Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Church bookings for The Passion

This is topic Church bookings for The Passion in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001026

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 01-23-2004, 01:05 PM:

I am getting a massive amount of calls from local churches wanting to set up (and promote) showings of "The Passion". Anybody else experiencing this. The movie doesn't even open for another month. I of course appreciate the business but considering the amount of calls that we are getting now, I am definitely not looking forward to a week or so before it opens.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-23-2004, 01:16 PM:

A lot of people are obviously looking forward to see the movie so they don`t have to read the book but can still talk about it (what characters are in it, how it ends, etc). Kind of how school kids often try to find a film version of a book they are supposed to read.

Posted by Ron Keillor (Member # 1790) on 01-23-2004, 01:35 PM:

This reminds me of the 1950's release of MARTIN LUTHER, which in our small town had a whale of an opening as all the Evangelicals who were against Hollywood finally had a chance to see one.
Similarly, THE CROSS AND THE SWITHBLADE which played in a small town theatre here. They were astute enough to spend a bit on the local religious radio station, got the attention of the church crowd, and were swamped with groups once word got around.

Posted by Travis Hubrig (Member # 1745) on 01-23-2004, 01:43 PM:

My company set up a toll-free hotline to set up group sales.
As a manager I am only allowed to direct any interested groups to the hotline. All shows are being set up through corporate.

This is also the first show we have sold advance tickets for. It is kind of nice to start advance tickets with this, hopefully we will start advance sales for more movies after this.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 01-23-2004, 03:18 PM:

We have gotten a few inquiries about screenings for The Passion of Christ. However we have to tell them to hold their horses because we haven't booked the film yet.

With 2,000 prints going out it sounds like a wide, general release. That means there might be as few as 4 and as many as 7-runs in the County. That also means we will not be getting it.

I'm sure we will find out Tuesday after the Oscar Nominations come out and all the bookers get back from Sundance.

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-23-2004, 04:14 PM:

Tell them that most sessions are sold out or partially booked till week 2 or 3, then book em at a reduced percentage.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-23-2004, 04:44 PM:

We are going to play it in all our locations. People call all the time and ask about it.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 01-23-2004, 04:50 PM:

The alleged "controversy" is what some are calling "anti-semetic". But the story is taken straight from the Bible and is not altered by the producer. So don't be afraid of it and notify all your local Christian churches and you should do good business. If the "anti-semetic" complainers want to chew on someone refer them to God.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-23-2004, 07:35 PM:

I fear this film may be anti-Roman and fan the flames of anti-Romanism!

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 01-23-2004, 09:01 PM:

Then perhaps we should put in some calls to the RCLU? [Big Grin]

Posted by John Spooner (Member # 1565) on 01-25-2004, 10:14 AM:

Dear Robert.
Exactly right and well said.
Regards. John S. <>

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 01-25-2004, 10:27 AM:

Romanes eunt domus!

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-25-2004, 04:58 PM:

People called Romanes, they go to the house?

Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 01-26-2004, 01:37 AM:

Perhaps, you could make it a double feature and run DOGMA before PASSION of CHRIST. [Wink]

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 01-26-2004, 08:13 AM:

Here's a different take on this subject. We received this e-mail yesterday. The name of the author has been deleted. Have any of you run into this situation as yet? Comments?

" Now that the advance screenings of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the Christ" have confirmed everyone's worst fears about its incendiary anti-semitic content, Mel Gibson's name will forever be associated with anti-semitism. I would like to request that you remove his image from your home page as he is no longer an artistic icon deserving of respect, but a religious zealot whose wealth and fame have blinded him to western civilization's most enduring evil, an evil repudiated by the Second Vatican Council (although Gibson's sect considers the Vatican too modern and progressive!!!)

Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center said he was "HORRIFIED" after watching the film. Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, said after screening the film that "it will strengthen and legitimize anti-Semitic feelings...and set back the dialogue between Jews and Christians by decades."

