just a mass of contradictions.
He's the new poster boy for the religious right, yet the Time Magazine reporter who interviewed him remarked that Gibson cursed frequently.
He's fits perfectly into the GOP (God's Own Party), yet his next film has been alleged to be a cinematic shot against the fear-mongering Bush Administration.
I saw The Passion in my role as film critic for my college newspaper. I gave it a B-, on the basis of its amazing imagery and visceral power. But, I bemoaned its last hour, which I found repetitious and gratuitous, not to mention rather boring. I find its amazing success inexplicable.
Here is a great commentary I read at:
http://passion-of-melgibson.tripod.com/LETHALWEAPON.html
Why did Mel Gibson, especially since he "loves" Jesus so much, use his own left hand in a vain gesture to be a peer of Alfred Hitchcock, hammer the fateful nail into Christ's hand, immortalizing his own fingers on celluloid as the culprits of the sin? We hope he does not "love" us quite so much, us the rest of humanity!
Mel Gibson is one dumb and grasping devil-may-care ambitious hypocrite, with the IQ of a penis. His father was a right wing psychotic who denounced the Vatican in 1964 in a break-away cult that was banned by the Pope. Not many adherents follow this sect, it is like the Moonies, although much much smaller and they do not have the backing of our CIA like the Rev. Moon's Korean outfit, nor the Dalai Lama [another CIA stooge who would be nothing without CIA backing]. Mel Gibson is one of the cultists, but never too evident especially if it gets in the way of making big bucks -- making blockbuster and ballbuster movies with his imprimatur swashbuckled onto it. BRAVEHEART was this bad actor's first stab at directing, and man was that one assbackwards and messed up film, with Mel in every frame as tall as Hercules on the Scottish battlefields saving Scotland from all of Mel Gibson's fantasy foes, which did not dovetail with historical record.
He is very short and must have a peewee's inferiority complex [short and numb in the intellectual range of fine calibrated minds -- i.e., exhibitionistically dumb] and to compensate he is overweeningly ambitious, rigorously stumping for himself. He patently hides behind cliches, Christian fundamentalist cartoon stick figures, in order to aggrandize himself. He is no artist, no director, no writer, no thinker, no intellectual. He is Mad Max, period, an action actor like Sylvester Stallone. I think Stallone directed a few movies too, that are equally bad, maybe even better.
You have a lot of loftier things to do with your head than dwell on media hype that is generated by Mel's cult looking for a billion bucks -- along with Moneybags Mel, the saintly one.
I saw the trailers. To be pretentiously historic the characters speak Aramaic and Latin depending on whether they were a jew or a roman soldier. The Romans were murderous back then, and the jews just fiddled along with the dictator's impulses just like Bulgaria or Ecuador today when GW Bush rattles his sabers. The elite Jews then were protecting their own asses in a world where every ass was up for execution. Not a very pretty reality, not very admirable for the elite jews of the time, but nothing like Gibson's movie, anyway, every group was copping out back then with an excuse to follow the Roman Emperor, or else you were pulled apart on a wheel while dogs ate your intestines. Something like the way GW Bush disregarded the UN leading up to the pointless attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why Mel Brooks -- [I mean Mel Gibson] -- picked CHRIST'S PASSION and made every minute of our honored protagonist's bible book death so brutal and so violent as to deserve an R rating [with no sex in it -- unless all the rapping with vampiric Satan is pillow talk], is because monkeying around Mel Gibson really had nothing to say, he never was a thinker and he never had an idea of his own in his head his entire breathing existence, so he latched onto Christ, an easy plot that millions will applaud. Also, he picked the Bible theme because he is a Mammonist who appreciates deeply both money and self-aggrandizement, with rivers of blood and tableaus of torture for good measure. He is a little punk who was the son of a lottery winner in the USA who had 8 kids or so and moved to Australia with the $27,000 to start a new life for his kids and family during the Vietnam Era when his sons were up for the draft. It worked. Mel, like GW, dodged war and then spent his whole friggin life glorifying war and his own deluded and non-existent heroism. This bravado is nothing more than sticky, adhesive, in your face -- nasty bat guano. Nothing more -- and it smells just as rat-like.
Anyone with 80 million dollars to burn and the support of quasi-Thule Society and Illuminati organizations [look at Gibson's films from whence he started to co-produce -- just after he had pocketed around $100 million personally for LETHAL WEAPONs 1 thru 1000 -- and you will see Masonic-emblem pyramids in backgrounds where they don't really belong but look compelling and artsy, etc.]. Anyone with at least one million bucks can hire out a genius cameraman and a top notch Euro art director to make any film look atmospheric, even a soft porno movie that is for different reasons rated R. Take your kids to see Delta of Venus, and they will be spared a brutal crucifiction but may learn that it is very difficult to be killed by kisses [even Judas tongue-in-cheek, considered]. Then they might have a passion for life rather than a passion for death, which seems to be the theme of our new millenium.
Post a Comment