RE: Crusades

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Thu Nov 10 2005 - 06:23:31 EST

 

 

  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of RFaussette@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 9:59 PM
But no one answered my question. If history was skewed by a TV production of
the Crusades so that Christianity itself was presented unfavorably in
contrast to other religions, who benefits? Why would that happen? TV
productions are not supposed to alienate the religious majority. They are
supposed to attract the majority of viewers to their channel/time slot.

 

rich faussette

 

 

GRM: I will, Look at Hollywood who continues to make financial flop after
financial flop berating the Christian. (Last Temptation of Christ etc). No
one with any investment sense would invest in one of these, but they keep
being made. Why? The producers and directors benefit by having their friends
think highly of the 'artistic' and 'intellectual' value of their films. If
you look at the financials, films like the Apostle, made for I think about
$5MM was a huge reward to Robert Duval who funded it himself and look at
that Mel Gibson film, The Passion of the Christ, which turned Mel from a
relative pauper to a really rich guy. That is the kind of film that makes
money. This new film, Brokeback Mountain, will probably win the oscar but I
doubt seriously that it will be a financial blockbuster. Hollywood gets to
stick it in the eye of 'fly-over country', jesus-land, the red-states or
whatever their derogatory term for the common people who buy tickets to
their movies is today.

 
Received on Thu Nov 10 06:26:11 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 10 2005 - 06:26:11 EST