Movie theaters refuse to screen "new " Passion of the Christ

Posted by:: "Modemac"
Date: 10 Mar 2005 04:32:23 -0800

--------
Source: Internet Movie Database

"Many theater chains have rejected Mel Gibson's recut version of The
Passion of the Christ because it is being rereleased without a rating
and because the original is available on DVD, the Hollywood Reporter
reported today (Wednesday). Some of the more intensely violent scenes
of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
audience with a PG-13 ratings. Nevertheless, the MPAA gave the new
version an R rating, which Gibson rejected. In a statement on his
website, www.passionrecut.org..."

So much for the plans to re-release the movie to theaters every Easter.
Besides, I can still picture a lot of movie ushers echoing what
happened in the South Park epiode, "Passion of the Jew:" The movie
theater employee says to the little kids, "This film is rated R for
scenes of extreme violence. But because this is about our Lord and
Savior Jesus Christ, you can go right in!"

Personally, I like to watch "The Last Temptation of Christ" around
Easter each year, and I see no reason to break this tradition.



Posted by:: "Anachron"
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:51:14 GMT

--------
"Modemac" wrote in message
news:1110457943.905668.282530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Source: Internet Movie Database

> Personally, I like to watch "The Last Temptation of Christ" around
> Easter each year, and I see no reason to break this tradition.

I really enjoyed watching God punish himself for his crimes against
humanity. I think he should make himself hang on the cross until he fixes
his mistakes down here. Mel makes it really easy to understand how the
religious right is ok with Abu Ghraib.

--
Rev. Anachron




Posted by:: "Nick Macpherson"
Date: 10 Mar 2005 11:49:26 -0800

--------

Modemac wrote:
> Source: Internet Movie Database
>
> "Many theater chains have rejected Mel Gibson's recut version of The
> Passion of the Christ because it is being rereleased without a rating
> and because the original is available on DVD, the Hollywood Reporter
> reported today (Wednesday). Some of the more intensely violent scenes
> of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
> audience with a PG-13 ratings. Nevertheless, the MPAA gave the new
> version an R rating, which Gibson rejected. In a statement on his
> website, www.passionrecut.org..."
>
> So much for the plans to re-release the movie to theaters every
Easter.
> Besides, I can still picture a lot of movie ushers echoing what
> happened in the South Park epiode, "Passion of the Jew:" The movie
> theater employee says to the little kids, "This film is rated R for
> scenes of extreme violence. But because this is about our Lord and
> Savior Jesus Christ, you can go right in!"
>
Too bad D. W. Griffith and Leni Reifenstahl never had Mel Gibson's
business sense. They could have re-released Birth of a Nation with six
minutes less racism and Triumph of the Will with six minutes less Nazis
and made a few extra bucks.



Posted by:: moviePig
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:12:19 -0500

--------

Modemac wrote:

> Source: Internet Movie Database
>
> "... Some of the more intensely violent scenes
> of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
> audience with a PG-13 ratings. ..."

Since when are younger audiences attracted to a watered-down *anything*?

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/



Posted by:: "Nick Macpherson"
Date: 10 Mar 2005 13:40:39 -0800

--------

moviePig wrote:
> Modemac wrote:
>
> > Source: Internet Movie Database
> >
> > "... Some of the more intensely violent scenes
> > of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
> > audience with a PG-13 ratings. ..."
>
> Since when are younger audiences attracted to a watered-down
*anything*?
>
I thought it was the other way round anyway. Gibson was cutting The
Passion to attract an older audience who might have been put off by the
violence in the original release.



Posted by:: moviePig
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:28:18 -0500

--------

Nick Macpherson wrote:

> moviePig wrote:
>
>>Modemac wrote:
>>
>>>Source: Internet Movie Database
>>>
>>>"... Some of the more intensely violent scenes
>>>of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
>>>audience with a PG-13 ratings. ..."
>>
>>Since when are younger audiences attracted to a watered-down
> *anything*?
>
> I thought it was the other way round anyway. Gibson was cutting The
> Passion to attract an older audience who might have been put off by the
> violence in the original release.

Well, sure. But you're talking about Reality.

