Mel Gibson

Didn't watch this for a long time because it's sooo long. Rousing story, well acted, well directed. Take half a star off it for having a gorgeous French actress in it and never taking her clothes off. The fight scenes are graphic and intense. I think it was a mistake to have his voice-over at the end, after he'd died. It's hard to think of Mel Gibson anymore without all that personal crap getting in the way.

No doubt this is a monumental presentation of the life of Jesus with a special focus on His Passion. Director Mel Gibson did a great job in presenting a historical Jesus, who symbolizes those who are physically abused with brutal violence, by a system that judges only through the prescripts of Law. This appears to be the main message. Though the movie did very well in attracting the interest, desire, and buying decisions of a great number of people (making $612 million from a $30 million show more budget according to Artvoice.com), from an exegetical point of view, it departs from the gospels' focus which shows who Jesus is through the eyes of Matthean, Lukan, Markan, and Johannine communities. But as one that can dramatically spur the vocation of any Catholic (or any Christian) to commitment in Christ's cause to build God's Kingdom here in our present world, it did a great job! show less

OK, first of all, I know as history this absolutely positively stinks. On the Wiki, I found out that in 2009, the film ranked second on a list of "most historically inaccurate movies" in The Times." Probably the biggest blooper was the affair Princess Isabella supposedly had with Wallace--at that time in history she was three years old and her son Edward was born seven years after Wallace died. And the list of small things this got wrong is endless. But hey, it's a great story (with emphasis show more on story) and a very watchable film with lots of adventure and visibly striking scenes. show less

I enjoyed it and found the overall presentation of that period engaging. The most disturbing thing to me was how the village scene (before the raid) resembled a (good) episode of "Everybody Loves Raymond."
(Technical note: I agree with many of the charges of anthropologists against the film, but would note that while Mayans claimed only royalty were sacrificed, analysis suggests this was only what they claimed.)
(Also, as for the priests arriving at the end suggesting a racist metanarrative show more that the Mayans needed saving...well, if that's what you see, then that's what you see.) show less