You are correct. No DTS, unless it's released as a separate product...the way they used to release DTS discs.

Thanks, and I dig your login...LOL

No, it has nothing to do with picture quality. It's a measure of how wide the picture is with respect to it's height. For example, a standard television is nearly square, making its aspect ratio 4:3. Film formats that are much wider than they are high might have a ratio of 2.35:1. It's merely a measure of the shape of the picture itself.

Has anyone heard why the change in aspect ratio?

You're right....the fallen angels didn't know the triumph and they will never know as they are bound in darkness (and that includes Satan) with eternity nipping at their heels..... I actually found it incredibly clever that Satan was portrayed here just as he is....a master manipulator ie. Garden of Eden ("...you will see all things good and evil" and boy did they ever). As the book of Luke indicates, only an angel is recorded as having visited Jesus to strenghthen Him after he ernestly prayed at Gethsemane. I think Gibson felt it important (I agree) the audience understands what length of scrutiny both physically, spiritually and emotionally that Jesus endured in order to shed light on the significance of Gethsemane (to start) and what a liar Satan is. I believe this is why Gibson decided to bring alive the visual presence of Satan with dialogue so cleverly cobbled together. I loved that in this scene Jesus didn't even acknowledge Satan (true to scripture if he was there tempting Him as there is no record of confrontation in the 4 Gospels) because Jesus knew His time had come to do what He was on earth to do: ultimately defeat Satan with antonement (action) and render him powerless....check mate. What Satan whispers to Jesus preys directly on His emotional human weakness by proposing an end to His forthcoming suffering (you won't survive the beatings nevermind the crucifixtion so throw in the towel now and save yourself.) It's all about smoke in mirrors with Satan....trying to get Jesus to step out of obedience with God and not, "...drink from the cup that has been given". Just one act of disobedience was all he wanted to break the link. Like all fallen angels, I believe Satan didn't know that Jesus' death would be more than an act of obedience....it would be the ultimate sacrifice to bring man back into relationship with God for eternal life. If a person understands how to love and forgive from this example, we can walk as Christians in authority leaving corruptness and arrogance behind. Unfortunately, Satan stills has his grip on the world and goes for the juggular when it comes time for us to make choices....and that includes Christians. We need faith and hope in Christ who bore it all for us to bridge the gap (with God) to begin to do right by others.

Good insight on how much impact the ratio has to the viewer in a home theatre environment. I've learned something here! Also, very interesting observation on the mood and environment of the film. You're right, many versions of this same subject matter have unfolded with less cruelty I imagine so as to keep the audience engaged in the story rather than a disturbing and controversial act of violence which very much existed in early Roman

(ooops)....the first century Roman Empire government. Ugly. I very much found the timing and visual presence of Satan's temptation to end suffering while Christ was at His most vulenrable incredibly mesmorizing....I felt like I cared about who He was and what He was going through right from the sweaty start...even if you (the audience) didn't know the whole story. I loved how imagination, clarity and practical intelligence was demonstrated in the writing, direction and photography. The acting was devasting...in a good way. I suppose I'm poised to be a consumer of this latest edition release!

Actually...you've explained it very well....I get the picture! Indeed, it is interesting that this version has been made with less widescreen. Perhaps that's an email of inquiry to make to the distributor. Anyhoots, since I'm latecomer in joining the running commentry of all that's been discussed, will you be adding this latest release to your dvd collection? Why or why not?

Hey batman, since I have no technical background in film making, can you explain what aspect ratio is.....are you referring to the 1.88:1 anamorphic widescreen mentioned in the opening details of this page? Do tell!