I'd much rather live in a land where one can make a movie specifically
about X, and then "broaden" its appeal by the mere removal of X, and
then look still oneself in the eye.

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/



Posted by:: "MFalc1"
Date: 11 Mar 2005 00:05:22 -0800

--------
MoviePig wrote:
Since when are younger audiences attracted to a watered-down
*anything*?

I'm old enough to remember when SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER was reissued in
1979 in edited-to-PG form. In those pre-video store days, it did some
business.

Mark L. Falconer-film and video links at
http://hometown.aol.com/mfalc1/links.html



Posted by:: "Nick Macpherson"
Date: 11 Mar 2005 04:51:48 -0800

--------
MFalc1 wrote:
> MoviePig wrote:
> Since when are younger audiences attracted to a watered-down
> *anything*?
>
> I'm old enough to remember when SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER was reissued in
> 1979 in edited-to-PG form. In those pre-video store days, it did
some
> business.
>
I thought abut the PG cut Saturday Night Fever, trying to think of
other films that had been cut for a theatrical re-release with a less
restrictive rating (or an intended less restrictive rating--in Mel's
case, the MPAA wasn't bamboozled). Not some cutting room fiddling
around at the time of the movie's initial release, but a full scale
recut after a succesful theatrical run. Any others?

In the case of SNF (the first R rated movie I ever saw--with my father
who was making sure it was alright for my younger sister), nothing
wrong with making a cut version of the movie so that Travolta's youth
audience (back when he was the biggest star in the USA) could get a
chance to see it, but Gibson's Passion Recut looks craven,
opportunistic, hypocritical and money-grubbing--one more chance to
fleece the rubes in the hinterlands. But what can you expect from a
guy who followed up his religious movie with a celebrity revenge
fantasy like Papparazi?



Posted by:: HellPope Huey
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:17:53 GMT

--------
In article <1110545508.891070.30200@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Nick Macpherson" wrote:

> I thought abut the PG cut Saturday Night Fever,

Dear God, seek medical help.

--

HellPope Huey
Step outside the Box;
I mean, its a catbox, fer chrissakes

Possibly the only dismaying aspect of excellence
is that it makes living in a world of mediocrity
an ongoing prospect of a living Hell.
- Harlan Ellison

"Diaper fee for chimp brides."
- "The Simpsons"


Posted by:: "angelicusrex"
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:37:29 -0700

--------


The Boston Strangler, starring Tony Curtis, I believe first came out to
screens with the first ever X rating for a regular movie. This was later
dropped to an R after some cuts were made. At least as far as I can recall.
It was 1969.

Angelicus Rex




Posted by:: "Paul Casino"
Date: 10 Mar 2005 15:27:16 -0800

--------
Fuck Mel Gibson and fuck the Passion of the Christ. Everyone is saying
"Oh, we need to cannonize Mel Gibson for making such a brave film and
glorifying Jesus and blah, blah, bliddidy-blah." He made a freaking
mint off that thing. Jesus sez "I get nailed to a stick so Mel can make
a movie, get richer than he already is and buy five boats. Hosanah."

And I feel really bad for Jim Caveziel, because now every time I see
him in a film after this, I'm gonna think of Jesus. What if he does an
action flick? I'll be thinking "Oh, man, you fuckers better run, Jesus
got a machine gun now!" Or a romantic comedy? "Oh man, Jesus is totally
gonna get some ass of Katie Holmes! Tap that ass, Jesus! Dude, dude,
dude, you gotta say my name when you're doin' it! No, say it low, she
won't know! Hey, I say YOUR NAME when I'm on the job!"



Posted by:: alvinstraight38@hotmail.com
Date: 10 Mar 2005 22:42:50 -0800

--------
Oh shut up. Mel took a huge gamble, and the public showed that they
will pay to go see religious movies. The movie was graphic because
gasp, reality is ugly, and the death of Christ was an ugly reality.

Jim Caveziel is a Christian, and I'm sure he will continue to chose
tasteful scripts. Everything I've seen him in as strong spiritual
themes.



Posted by:: "Paul Casino"
Date: 11 Mar 2005 01:42:38 -0800

--------
>Oh shut up.