I presume it is unnecessary to inform any businessperson who has researched the demographics of East Brunswick and environs that publicly insulting Jews by taking part in the distribution of this film would be met with a consumer boycott and backlash commensurate with that deserved by any business and franchisees participating in the dissemination of blatantly hateful anti-semitic propaganda. Given the long years of thoughtful, dedicated planning that went into the creation of Mega Movies, I'm sure you are aware of your public, and we can count on you to avoid this film like the plague. "

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 01-26-2004, 09:04 AM:

1. Anything taken from the new testament is historically suspect, as it is a notoriously bigoted work of fiction, especially where it attempts to justify why Jesus own people clearly rejected him a false profit. Theology aside, as an historical work it is a joke, and it’s portrayal of the Jewish people of the time is not based in facts.

2. What’s with this “Roman” crap. Last I looked, Rome was located in Italy. The Italian occupation government of Judea arrested Jesus, tried Jesus, and executed Jesus. Yes, there were Jews who cooperated with the Italian occupation government, as there have been scum throughout the ages who have cooperated with foreign occupiers, but they have never spoken for the masses. King Herod was half Italian, and appointed by the Italian occupation authorities, not the Jewish people. Calling them “Roman” is just a lame attempt to hide the fact that they were Italians.

Propagating lies and bigotry in the guise of religious dogma is not acceptable, and this is what people are complaining about.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-26-2004, 10:52 AM:

Anti-Defamation League reaction:

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/4430_96.htm

Catholic News Service:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/20031224.htm

quote:
Vatican officials say pope didn't comment after viewing 'The Passion'

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Although Pope John Paul II watched at least part of Mel Gibson's film, "The Passion of the Christ," he made no comment about the film, said a senior Vatican official close to the pope.

"The Holy Father saw it, but he made no comment. He watched in silence," the official told Catholic News Service Dec. 24.

"The Holy Father does not comment, does not give judgments on art," the official said. "I repeat: There was no declaration, no judgment from the pope."

The official was replying to a request for clarification after numerous newspapers reported that the pope had watched the film and said, "It is as it was."

The purported quote was interpreted as papal praise for the movie.

The official, who insisted that his name not be used, said the pope made no such comment.

He also said that he, too, had seen the film and felt charges that the movie was anti-Semitic were "an exaggeration."

Another well-informed Vatican official, responding Dec. 24 to an e-mailed request for information, said, "The Holy Father saw this film, but did not express any opinion about it."

The pope's spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, has refused to confirm the supposed papal quote, which was relayed to reporters by the film's co-producer, Steve McEveety.

After sending a copy of the film to the papal apartments in early December, McEveety met with Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, the pope's personal secretary.

The Vatican made no comment about the meeting.

"The Passion of the Christ," directed by Gibson, is scheduled to be released in the United States Feb. 25, which will be Ash Wednesday.

Even before the editing of the film began, it became the object of controversy because of alleged anti-Semitism in the script.

In a Dec. 17 statement, Abraham H. Foxman, U.S. director of the Anti-Defamation League, said, "If in fact Pope John Paul II has screened Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of Christ' and if in fact his reaction to the film was positive, as has been reported, then we respect his statement.

"The pope has a record and history of sensitivity to the Jewish community and has a clear moral voice and understanding when it comes to anti-Semitism," Foxman said.

While he said he would reserve judgment until he has had an opportunity to see the film, Foxman said, "We hope that Mel Gibson has heard our concerns and those of Christian and Jewish scholars and religious leaders, who expressed unease about the earlier version of the film and its potential to fuel, rationalize and legitimize anti-Semitism."

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 01-26-2004, 12:26 PM:

Sounds like we might need a "Religion" forum soon. [Roll Eyes]

Honestly, if you haven't seen the movie, people should save themselves some embarassment by not commenting on its content until they do see it. Judging something without seeing it goes on all too often, and THAT TOO is unacceptable. There was a movie out several years ago called "The Last Temptation Of Christ" which had absolutely NO basis in fact or literature... and yet I don't remember anyone complaining about its historical accuracy.

So they claim that this movie is anti-semetic and that one wasn't. Yet all we have been told is that this movie follows the story of the New Testament very closely. So... is the New Testament anti-semetic? That's just ridiculous.

So when the movie comes out - go see it, and post an informed review in the review forum. I'll be eager to read what everyone has to say then.