...and there I was. Just minding my own business while sifting through some seasonal dvd release reviews and poof...along came a swarm of passionate bloggers hot on the case of well, the passion of Mel Gibson who made a movie about his Christ. What a delicious topic....and there appears to be a stunner buffet of commentary from everyone to go with it.
I appreciate passion: the passion to be heard, to be accountable, to be loved, to be accepted, to be noticed, to make a difference and to be peaceful. In fact, from what everyone has wrote here to date, I can safely say that all of these passions seem to have been touched on...and it's important to stand for something...because if we don't, then we will fall for anything.
Having said that, I know and expect that the topic of Jesus Christ will always be controversial because the very essence of what he represents - the passion to encourage and represent unconditional love - is completely unexplainable and impossible to conduct as we are all imperfect humans in this world. I believe love is not a mood - it's a choice to commit with heart, mind and soul and boy am I glad He was committed to the cause - us. There is much light and beauty in the world but somehow, many of us seem to love the dark more - where corruption and deceit lurk - traits that God never wanted for us to live with (enter: death from sin) but rather live in harmony with Him and each other without suffering - and that is the point of having humbled Himself into human form so that He may identify with us and we could learn from Him how to love each other through his spotless example - and He paid the ultimate price with His life to complete the bridge. Boy are sins ever messy and ugly. What a story to tell, hey Mel? This movie was definitely meant to stir the heart of a non-believer to seek more about who Jesus was prior to His final 12 hours on earth and for believers to wake up and see all that is, has been done and to do something good with it. You see, God is in the business of restoring relationships and building bridges of love for eternity - not almighty oneness, self-righteousness and fear-injected dominance. That's man-made religion. No other faith cuts such a clear path of freedom from forgiveness with hope to walk on - I'm sure a path that the Tutsis during the Rwanda genocide would have gladly walked but instead 800,000 lost their lives over what.....jealousy from others not knowing a peace that passes all understanding. (No, I have no family ties to this tragedy but felt this was a good example of what can happen to a nation that lacks the ability to understand unconditional love.)
There is much more to the story of why Jesus was, but this is for anyone to seek more because their heart has been filled with the desire to know more. I enjoy pointing out great books, credible websites and other tools to start with but only if ever requested. My point as a Christian is to be open without being a bully or demanding world domination at the sign of the cross. It's about being a witness through acts of strength from kindness and it all comes down to a heart choice for truth. I have no desire to claw my way to victory with anyone on this topic in order to be heard - that is not the way Christ was or what God expects and I already know He hears me which is really the most important thing. Jesus listened and spoke only with people who chose to hear his message. Wouldn't that just ruin the bragging party of today's corruptive leaders if they made the choice to do the same and then people suddenly had a voice? Personally, I like having the freedom to make choices not only for a clear decision on what is truth, but to try to make educated comments on why. I thank God for giving me life in a country of peace, fresh water and plenty of beauty to live with and welcome any opportunity in dvd-re-re-release-infinity-extraordinaire format to spread news of goodness and the golden rule; the very foundation our morals, values and justice system was built on. This new dvd is not all about the money, it's about the message. If the message is true and clear, the money plays an less significant role. Of course there is a price tag - movies are a business - some just better than others.
Last hit: CS Lewis said it best, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else".
 

The ad has better artwork than the actual cover.

Don't they have homework at Gotham Community College? If you actually read anything I have written in it's entirety instead of picking out segments and trying to disect and analyze them down to the sub-atomic level, you would see a lot of what you are saying is cotradictory. I never grouped all christians together. Obviously you missed the entire reference to Religious Zelots, an educated "man"(i'm assuming) like you should know the difference. If you are saying there is no such thing, then you are probably one of them. Saying "I think it’s safe to say anyone who has read your posts knows exactly and precisely how you feel about Christians" is an assumption you have no right to make. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't for a second think you know what I'm about, because you don't. I'm not going to sit here and explain to you the people I have come across in my life and the conversations I've have, because you don't warrant the time. You really say nothing at all, a bunch of puffed up opinion with an overactive vocabulary. Let's just say agree to disagree on this one. If you have another topic I'm all ears, this one is dead to me.

They call this the Definitive Edition... that may be true on DVD, but I bet that now that the 2-disc has been released, they'll try to release it in Blu-ray.

batman wrote: Billy Black wrote: Talk about regurgitating something you just heard. How quick were you to cast the chiches stone and now you do exactly what you chastise someone else for. I think the real lesson here is everyone is guilty of something. Even the guy who got nailed to the cross. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to call someone else's originality into question there... BATMAN.I call them as I see them and will continue to do so.

Your post that I responded to was exactly what I said: anti-religion cliche's that are older than you are which you repeat because the leaders of your brand of "religion" presented them to you as true. The sad part is, you may not even know exactly what you believe, but you do enjoy casting aspersions in a particular direction, see who you can get a rise out of, etc. So, you do so here.

