As for the "stereotypical Jewish look" thing, it's simply true that as a general characteristic a lot of Jews (not all), have prominent noses, is it not? (Same seems true of other nationalities from/around the Levant.) So what? And some of them are actors. (BTW I didn't really notice anything especially out-of-the-ordinary "hook-nosed" about any of the actors...you did? Which ones?) But ok, if I hire such an actor to play the role of a character who's Jewish (and heck why wouldn't I?), and (historically correctly) plop a yarmulke on his head, you get to accuse me of using a "stereotypical Jewish look"? or I can't have that character holding money or whatever?

But the stereo-type you are depicting here is of a white anglo-saxon Jew. Is this really how a Jew living in the middle East 2000 years ago would have looked? Don't you think he or she would have had a more distinctly middle Eastern appearance? That he or she would have been more brown than white? That his or her hair would have been more dark than light? If the film was being accurate, then surely Jesus should have been brown and those Jews persecuting him brown also? The white people would have been the Romans. So, then, why did Gibson - who despite his pretences to accuracy in other aspects of the film - choose to depict Jews of the Middle East from 2000 years ago according to the white anglo-saxon stereotype?