It's on.

>Mel took a huge gamble

Yeah, so what? So did I when I put $50 bucks that I didn't even HAVE on
the Red Sox to win the ACLS last October after game 3 when they were
one away from being elimanated. Besides, Jesus hates gambling.

>and the public showed that they will pay to go see religious movies.

Again, so what? The public will also go to see movies about a ditzy
blonde pink airhead fuck-tard who is a lawyer. Popularity is no proof
of quality. Look at American Idol. LOOK AT SURVIVOR, man!

>The movie was graphic because gasp, reality is ugly

So I've been told.

>and the death of Christ was an ugly reality.

Or mythology. One of the two, take yer pick. (I'm gonna hear it about
that one...)

>Jim Caveziel is a Christian, and I'm sure he will continue to chose
tasteful scripts. >Everything I've seen him in as strong spiritual
themes.

Oh, that's some HORSESHIT right there! Everyone said that about him
around the time The Passion was big without actually looking into it.
He made a flick called "Highwaymen", that made me feel good to be
alive, he goes on a fucking rampage of vengeance with his piece of shit
car after someone kills his wife.

What else? Ah, "The Count of Monte Cristo", about revenge again, the
lawd luvs that, as he turns the other cheek.

Then you got "The Thin Red Line" about snipers, and you know as well as
I do, if there's one thing that Jesus loves, it's people who kill other
people from very far away.

He was in "Wyatt Earp" as Warren Earp, more rootin' tootin revenge.

So think before you repeat shit like that, or at LEAST check the imdb
for five seconds.



Posted by:: washer of kegs
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:21:12 +0100

--------
Paul Casino wrote:

>
>>and the death of Christ was an ugly reality.
>
> Or mythology. One of the two, take yer pick. (I'm gonna hear it about
> that one...)
>

That the romans enjoyed flaying or sticking people on crosses is fact. That
one of their thousands of victims was the son of a deity, is bull. Having
been flayed and stuck is no indication of being related to a mythological
being.



Posted by:: "Anachron"
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:43:22 GMT

--------
wrote in message
news:1110523370.050827.212970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Oh shut up. Mel took a huge gamble, and the public showed that they
> will pay to go see religious movies. The movie was graphic because
> gasp, reality is ugly, and the death of Christ was an ugly reality.

I agree completely. The story of Chirst is really ugly.

--
Rev. Anachron




Posted by:: nenslo
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:07:41 -0800

--------
Modemac wrote:
>
>
> Personally, I like to watch "The Last Temptation of Christ" around
> Easter each year, and I see no reason to break this tradition.

I like that one with Fred Astaire and the bunnies.


Posted by:: Mike O'Sullivan
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:26:02 +0000

--------
Modemac wrote:
> Source: Internet Movie Database
>
> "Many theater chains have rejected Mel Gibson's recut version of The
> Passion of the Christ because it is being rereleased without a rating
> and because the original is available on DVD, the Hollywood Reporter
> reported today (Wednesday). Some of the more intensely violent scenes
> of the movie have been removed in hopes of attracting a younger
> audience with a PG-13 ratings. Nevertheless, the MPAA gave the new
> version an R rating, which Gibson rejected. In a statement on his
> website, www.passionrecut.org..."
>
> So much for the plans to re-release the movie to theaters every Easter.
> Besides, I can still picture a lot of movie ushers echoing what
> happened in the South Park epiode, "Passion of the Jew:" The movie
> theater employee says to the little kids, "This film is rated R for
> scenes of extreme violence. But because this is about our Lord and
> Savior Jesus Christ, you can go right in!"
>
> Personally, I like to watch "The Last Temptation of Christ" around
> Easter each year, and I see no reason to break this tradition.
>
It's a slasher movie/ Why would anybody watch it for any other reason?
("loved the flaying Mel").


Posted by:: "angelicusrex"
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:31:29 -0700

--------


>> "Many theater chains have rejected Mel Gibson's recut version of The
>> Passion of the Christ...

Good. Get that stink-bomb off the screens! He got enough money from that
tripe already.

Angelicus Rex