Again, I stand by what I said.

As far as my last post being a repeat of something I just heard, all I have to say is, huh? On the surface, the two of you are diametrically opposed, but in actuality, you were saying the same thing.

And, according to you, I just heard this.........where?
It was probably last night's homework assignment. Look man, you're not the only one who's had cool professors, it's OK if you learn something and then repeat it. If you wanna act all educated and above it all that's you're deal. Fact is, everything's been done. You talk about cliches and that c**p, but you haven't said anything that isn't already out there. "I call it like I see it", apparently you are the only one who has the right to do so. You have no idea what my religious background is and yet you pretend to speak on a level of understanding you don't have. Saying the radical christian right of this country, which is what made the passsion the $400 million domestic gross, blindly follow a path isn't just a cliche, it's based on my own personal experience with that particular group, and it also happens to be true. And since you responded to my comment in the manner that you did, I assume you agree with the person I was originally responding to. Anyone who makes their mind up about a subject before judging the facts themselves is a fool, agreed? But you've already chosen a side. Bottom line is, ALL this is a matter of opinion. And while you do have some merit to your arguement, eloquently put as it was, you bore me.

Word to everything ticktock said. Obligatory cliche: You hit the nail right on the head.

batman wrote: Billy Black wrote: If you are looking for the definition of irony, look no further than a self proclaimed "fellow athiest" explaining the important lessons of Christ's crucifixion. Seriously bro, glass houses. I have a better definition of irony. The both of you are saying the same thing -- decrying the closed-mindedness and name-calling from the opposing side. I challenge any and all to study the evidence that exists and follow it wherever it may lead, especially when it goes places that challenge your paradigm.
Talk about regurgitating something you just heard. How quick were you to cast the chiches stone and now you do exactly what you chastise someone else for. I think the real lesson here is everyone is guilty of something. Even the guy who got nailed to the cross. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to call someone else's originality into question there... BATMAN.

Gabe Powers wrote: Eugene Mlodik wrote:
And, although no one's willing to admit it, about 45% of the script if a rip-off of "Caligula."

Wait, Gladiator or The Passion?

THe Gladiator... Though, "Passion" did borrow some visual aesthetics (when it wasn't busy raping 'Passion of the Joan Arc.'

Will this be the Unrated Version ive heard so much about? Besides the Mary/Jesus sex scene, I heard they actually slow down the Cattail scene and zoom in to see the flesh chunks come out. New larger flesh flying graphics and everything. The only thing that could beat that would be intercutting it with a picture of Mel throwing up some rocknroll horns.

I hear in the sequel, Jesus comes back to battle the kid from the Grudge.

Just to add a note of balance. As a firm believer in Christianity I'd like to point out not all Christians like the film myself included. From my own point of view it taught very little about what I believe the meaning of Jesus and his life to be. I could take the movie and cut just 5 minutes from it and it would become simply a movie about a man who happened to be called Jesus who was brutally tortured and killed. The rest of the movie is brutal and violent and doesn't seem to speak any message whatsoever. For those who argue it it important because it depicts Jesus' suffering I would respond yes but only if the film also makes it clear why it is important to know how he suffered. I would imagine many of those who aren't Christian even though they don't believe the bible would agree the film gave very little meaning to the violence shown on screen. Speaking to many of my friends both Christian and Non-Christian alike, they felt pretty much the same. I was only moved at one point of the film and that was at a part that isn't taken from the bible itself.

Just wanted to write this to make sure people realise that not all Christians are fans of the film and provide a different perspective

JackJackMN wrote: If anyother movie had come out with this amount of violence, it would have been shunned by christians, but because it is about JESUS, it somehow makes it OK and they ran to the theater like sheep and dropped down there $10.
Nice try. There are several people I know that didn't see it because of the violence. I'm sorry we're not all quite the mind-numbed robots you would have us be.

FangsFirst wrote: Gabe Powers wrote: Watch Gladiator again. If you still can't see it I don't know what to tell you. I guess it's just a difference of opinion.

