(snip)
In Martin's column, "Stan", a fictitious studio boss, sends Mr Gibson "studio script notes" on The Passion, effusing excitedly at the commercial and dramatic prospects for the script he has just been sent but suggesting some changes to widen its appeal.
"Dear Mel, We love, love the script! The ending works great. You'll be getting a call from us to start negotiations for the book rights," he begins.
Jesus is such a "likeable" character, Mr Martin's fictional studio boss enthuses, because he "can't seem to catch a break" and everyone can identify with that. But there is a flaw that, he suggests, audiences will not understand. Why did Jesus not use his "superpowers" to save himself? An explanation is in order: cut away to two spectators, have the first pose the question and the second reply, "He can only use his superpowers to save others."
"Stan" proceeds to offer a list of helpful suggestions in memo form.
"Does it matter which garden? Gethsemane is hard to say, and Eden is a much more recognisable garden. Just thinking out loud," he writes.
Then there is the Last Supper. "Could he change water into wine in the Last Supper scene? Would be a great moment, and it's legit: history compression is a movie tradition and it could really brighten up the scene. Great trailer moment, too."
On the lengthy and gruesome scenes of Jesus being whipped, which have forced many cinemagoers to turn their heads, "Stan" remarks briefly: "Love the flaying."
Other suggestions he offers include: "Could the rabbis be Hispanic? There's lots of hot Latino actors now, could give us a little zing at the box office." And: "Possible title change: 'Lethal Passion.' Kinda works."
more…
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/08/1078594276989.html