That's my 2 cents.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 01-26-2004, 01:03 PM:

Mark,

Not a fair analogy. Last Temptation Of Christ was clearly represented in it’s press releases and advertising as a fictional story. Passion is being pawned off as historical fact.

/Mitchell

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 01-26-2004, 01:52 PM:

Mitchell,

"Pawned off as historical fact?" That's a real pleasant choice of words. Where did you hear that? According to the web site it's "adapted from a composite account of The Passion assembled from the four Biblical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John."

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-26-2004, 03:14 PM:

What is this "Italian" business? It was the Roman Empire, not Italy or an Italian Empire. That's what they called it therefore that is what is was. The Rome of the day was not located in Italy. Rome was capital of the Roman Empire. To say otherwise is ridiculous and makes anything else you say suspect.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 01-26-2004, 04:15 PM:

"1. Anything taken from the new testament is historically suspect, as it is a notoriously bigoted work of fiction, especially where it attempts to justify why Jesus own people clearly rejected him a false profit. Theology aside, as an historical work it is a joke, and it’s portrayal of the Jewish people of the time is not based in facts."

Hello Mitchell:

I think you would be better off prefacing your remarks regarding the validy of the Book on which the film is based (a spiritual book NOT an historical book) with at least "...in my opinion..." since you have not shared with us your credentials for calling it suspect. There are millions of people who would disagree with you including historians, archaeologists and, of course, theologians.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-27-2004, 03:13 AM:

I am amazed that a lot of studios passed on this. The media doesn't seem to get it. There was a lot of talk about whether this movie will do well. It's not if, but how well can it do. This movie will make back its money at the very least.

And I wouldn't worry about boycotts with a wide release because you can't possibly boycott almost every multiplex out there. And I agree that a lot of the old texts were not exactly the most open minded books out there. So one should probably blame those books more than the movie itself.

I am an agnostic from a Hindu family who doesn't believe in Jesus and even I am stoked to see this movie. Go ahead and book those church groups. In fact, you should take the initiative and book more once you are assured of a booking of the movie by the distributor.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-27-2004, 03:38 AM:

quote:
There are millions of people who would disagree with you including historians, archaeologists and, of course, theologians.

Without wanting this to drift towards a religious discussion, which would a)be fruitless and b)not allowed on this website, I would like to remark that it is commonly accepted (also by many theologians) that the New Testament does not contain any historically provable facts. There is no single contemporary historical account outside the gospels which sheds light on the events described therein. There are some remarks by historians a few decades later which suggest that a historical Jesus did in fact exist. But the gospels are essentially works of faith, not of history, conveying a spiritual and religious world of ideas, not actual facts and quotes. Which is also obvious from the fact that there are several gospels which differ from each other, in addition to a number of sources which stem from the same time period but were not selected into the official body of writings.

quote:
What’s with this “Roman” crap.

While I think the name "Italia" as a geographical term for the peninsula was already used in antique times, the Romans did not have a perception of Italy as a state or cultural region as we have it today. The Italian peninsula was inhabited by various loosely related tribes, many of which spoke a language or dialect related to the Latin language. But not all - some spoke Celtic or Etruscan dialects. Even though the Romans subjugated all of the peninsula and then most of the known world, they never saw "Italia" as an entity, their homeland or center of gravity. That was essentially the region of Latium (in modern Italian "Lazio"), therefore they called their language "lingua latina" (the language of Latium), not "romana" or "italiana". And they saw themselves as "Romans", not "Italians", a concept which at that time did simply not exist.
Why then did they call themselves "romani", not "latini"? Because in their thinking, the idea of Rome was not a cultural, but political one. Roman was who held the citzenship of the republic of Rome, irrespective of language or culture.
In fact, Italian culture is not a parallel phenomenon but a consequence of the Roman influence, as the Romans imposed their language which would later be the basis for modern Italian over a region which at their time did not have a common language and culture.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-27-2004, 08:53 AM:

This is what happens when you grow up in a country with good schools. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mitchell Cope (Member # 32) on 01-27-2004, 09:01 AM:

The 10th-Century Arabic translation of the Testimonium recounted by Agapius (Josephus' Antiquities, Book 18, Ch. 3):

"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and his learning outstanding. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after the crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." - translation of Shlomo Pines

Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies, especially those found in Isaiah. "He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not." (Isaiah 53:3, NIV)

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus said, "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." (NIV) Even a non-Christian would have to agree that the Christian church has not been overcome by Hell or those who won't believe.