Somewhat ironically, Gladiator is a huge ripoff of Spartacus and The Fall of the Roman Empire. Albeit only in script and not style.
But the latter (TFotRE) is the BLATANT source of script THEFT. Oh well.

And, although no one's willing to admit it, about 45% of the script if a rip-off of "Caligula."

Scar_Face016 wrote: It's amazing how companies are willing to exploit the story of Jesus' cruxifiction for money. One of the many reasons that I do not believe in religion.

Gibson paid for this out of his own pocket, so don't disrespect him for that.

is there going to be a Best Buy exclusive that comes with a whip and nails?

What's so definitive about it?  A collectable, individually numbered apology from Mel Gibson?

I never said that Gladiator was narratively original, or even particularly great. All it really has going for it is it's look.

Gabe Powers wrote: Watch Gladiator again. If you still can't see it I don't know what to tell you. I guess it's just a difference of opinion.

Somewhat ironically, Gladiator is a huge ripoff of Spartacus and The Fall of the Roman Empire. Albeit only in script and not style.
But the latter (TFotRE) is the BLATANT source of script THEFT. Oh well.

"I guess they are releasing at the same time as the sequel?"

The prequel is coming out...

I found this movie really pretentious and stuff. I didn't feel sorry for Jesus at all, I hated all the gratuitous slow motion, ect. This is good news for the fans, though. Sounds like a comprehensive DVD. I wonder what the recut it.

It's interesting reading these comments and how people seem restrained with such a topic!
I think we also must realise that the film is one persons vision of the story and that we are allowed to have our own opinion of it and should not be penalised because of it.
Double dips will always happen - especially if the film is quite popular, made allot of money and was first released with a basic DVD package. I am tending now a days to actually wait a while before purchasing a DVD due to this factor

What's with the aspect ratio? I thought it's OAR was 2.40:1, which is my prefered AR. I remember seeing it on the single disc version of Star Trek VI and it really suck, one bar is huge, while the other is thin. Hopefully that's an honest mistake from Fox.

Get rid of "Definitive Edition" and Mel's name, and you have one of the best covers I've ever seen.

Is it true the new cut is going to be a PG-13?

What is the point in that??? I can't believe it's Gibson approved, taking the violence away you'd not have much of a film left.

PG-13??? Surely not, they'd have to remove at least half the film. Unless PG-13 doesn't mean much any more but then the original cut is are rated when it should be NC-17 in the first place.

It's NOT a kids movie so doing this will only insult the original (which in it's own right is a decent film).

The ENTIRE point is the viewer is shown the extreme violence Jesus went through. Without it the whole point of the film is lost.

Yet again a film is watered down for those who can't handle it. Which is fine but simply don't watch it and watch a documentary instead.

Gabe Powers wrote: I thought the entire film was a stylistic rip-off of Gladiator, only with more slow motion.
What??? It's nothing like Gladiator at all. Both feature lots of sun and are set in a similar area, that's it. What an odd thing to say.

I agree the artwork isn't the best, but I have been patient by not picking up the vanilla edition and will reward my self with this edition

Billy Black wrote: ...these companies prey on religious people, like yourself, because they know you will blindly go and buy it again. Religious zelots will do anything to support the their "story", like double dipping on relgiuos propaganda dvds, or electing GW Bush because he pretended to be religious. You're like lemmings in that regard. You know, there is a reason congregations are referred to as sheep.
Hmmm...accuse others of being mindless lemmings....then just repeat the same, tired anti-religion cliche's you heard someone else say...

Irony, anyone?

mlcm wrote: I'm tired of the debate over this film and films like it. It always ends up as "Well, you don't like it because you're a non-believer" or "Well, I don't like it because Jesus ain't my homeboy."
I even agree. I am 100% Jewish on both sides and I don't like this movie but The Last Temptation of Christ, advertising the same thing, is one of my favorite movies just because it interests me to see what the real fate is about and the actual story rather than the beating.

jmm wrote: The way I understand it, this "definitive edition" has been greatly purged from much of the most gross and violent images to make it more pallatable to audiences. That's sad to me because, as a non-beliver myself, the major merit of this film –if any– is that it served to exemplify the christian paradigm of "virtue through suffering". Again, I do not share that notion at all, but it is essential to christianity and the movie approved and show calvary in all its glorious detail.

