What made it different was the portrayal of the Jews in it.
ALL of the above films recount the Passion, the teachings of Christ, etc. Why this obsessive focus on Gibson’s film ? What makes it DIFFERENT ?
ALL of the above films recount the Passion, the teachings of Christ, etc. Why this obsessive focus on Gibson's film ? What makes it DIFFERENT ?
It seems to be an unwritten rule in hollywierd that religious films were tolerated in the 50s 60s and maybe early 70s but after that no more.
I guess it's the same reason why in any movie or TV show, I've noticed that it's OK to be a Christian if you're depicting a historical time. But, if you're depicting a modern person who's a Christian they always have to be portrayed as unbalanced in some way. Either they're fanatic and hateful, they're pedophiles (especially if it's a Catholic priest) or they're "intolerant". A good example of this might be the movie Cape Fear. Remember the old Gregory Peck version the guy was just a psycho. In the Robert DeNero version they made sure to point out that the killer was also an evangelical Christian. Why the change?
Related to this, compare how muslims are portrayed. Am I imagining it or is it true, even if a muslim is portrayed as a terrorist, they're always noble in some way. They're almost never the two dimensional characters that Christians are portrayed as and they usually have some small redeeming quality.
Maybe I'm just being over sensitive, and there are exceptions, but that's the trend I see.