Finally! This is the first (and last) positive mention of this fascinating movie that I’ve ever seen/heard. Apocalypto has my recommendation, whatever that is worth.

Isnt this the movie with the super fast clip of Waldo, from “Where’s Waldo” in the big pile of dead people?

….

Yup! It is!

http://tinyurl.com/2wkmb5

I hated this movie. It just wasnt good. Every actor was a caricature of other Gibson roles. Completely devoid of character development or even much of a story, there’s an “oh gee” moment at the end thats kinda neat.

The only redeeming factor was the commentary on todays society. But even that was lost under a pile of one dimensional overacting. Definately a miss.

To ROBERT:

The Waldo thing is a hoax that was added by someone who had a cam release. They added a frame of Waldo and then unleashed it on the intertubes. It’s not actually in the movie.

Ppl, check your facts, this is a hoax.

Meh. I’ll wait till it comes out on TV to watch it. I’m not pressed to see any movie made by that nutbag.

That movie…made me not want to watch movies for a month after I saw it…

I’m mexican, and I know tons of ancient history, and this movie is great because he turned a simple plot into an epic masterpiece. Who cares how acurate the rituals were? this is entertainment not Discovery Channel. The little changes they might have done gave the movie a creepy violent-death-any-moment-now that an accurate depiction would not have. The weapons, jewerly and languages are based on real ones, and the fast paced scenes of the movie makes it a great action movie and not a archived documentary. Imagine making Pirates Of the caribbean realistic without sea monsters and pirates with gonorrea and dehidrated!

the waldo frame is real. I saw it in the actual film print.

Yeah well I recommend The Hellcats.

Eh, I thought it was decent–not outstanding, but not terrible.

The only part I remember fondly is when the main character tosses a hornets’ nest wrapped in a leaf at the guys hunting him. Gives a whole new meaning to the term “bug bomb.”

By paying to see this film, I would be paying Mel Gibson. His production company had a lot to do with the distribution of this film, so he saw profits all over. So no matter the merits of the film, I’m not going to throw my finacial support, my capitlistic power, behind a man who hyproctically claims his christendom.

My favorite movie of 2006.

It’s a shame so many people avoided this film. I really can’t say a whole lot more that hasn’t already been said. It’s a wildly exotic, violent, thought provoking film. I had to see it twice in the theater and I’ve been anxiously waiting for the DVD the second after I saw it. Go watch it despite anything you may already think. Don’t let Gibson’s personal tirades distract you from how well done this movie is.

I’m really curious about this movie. I’ll try to pick it up as soon as possible.

Bah, “I” … “I”

You know what I find hilarious?
A lot of these people that judge Gibson’s films based on his personal life are probably the same people that said we shouldn’t judge Bill Clinton just because of his sex scandal.
Hypocrisy ftw.

This film is great, regardless of how you perceive Gibson, and it’s well worth checking out.

Come on, Mel Gibson made the Passion from the writings of the bible, and jews killed Jesus, another jew. the catholic church is a spin off of the jew religion, so he was killed by jews, this has been a fact for 2000 years. Not even Hollywood which consists of practically 90% jews can change that. Look at how the islam is treated on movies, the problems is jews have in conflict with the islam since before history was first put on paper. Gibson is just getting black listed like tons of others have been in Hollywoodland. How he gets money for his moneys now? he pays for them, distribution is handled by major studios.

I didn’t quite get what you were saying rokerovakero, so if you can explain it that would be nice.
But just to correct a few things..
The Jews and Muslims had very little problem with each other until the last century. If you look at real history books you’d see that the Jews lived peacefully in the Caliphate. (Of course, paying taxes to the Muslims.) The Koran does tell about how to treat infidels, but that wasn’t really followed as much until recently.
Also, what can change the blame of the Jews for the killing of Christ is not “90% of the jews” but Vatican II. 1969. And whatever the Pope says is law in Catholicism. However, Mel Gibson’s father, and probably Mel Gibson himself are of the sect of Christianity that rejects Vatican II. (Although most do it for different reasons, not specifically the shifting of the blame from the Jews.)
Finally, Gibson gets money because he earns a percentage of the sales of the DVD just like any other actor/director/producer or any one else who has that stipulation as part of their contract.

Now, I’m not saying through all this that I condone judging movies based on the personal life of their creators. I do not like Mel Gibson as a person, but I still like Braveheart. And Roman Polanski movies are amazing, although what he did in his personal life was obviously terrible.

If you rent the movie, no money goes directly to Mel Gibson. The store bought their copies of the film already weather you rent it or not.

There. A way to see what might be a great film (I havn’t seen it yet) while still being able to keep your moral high ground.

there, problem solved