If you take that away, I really can see no value to this film.

Maybe Gibson will go the way of Lucas and have Jesus Christ shot first or whatever. ;-D

Nah - this "Definitive Edition" will have both cuts on it, according to the description above.  The "Passion Recut" version without a lot of the gory violence will be available via seamless branching, but the original version in its entirety is on this this disc.

For a "non-believer", as you call yourself, you've got a pretty good handle on what this movie is about.  Kudos to you, and I mean that sincerely.

But if Gibson was gonna pull a Lucas, he'd have Jesus shoot first.

Anyway, my thoughts on this set?  Awesome.  I was waiting for a better release before I picked it up.  I bought it for my folks, and I borrowed the disc for a bit about a year after I bought it for them.  While I appreciate the effort on Fox and Gibson's parts to bring this movie out to the public, there are some of us who actually want to delve into the artistic side of the production, and I was kinda sore that there wasn't much in the way of that on the original disc.
(Damn, that's a long sentence.  Sorry.)
I saw this film twice in theaters - once by myself, and the other time with my then-girlfriend (now my wife).  The scenes of violence disturbed me, but the message of Jesus' humanity was the thing that got to me the most.  It's different when you hear Bible stories or hear the priest who reads the gospel on Sundays drone like he's read it a billion times before.  To have a visual depiction of his suffering and how it affected everyone around him hammers home the point that he was human, he had a mother who was probably dying on the inside watching her son get treated like no human probably had before.  The scene where Jesus falls and Mary tries to help him is, to me, one of the most powerful scenes I think I've ever seen in a film.  
Gibson knows how to direct a good movie, and I've enjoyed all his films.  Even "The Man Without a Face" was pretty great in its own right.  I appreciated his efforts on "The Passion of the Christ".  Do I give a c**p about his personal life and how he harbors some weird sentiment towards the Jews?  No.  Does he make good movies?  Yes.  That's all I want, is something that's not going to make me say "Damn, I wish I had that two hours of my life back."

And if you folks really want to see a cinematic atrocity, I'd suggest "Ballistic: Ecks Vs. Sever".

Okay, I ain't gonna get into all the religious stuff, seeing as how I'm about as non-religious as you can get.  That said, I love The New Testament and Jesus (great stories), and so far the only Jesus film I really got into was "The Last Temptation of Christ."  I've been meaning to see this movie for quite a while (if for nothing else, to see what all the fuss is about), since I do, as I said, love the character of Jesus when done right, and I think Mel Gibson's filmmaking skills are overlooked.  So far, this new release looks quite satisfying if I turn out to like the film.  Heck, I even kind of like the cover art; simple, nice.

(Oh, and one thing I have hardly heard anything about this movie is the ACTING!  How is Jim Caviezel (sp) as Jesus, and the rest of the cast?)

Despite all this, it's just plain stupid that this gets a special edition before "BRAVEHEART," for goodness' sake!  Whether or not it's a ploy to boost Mel Gibson's career back up a tad again (although personally, I think that whole issue is overblown to high heaven, pardon the pun), that movie has GOT to get a multidisc, "Gladiator"-esque special edition.  If anything, time a special edition of BOTH "Braveheart" and "The Passion of the Christ" to be released simultaneously.  That would be way cooler.

Billy Black wrote:
That's not what I got out of it at all. What he is saying, as I understand, is that these companies prey on religious people, like yourself, because they know you will blindly go and buy it again. Religious zelots will do anything to support the their "story", like double dipping on relgiuos propaganda dvds, or electing GW Bush because he pretended to be religious. You're like lemmings in that regard. You know, there is a reason congregations are referred to as sheep. But these companies will profit off any fanatacism, look at the World Trade Center double dip due out. And your Detroit analogy is very flawed, you can alway get a Japanese car. Besides, Detroit is a hell hole.

The simple response:  "Oh Lord..."

The complicated response:  You have no idea what you're talking about.  Where to begin....

Let's see...you said What he is saying, as I understand, is that these companies prey on religious people, like yourself, because they know you will blindly go and buy it again.