I guess we will have to see the movie. It's probably more relevant to our lives than say "The Alamo" or "Titanic".

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 01-27-2004, 10:27 AM:

Well, as long as this is being allowed to drift into a religious discussion...

Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies

Not true. If it were, Christianity and Judaism would not two seperate religions. The profecy is quite explicit, that the coming of the messiah would free Judea from foreign occupation and there would be 1000 years of peace on earth. Jesus accomplished neither.

While it is certainly within God's power to change his mind and decided that we were not ready, from a Jewish viewpoint that does not make sense. It implies that God did not know what he was doing 2000 years ago when he sent the mesiah to earth.

The Christian old testament is a translation of the Jewish Torah. The problem is that the Christian scholars who translated it took liberties with the text and sprinkled it word and phrases not in the Hebrew original in order to validate Jesus as the messiah.

One of the problems that Jews and Christians have always faced is that when one thinks about it, we are really different sects of the same religion. We share the same God, the same values, the moral code, and unfortunately, some people on both sides share the same intolerance and lack of respect for the belief in others.

Whatever the actual events that took place 2000 years ago were, it is clear that Christian and Jewish scholars have of very different view of the events.

From the perspective of "respect the beliefs of others", nobody should have a problem with this film. It is a work of theology, and should be respected as such. However, it also depicts historical events that there is far from universal agreement on, and more importantly, events that have been used throught out history as the basis for persecution. From that perspective, one can understand the objections.

/Mitchell

Posted by Kevin Wale (Member # 1851) on 01-27-2004, 11:01 AM:

quote:
Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies

Not true.

This is exactly why these things never go anywhere. Not true? Dude, that is a very true statement. You are saying that he didn't fulfil one prophecy so he didn't fulfil any of them. That's an issue of interperetation of timing on that prophecy, not an issue of whether or not he fulfilled OT prophecy.

He fulfilled 88 messianic prophecies. The odds of that are astronomical. In fact, the odds that he would fulfil 8 of them are more astounding than any of us can imagine.

It seems quite logical to me that if there were nearly a hundred prophecies, some of them would require others to be able to be fulfilled. He has to come as a lamb before he can return as a lion. Last I checked, those were two different prophecies pointing to two different time periods. Whether one thinks that is the way it should be or should have been is one thing... to say that he didn't fulfil OT prophecy is wishing something that did happen didn't. It also has nothing to do with this film or the intent of this thread.

Jesus and the disciples were Jews. 95% of those he ministered to are Jews. He commanded to forgive the Jewish leaders for they knew not what they did(which was also referring to the Roman soldiers and leaders that were involved). The text is clear to speak of the specific Jewish leaders who had been corrupted. Gee, we talk about our nation's leaders all the time like that. Does that make us antiaUSA?

Just like a certain group of idiots who claimed to be christians started the crusades(while many many many christians condemned it as against the nonviolent and love thy enemy teachings of Christ), so happened in Jesus' day with those particular pharisees. To talk about a specific group of them doesn't in any way say that all Jews are like that.

Anything that would teach that the Jews are at fault for killing Jesus is clearly 180 degrees off the Exacting point as to why Jesus came.... which was to save humanity because in essence the Jew, Gentile, modern Christian, whoever are sinners and need God to pardon them of thier guilt.

So, the whole point would be if anything that if the Jews were that bad, everyone else must really be bad(while that wasn't the point I can see how poeple might feel that way.)

I am excited about this film, but I feel that it will likely fly over most people's heads and interest. I have a feeling that only artistic thinkers, those into literature, philosophy, and religion will really be very interested in this film. Just because Americans don't tend to like to think about movies they see. Even LOTR and Matrix have two very distinct groups of fans. Those who love the big battles and fight scenes and not much else, and those who love the depths. Not much action involved with The Passion.

Maybe I'm wrong. I hope so. I'd like to think that people in general enjoy deep thoughtful movies.

