speeed001 Seems the movie is a fraud, staged on a set in an English warehouse.See:1) Text of email confession at grailseekers.blogspot.com, search for March 2012 Hoax2) Podcast of confession at http://latalkradio.com/Rene.php, March 21, 2012.I'm disappointed, and I now consider Ben Hammott to be beneath the richest con artist or the deadliest drug lord. Preying on one's money or addictions is unconscionable; preying on one's most basic, fundamental beliefs - the universal/cosmic order, correct or not, upon which every aspect of the lives of millions is built - is inhuman.Even if the questions/possibilities raised by the hoax are interesting as hell. No pun intended.

respzik8 Let me first say that I am not someone who regularly posts comments on movies. However, I get so disturbed by film making posing as factual journalism that sometimes I find I cannot avoid comment. This is one such time. Don't get me wrong, Bloodline is good solid entertainment. I watched with great interest and excitement as the elements of a so called plot by the Vatican to cover up the true history of Jesus and Mary Magdalene was revealed in step by step film noir fashion. The trouble is that there is nothing in the film that links any of these seemingly miraculous discoveries to the point that the movie is trying to make. Lots of suspicious artifacts are uncovered and revealed as true relics simply by proclamation by the people making the discovery. Some attempt is made is one case to back the claim with scientific evidence but the incredibly amateurish method of uncovering the relics, the lack of proper excavating procedure and artifact handling methods just adds to the suspicious nature of the claims. Everything discovered is contaminated by the people making the discovery. This is the worst form of amateur archeology I have ever seen and as a scientist myself I can only say how absolutely disastrous such a procedure is to substantiating authenticity. All that aside, the evidence presented is simply entertainment detail with nothing to directly connect it to the claim and I would expect, the premise of the documentary. Let me say simply that it's OK to make a film expressing a controversial point of view about any subject. The da Vinci Code showed there was real interest and big money in it for something done well. The problem with Bloodline is that although it was done reasonably well, there were too many loose ends that were just dropped when the movie ended. As much as I didn't like The da Vinci Code at least that movie had some plausible explanation for the connection between discoveries and the theme of the movie, and it provided at least some kind of closure. Bloodline has none! I expect more from a documentary.

Greg P In terms of pure, fictional, entertainment value? This wasn't the wost film i've ever seen, but PLEASE do not look at the events in this film as fact! I honestly don't know why they even bothered putting this thing together. I just happen to be a huge believer in this particular theory, but I think all the makers of this film have done, is take away any legitimacy from the claim.Seriously...who the HELL handles archaeological evidence in that manner? Either they are really stupid, or they just don't care if people realise its fake...I really don't know what else to say....shameful!

anselms after Sunday roast i was plonked in front of the TV to watch a ground breaking piece of film making,after about ten minutes of viewing i thought some one had got the turkey back out of the oven but no it was on the screen,my impression was it was a bank roller for the film company.I've done a bit of bottle digging and they don't come out of the ground with just a bit of dirt on them,they are 9 times out of ten stained,when a boulder was moved to reveal a bottle what do we see dry earth,no worms or bugs under it and the way they handle so called historic artifacts was outrages,you put a pair of gloves on at least.the so called tomb,i mean isn't there no respect for the dead unless it was a dummy.what made me laugh was the air of danger surrounding the film,guys not saying too much lest them from above get upset i mean why didn't the camera crew get a kicking from a bunch of paid up franciscan monks,im no catholic or Christian but found the film confusing,so what Jesus didn't die on the cross big deal but wait there is a blood line which hints at a messiah to come out of the hinterlands to save us,but isn't that what christians preach with the endtime in revelations etc,and yet the film seems to be saying that the church is the enemy but the church invented this story in the first place.bottom line if i had a house id put it on the fact that the catholic church funded this amusing flick in the vain attempt to get people attending church again.the priest at the end got it spot on when he said christians had abused,killed,raped,robbed and taxed the people,they ve done from the start up until now.ohh the zion members have infiltrated the vatican,give me a break,what makes them think we are so bothered to give a xxxx...do you think the forces will get me now....