So let me get this straight...the first release of Passion was a bare-bones version by every definition of the word, and finally Fox is coming out with the 2-disc deluxe version they promised way back when and you say this is to prey on the blind religious people?  Boy, I'm praying that you're never on a jury if that's what you got out of his rant.  Well, to be honest that is what he's saying, but just like him, you apparently agree with that sentiment because you go on and attempt to further support that opinion with your own biases.

Then you go on to say this brilliant thing: Religious zelots will do anything to support the their "story", like double dipping on relgiuos propaganda dvds, or electing GW Bush because he pretended to be religious.

Oh just like the Left-wing zealots who go out and buy every Michael Moore film and Al Gore documentary to support their ideology?  You mean those type of zealots?  

At this point, I'm guessing you didn't like the source material this movie was made from.  

Then comes this statement: You know, there is a reason congregations are referred to as sheep.

Congregations, or as I like to call them, people who share the same general beliefs and follow the same rules.  Very similar to organized sports, wouldn't you say?  A bunch of people who follow the same rules in order to practice their "religion" so that it's played the same every time to maintain consistancy.  Rather than making up rules as they go along, much like the Left does today with their motto: "I think for myself, therefore I am." or some such bulls**t.   What's ironic about that statement is that it's made pretty clear in certain establishments, such as academia, that the Left has adopted "If you don't think like me, you're a fascist Right-winger."

As for your Detroit and Japanese reference...very funny.  

lazerlover wrote: my friend,
i must disagree with your comment that you get it. no disrespect intended.
you proved my point, and that in fact you do not yet understand, perhaps without even knowing it; with comments like:
-dan brown knows what he is talking about.
-or that you do not understand what the sword reference is about.
but that is ok. that is to be expected.
look, I did not mean to insult anyone. it just happens to be the truth that if someone does not understand something like this (and there is nothing else like this), then he/she cannot be expected to know it's meanings.
what I mean by "understanding" is not like knowing how to solve a math problem, or having a high-level grasp of the english language.
in this case, it is understanding without fully being able to explain in human terms. it is faith filled. it is in the heart.
and I do not have any problem with agreeing to disagree. because in this case, until God allows otherwise, that appears to be what we will be doing.
peace.


Okay, that's a very reasonable response. That's fine. I know the definition of faith. I have faith in science. It's roughly the same. I see your point.

However, there's a question to be asked. Are you saying that Jesus is unique in human thought? To borrow The Matrix's borrowed jargon, he may be the One but others came before him. The Son and the Father and the Halo and the cross and the wound in the side are all archetypes. They have ancestors. You say there's nothing like this.... Are you saying there's nothing like the cartharsis of watching Jesus suffer for humanity? Or there's nothing like Jesus suffering for humanity?

Watching Jesus die for sins is NOTHING. Absolutely nothing. My issue with this film and its fans is epitomized in the film's resurgence, resurrection if you will, at the box office during Easter. Instead of contemplating what Jesus meant, they forked over their ten dollars to see a glorified snuff movie. As if they are better Christians for seeing this movie on Easter.

Reasoned faith with altruistic intentions... that's perfect. Just perfect. Unexamined nostalgia and proud ignorance, now that's something to be frightened of.

As well, please don't misunderstand me. I have nothing against faith per se. It's the morons running around killing people in the name of the intangible that frightens me.

Thanks for the debate.

One of the worst films I've ever seen, there was just NOTHING good about it. I shall leave it at that.

my friend,
i must disagree with your comment that you get it. no disrespect intended.
you proved my point, and that in fact you do not yet understand, perhaps without even knowing it; with comments like:
-dan brown knows what he is talking about.
-or that you do not understand what the sword reference is about.
but that is ok. that is to be expected.
look, I did not mean to insult anyone. it just happens to be the truth that if someone does not understand something like this (and there is nothing else like this), then he/she cannot be expected to know it's meanings.
what I mean by "understanding" is not like knowing how to solve a math problem, or having a high-level grasp of the english language.
in this case, it is understanding without fully being able to explain in human terms. it is faith filled. it is in the heart.
and I do not have any problem with agreeing to disagree. because in this case, until God allows otherwise, that appears to be what we will be doing.
peace.

an amazing masterpiece. much more than just a movie. an experience that mostly only the believers will "get".
this film is so divisive precisely because of the subject matter.
Jesus came as a sword. and the sword divides. truth from lies. right from wrong. good from evil.
and He allows this concept to manifest itself throughout life in simple and in complex ways. in this case, through this movie.
either you "get it" and like it, or you don't "get it" and thus you don't like it.
obviously a must have!
God bless.

the cover is horrendous. why blue? and why those images?

the original single disc cover is more appealing.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOH!!!!! Mel Gibson's Jew hating masterpiece!!! DEEE-LICIOUS!!!!!