Posted by Gary Crawford (Member # 2038) on 01-27-2004, 01:16 PM:

Controversy can be good for business. Fire up some passion on both sides and so many more will want to see what all the fuss is about.

One of my pet gripes: People who scream and yell and have not seen it yet and are just going on what someone else says. Too many folks have thin skins and get "offended" at most anything.

I have always been a fan of theology (not quite a theologian however) and would see this film out of curiosity. Whether fact or fantasy, I don't care. I'll watch it and then make up my own mind, as the rest of the world should do.

I know we aren't allowed to have religious discussion in here but I enjoyed what I read in this thread.

Posted by Zach Zagar (Member # 379) on 01-27-2004, 06:54 PM:

What's the big fuss... if you are offended by the movie... don't watch it, its that simple. If you aren't offended by it, watch it. As theater managers, a lot of deal with this same old crap all the time, be it South Park, or The Passion of Christ.

Sure the movie is anti-semmite, but then again, isn't a movie like Barbershop 2 kind of anti-white? I am not complaining about it.

This movie is going to be so big with the amount of fire its giving.

And for the love of God (pun intended), lets stop the holy war that's about to errupt on here... neither side will prove the other right... back to movies! PLEASE [Smile]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 01-28-2004, 09:28 AM:

Thank you, Zach!

But I'd also add to that... if you feel you must comment on the film, you are REQUIRED TO SEE IT FIRST! Then feel free to blast away on it's accuracy until a moderator shuts you down. Otherwise, you ARE discussing religion, and not the film.

No one cares about any analysis of the film by someone who hasn't seen it.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-28-2004, 03:18 PM:

We weren`t discussing the film and we weren`t arguing about religion. We simply discussed the historical background.

Posted by R. Andrew Diercks (Member # 1725) on 01-28-2004, 04:47 PM:

If you weren't discussing the film or the management of it's run, keep it out of this post. Just my humble opinion. [thumbsup]

As far as groups, we booked two prints, with the hope of using one of them primarily for special bookings, so we don't have to force inconvenient times for them. We are in a VERY Christian area and I'm pretty sure there will be no protesting here.

Posted by Ky Boyd (Member # 23) on 01-31-2004, 04:28 PM:

I just had a conversation with a nice lady who stopped by to inquire about whether we will be showing Passion of Christ or not. I told her to check back with me on Tuesday as we've been told by our booker that we will know by then. She was very nice and thanked me. She then pointed to the City of God poster we have up in the lobby and wanted to know if it was a good religous film. She took it pretty well when I explained that City of God was a reference to a part of Rio and that the film was essentially about drug dealers.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 02-01-2004, 10:57 AM:

Advance tickets are already on sale on Fandango...at least here in the SF Bay Area they are. Newspaper ads also state Advance Tickets Available...

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 02-02-2004, 11:27 AM:

We are already selling advance tickets also but only to groups. We won't start selling to the general public until after our groups showings have been booked.

Posted by Kevin Wale (Member # 1851) on 02-03-2004, 12:55 PM:

I won't be here when it opens but it is booked out the doors. I think right now 4 different groups have bought the theatre and several other groups have scheduled special events during normal closed hours. I'm not sure if the Tally Ho will be able to keep up. lol

In Guymon Ok it is getting booked up too but I'm not as sure on the details. Obviously for the 25th itself the Catholic church is the most excited and wanting that particular day at most theatres because of Ash Wednsday. It may be hard for someone not included in a church group to see it except most of them are including people that want to see it that don't go to thier church or church at all. Churches are more interested in everyone going and seeing it as an event for fellowship and a good time together and not so much having it all to themselve's. From what I have gathered they are just afraid if they don't book it as a group they may have to wait a while.

Posted by Dino Panagiotopoulos (Member # 1579) on 02-03-2004, 11:39 PM:

Ad Timed to Gibson Film Release Refused
Tue Feb 3, 4:36 PM ET

By BOBBY ROSS JR., Associated Press Writer

DALLAS - AMC Theatres is refusing to accept a 30-second ad produced by the Baptist General Convention of Texas and timed to coincide with the Ash Wednesday opening of Mel Gibson (news)'s "The Passion of the Christ."

