Yes! I love this billboard. In your face to Hollyweird. . .

That's right! :)

Clearly you don't hate all of Hollywood. You have spoken well of The Passion of the Christ, Polar Express, and The Merchant of Venice.

Of course I don't hate all of Hollywood, though I wouldn't consider The Passion to be a product thereof. I haven't actually blogged about Merchant. It was actually quite terrible. Joseph Fienes was great, so was Portia and Jeremy Irons, but the movie was poorly done in my opinion. I was extremely disappointed. They didn't even show much of Venice! I don't recommend it.

Why don't you consider The Passion of the Christ a Hollywood product?

Hollywood had nothing to do with that project. They all but boycotted it. Over half of the members of the Academy admitted to not even seeing it because they didn't like what it was about. Mel Gibson was basically tarred and feathered for the movie. The Mainstream Media went after his family, his past, his father. Hollywood wanted this movie not to be made. That's easy to discover if you research it.

Also, Hollywood did nothing to fund or back it. Mel Gibson did everything himself. He invested his personal money, used his own production company, etc. This was not a Hollywood production.

I see what you're saying, but Icon Productions wasn't created to finance this film. It has been around since 1989, headquartered in Santa Monica, and the film had a budget of $30 million. Mel Gibson, moreover, is a major Hollywood star, with such films as The Road Warrior and Lethal Weapon series.

Mel Gibson PAID for the project out of his own pocket. Normally production companies use investors and distributors, but the big investors and distributors Mel (Icon) approached for The Passion refused to touch this movie.

The big-name Hollywood distributors refused out of fear of losing money and/or backlash of not being pc. Hollywood distanced themselves from this production intentionally--floating anti-Semitic and violent themes (which is ironic; critics panned this film for "gratuitous" violence then in the next breath were thumbs-up over "Kill Bill"). The company that did distribute The Passion is Newmarket, a smaller independent company--not a mainstream Hollywood distributor.

Yes it looks like he put $25 million into it. It looks like you're right that it's independent in the sense of not being backed by a major studio or distributor. On the other hand it's not independent in the sense of having a low budget or being disconnected from the star system, like Clerks or The Unbelievable Truth. Also, it was nominated for 4 Academy awards.

Dee, what do you mean when you say Hollywood distanced themselves by "floating anti-Semitic ... themes"?

Full disclosure: I have not seen the movie so I can't comment on its content.

If you do research on written articles coming out of Hollywood and those by critics you will find one of their objections to the movie was that of anti-semitism. They said people would blame the Jews on Jesus' crucifixion; they also raised the possibility that the movie itself would spark violence against Jews. All ridiculous.

I recommend you see the movie. Although Mel is only showing the last part of His life, it is Biblically and historically correct in its portrayal.

Did they also say the movie itself was an anti-Semitic depiction?

It's been a while so I can't give you verbatim quotes, just the overall tone: the movie is anti-semitic because it portrays the Jews as the ones who wanted Jesus dead.

Basically the critics were basing their assumptions upon fears that turned out to be completely unfounded (as everyone who supported the movie said at the time).

Do a google search and it will prove more enlightening than my paraphrasing.

P.S. I think we're getting off topic; back when the movie came out Emily did a big piece on The Passion. Check out the archives and see what she said at the time.