I liked the original release's artwork better, but the transfer was terrible, so I held off on buying it. Hopefully this release will include an improved transfer. If so, I'll probably pick it up. We'll see.  

They should have called it "The Jesus is my homeboy edition"

Lincoln6Echo wrote: Scar_Face016 wrote: It's amazing how companies are willing to exploit the story of Jesus' cruxifiction for money. One of the many reasons that I do not believe in religion.

That has got to be one of thw dumbest things I have ever heard.

I guess the "collection basket" is a totally foreign and alien concept for you, isn't it?  You're thinking, "What does God need with money?" right?  

But to address your statement directly, you're saying that you don't believe in religion because (in essence) people can make money off of it.  Hmmm...if there's one thing in life you should learn is that someone, somewhere, will ALWAYS find a way to make money off of anything.  How that would cause you to not support or believe in whatever that thing is, is very ridiculous.  

It'd be like saying, I don't like how Detroit makes money off of auto sales....therefore, I shall never learn how to drive because I don't wanna support such evil.  Sounds stupid, don't it?  That's what your statement about this double-dip on Passion sounds like.

That's not what I got out of it at all. What he is saying, as I understand, is that these companies prey on religious people, like yourself, because they know you will blindly go and buy it again. Religious zelots will do anything to support the their "story", like double dipping on relgiuos propaganda dvds, or electing GW Bush because he pretended to be religious. You're like lemmings in that regard. You know, there is a reason congregations are referred to as sheep. But these companies will profit off any fanatacism, look at the World Trade Center double dip due out. And your Detroit analogy is very flawed, you can alway get a Japanese car. Besides, Detroit is a hell hole.

I thought the entire film was a stylistic rip-off of Gladiator, only with more slow motion. And more gore. Gore gore gore. I think Zimmer rips himself off enough these days, we don't need more of it.

Kaya Savas wrote: Frickin' John Debney has a commentary! I hate him so much. He does so much c**p work it's unbelievable. The Passion was nothing but rip-offs of Hans Zimmer. That douche got an Academy Award nomination and it really pissed me off. The structure and instruments used in this film are identical to Black Hawk Down minus Zimmer's synth work.

Yeah, all thee less than the Almighty Zimmer are not worth three pense.

This movie was like Hostel with Jesus. Though I like Jesus more than any annoying frat boys, so go Passion.

mlcm wrote: A theologian commentary with Mel Gibson? Oh, saints be praised. I always wanted to hear of complex matters of faith and messianic symbols from Braveheart.

Winner: Post of the week.

I guess they are releasing at the same time as the sequel?

It appears that no one has discussed the artwork yet, so I'll begin.


AWFUL.

What's wrong with Amaray cases?

I wish this had Kevin Smith's purported Joel Siegel quote on the cover: "Mel Gibson nails it!"

Well it is true, they make money off of it but not so much off of the story in THIS case. I will bet anything that they are making this to make up for the money that Apocalypto will not make.

wow to think just yesterday there was a discussion about movies that needed a special edition. amazing timing

need to get this since I don't own the regular DVD. plus John Debney's commentary is nice to hear

It seems like we had some warning that a better version would be forthcoming.  When I picked it up, I actually expected a better version to be released just before last Easter.  

Scar_Face016 wrote: It's amazing how companies are willing to exploit the story of Jesus' cruxifiction for money. One of the many reasons that I do not believe in religion.

hey, believe what you like- but how would a company double dipping on a movie about a story from a religion make you not believe in the religion? what does that have to do with the story of jesus?

I knew it. I already have it but Ill get it when it goes down on sale.

1.88:1????? It was shot and shown in theaters and previously released on DVD in 2.40:1, what's going on here?