Like many evangelical Christian groups throughout the nation, the 2 million-member Baptist convention hopes to take advantage of the publicity generated by Gibson's R-rated epic about the last hours of Jesus.

Rick King, spokesman for AMC Entertainment Inc., based in Kansas City, Mo., said he couldn't address the specific situation.

In general, King said, "Screen advertising is a pretty sensitive area and we have a pretty tight set of guidelines for what we will place on our screens and what we won't."

Regal Entertainment Group of Knoxville, Tenn., whose holdings include United Artist theaters, has accepted the ad.

"The advertisement meets all of our standards and guidelines," Regal spokeswoman Lauren Leff said. "There's no reason why we wouldn't run it."

Becky Bridges, communications director for the association of 5,700 Texas Baptist churches, said the black-and-white ad is designed to "spark some interest and questions on the part of younger viewers about the story of Christianity."

The ad opens with a young man asking: "You want to see the most scandalous story ever?"

Words then flash on and off the screen: "Betrayal. Sin. Adultery. Greed. Envy. Weakness. Poverty. Torture. Murder."

"Redemption," the actor says.

The ad ends with the message "Now playing at a Baptist church near you" above a Baptist General Convention of Texas logo.

AMC has been "very vague about why" it declined the ad, Bridges said, with company officials describing it variously as "too dark" and "too Christian."

"We followed all their regulations: not using Jesus, Bible or any other overt God talk," she said. "We do not use religious symbols or icons. We do not attempt to use guilt or other things that might appear to be judgmental or proselytizing.

"In my opinion, it is a good teaser which is edgy enough that audiences will find it intriguing, but not offensive," she added, noting that the ad's art director was Catholic and the director Jewish.

Texas Baptists plan to run the ad on about 200 Regal theater screens in Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio, Bridges said. At a cost of about $40,000, the ad will run for four weeks starting the Friday before the Feb. 25 opening of Gibson's movie.

The convention also had hoped to show the ad on about 150 AMC screens in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Bridges said the convention approached theater chains that it knows accept regional advertising and don't require a national contract.

King said ads accepted by AMC must be appropriate for all audiences — those coming to see a children's film such as "Finding Nemo" as well as someone expecting the graphic nature of a drama such as "The Passion of the Christ."

"In general terms, we don't allow any kind of negativity," King said. "We do run ads for a number of churches and organizations, but this particular one would need some modifications to meet our guidelines."

Bridges said the Baptist convention offered to soften its ad, including taking out references to "murder" and "torture," but that did not appease AMC, she said.

Gibson's movie, with dialogue in Latin and Aramaic and English subtitles, is set to open on 2,000 screens nationwide — an unusually large release for an independent religious film made in dead languages.

Some critics of "The Passion of the Christ" worry that its depiction of the role of Jewish leaders in Jesus' final hours will revive the idea that all Jews are to blame for his death.

Gibson has repeatedly denied that his film maligns Jews. It has won praise from many prominent Christians including evangelist Billy Graham. An aide to Pope John Paul (news - web sites) II has said the pontiff felt the film accurately shows what Jesus went through, although the Vatican (news - web sites) recently backed away from that statement, declaring that the pontiff "does not make public judgments on artistic works."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040203/ap_en_mo/jesus_film_ads_1

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 02-04-2004, 12:17 AM:

King said ads accepted by AMC must be appropriate for all audiences — those coming to see a children's film such as "Finding Nemo" as well as someone expecting the graphic nature of a drama such as "The Passion of the Christ."

There are things called restriction on ads, Disney does not let you run ads anyway. I think there is some personal reasoning from someone high up....I wouldnt knwo though.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-04-2004, 09:21 AM:

The New York Times February 4, 2004

[Excerpt]

Gibson to Delete a Scene in 'Passion'

By SHARON WAXMAN

LOS ANGELES, Feb. 3 — Mel Gibson, responding to focus groups as much as to protests by Jewish critics, has decided to delete a controversial scene about Jews from his film, "The Passion of the Christ," a close associate said today.

A scene in the film, in which the Jewish high priest Caiaphas calls down a kind of curse on the Jewish people by declaring of the Crucifixion, "His blood be on us and on our children," will not be in the movie's final version, said the Gibson associate, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The passage had been included in some versions of the film that were shown before select groups, mostly of priests and ministers.

"It didn't work in the focus screenings," the associate said. "Maybe it was thought to be too hurtful, or taken not in the way it was intended. It has been used terribly over the years."

Jewish leaders had warned that the passage from Matthew 27:25 was the historic source for many of the charges of deicide and Jews' collective guilt in the death of Jesus.

Mr. Gibson's decision to remove the scene could indicate that he was being responsive to concerns of Jewish groups that the film will fuel anti-Semitism. Mr. Gibson was the co-writer, director, producer and financier of the $25 million film, which will be released in more than 2,000 theaters on Feb. 25, Ash Wednesday.

Full Article

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 02-04-2004, 10:39 PM:

I wonder if they will publish bibles with pictures from the film, just like all editions of Lord of the Rings now have pictures of the movies.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 02-05-2004, 01:40 PM:

quote:
King said ads accepted by AMC must be appropriate for all audiences...

I don't doubt that he said that, but that's completely absurd. We play ads all the time that only show in front of R rated films, and we play ads that only show in front of G or PG rated films.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-05-2004, 04:17 PM:

I don't see what is so surprising about this. Any company that associates itself with any religion is just shooting itself in the foot.

Playing a religious movie is fine, people choose to go see it. Subjecting the audience to religious ads is quite different.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 02-05-2004, 08:40 PM:

Back on topic...

I have one early screening booked thus far. I'm finding that even though there is great interest in the bookings, most people have to work during the week, leaving Saturday the only feasible day to have a screening. Sunday, of course, is church day, and the other days everyone is working, so interest just isn't there.

Finally saw the trailer today. This is going to be one POWERFUL movie, no matter how you slice it. I'm going to have to hit Chris or Dennis up to see it while I'm in Vegas...

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 02-05-2004, 09:09 PM:

So far I have one buy out where a church has paid for every seat in our largest house ($7.75 a pop) for our 6:30 showing on that first Friday. I have a couple of early morning showings scheduled and more than a few theaters buying a block of tickets during a regular public showing. I expect this film to have a good first two weekends but I really not sure just what kind of "legs" this movie is going to have. I think that this is going to be one of those movies where people are going to see it once and then wait for the DVD to see it again.

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 02-05-2004, 09:18 PM:

No one knows how it will do. This has to be the biggest guessing game for who knows how long.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-06-2004, 06:54 AM:

I think it will do well considering the subject matter.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 02-06-2004, 08:58 AM:

Subject matter aside, I think the subtitles are going to hurt it's overall sales after the first 5 days.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 02-06-2004, 02:13 PM:

I don't know that the sub-titles will hurt it Jason. But I hope management is smart enough to advertise it as sub-titled. The action is slow enough that even an 8th grader should be able to read the titles.

I have a sub-titles copy of "Life Is Beautiful" which I thought was a excellent film. But, because the dialog was so fast I've got to watch it again to catch all the titles.

Posted by Linda Welch (Member # 2088) on 02-09-2004, 11:07 PM:

As for the post about bibles with pictures from the film . . . I actually read on another website that they're already working on that. I just don't remember where I read it.

I know at my theatre, we've been selling tickets in large groups to a number of different churches and youth groups in the area, along with the standard walk-ups who ask if we'll be showing it, and when we tell them tickets are available, buy one or two.

Posted by Kevin Wale (Member # 1851) on 02-13-2004, 08:25 AM:

The Regal in Sterling Va isn't allowing groups to buy out the theatre. One theatre that has a 600+ seat house is doing the same thing.

Why would you take the maybe 600+ people will buy tickets route over the 600+ tickets are sold gauranteed?

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 02-13-2004, 08:45 AM:

Bob,

Two points...

1) I've not heard of a single company advertising the fact that the feature IS subtitled. I still believe that this will hurt the film in the long run, however, I've been known to be wrong before. I said 'The Grinch' wouldn't do well.. [Roll Eyes]

2) Life is Beautiful was a great movie. Fast paced, yes, but still very good.

Posted by Jacob Huber (Member # 1138) on 02-24-2004, 12:58 PM:

Last night we had our first special showing for church groups. 4 theatres playing at 6:30 and 9:15. I left at 6:00, but by the time I left, there were probably a good 500-600 people there, most of whom were there by 5:30.

We're doing the same thing tonight, and have a 6:00am show on Wednesday and a 9:00am show on Sunday.

Last weekend (2/13-2/15), Passion was our 3rd highest grossing movie because of pre-sales. It came in behind 50 1st Dates and just behind Miracle.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 02-24-2004, 02:17 PM:

We have sold out 5 showings mostly to Church groups. Our individual sales are only about 10% of the total which makes me wonder if this film will have legs.

The slot machines will be installed in the morning and Ky and Michael will be married at the 7:00 PM show. Although it is sold out, we will allow guests to attend the gay wedding by standing in the isles. [Big Grin]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-24-2004, 02:22 PM:

Ian wrote:

quote:
The slot machines will be installed in the morning and Ky and Michael will be married at the 7:00 PM show. Although it is sold out, we will allow guests to attend the gay wedding by standing in the isles.

Next best thing to a real Church wedding. [Cool]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-24-2004, 03:32 PM:

The way the media is screaming about the violence, torture, etc. in the movie, it'll be a wonder if anyone wants to see it after the first weekend. They're revealing every last detail about the film, even the manner in which it ends. Even some of the true believers are being turned off now because they're hearing it's just too much to take. I've had two people so far today tell me they've decided they now don't want to see it.

Having thought about it a little, I wish now that the film would have started when Jesus was age 12, with the beginning of his ministry. The story could have had some light moments and even some humor. The miracles from the Bible would have made for some great special efx.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 02-26-2004, 03:53 PM:

OK, I am now officially over pre-selling tickets. [Mad]

Sure having $12K in the bank that we don't have to pay out for a month was kind of amusing, but I am now sick and tired off everybody coming to the box office in a panic and asking the following questions:

Is Passion of the Christ sold out for Wednesday, March 5th at the 1:15 show? No
How early do I have to arrive at that show? Whenever you want.
Can I save my seats now? There will be no saving of seats or souls here at the Rialto Cinemas Lakeside.
Can I use this credit card to purchase my one senior ticket? No we don't accept credit cards.
Ok, here is my ATM card. If you give me your pin, I would be glad to go down to the ATM on the corner and clean out your account.

On the Telephone: I hear that all your shows for Passion of Christ are sold out for Months? No, we've sold out three shows this weekend. If you come to the 4:00 show there will be plenty of seats. So you're not sold out for Wednesday March 5th? No.

Then you get this nice line in the box office at 1:00 PM and the first guy in line wants to by 5-tickets to the Saturday Night performance. Sorry sir but that performance is sold out. Would you like to come to one of the other 4-showings we have that day? Well, I don't know, now I have to call everybody up and ask them. Sir, please step aside so I can sell these people tickets to the show that starts right now.

Next person in line: Hi, I bought these tickets to the 1:15 show for Sunday, but now my daughter is sick and I have this one spair ticket, what do I do? Shove it up your ass you freaking religious nut and let me sell tickts to the show starting right now! [Mad]

Oops, sorry, I can exhange that ticket for a pass or give you a refund.

Is there anybody here to see the 1:15 show of Passion of the Christ? No, give me one ticket to The Dreamers.

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 02-26-2004, 06:14 PM:

I hear ya Ian.
I had the same conversations as you, plus this one.
Customer "POTC will only be here Wed & Thur, correct?"
NOOOOOOOOOO!!
Me "Where did you hear that?"
"Brother Jo-bobs-sisters-mothers-uncle told me so."
"He heard it on the news."
Ok, yeah whatever.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-26-2004, 07:09 PM:

I've heard of selling advance tickets, but selling up to Wednesday March 5th, 2008 is a little excessive, don't ya think! [Smile]

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 02-27-2004, 10:54 AM:

You can buy tickets on Fandango for Regal Theatres here in SF all the way through March 11th.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 02-27-2004, 11:20 AM:

We sold out the Thursday, March 11th show to a church group. [eyes]

But I have seats for today, opening week Friday. Sales weren't too hot yesterday, opening week Thursday. Once the church groups stop buying, this film is deader than Christ on the cross.