Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Initiative Supports Disclaimer for Controversial Film
CCN ^ | 10 March 2006

Posted on 03/09/2006 3:56:22 PM PST by Aussie Dasher

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
One problem: since when has Hollywood worried about the truth?
1 posted on 03/09/2006 3:56:24 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

The more the Catholics whine, the more people are going to be interested.

There are very few people in America who believe the book is a historical narrative or that the upcoming film is a documentary.


2 posted on 03/09/2006 4:00:51 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

Ron Howard always seemed like a nice guy, he should do what is asked ogf him, although I dont know why he made this crap into a movie to begin with ,except it probably will make money.


3 posted on 03/09/2006 4:15:40 PM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: Dog Gone
"There are very few people in America who believe the book is a historical narrative . . . "

On the contrary, in New Age circles it is widely believed that something like what Brown claims is actually true. Of course, everyone knows the characters are fictional, but many people believe that his claims about early Christianity, Jesus, mary Magdalene, etc., are true.
5 posted on 03/09/2006 4:22:49 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

Does ANYBODY think this isn't fiction? If so, they're so dumb and so few, it's not worth worrying about.


6 posted on 03/09/2006 4:25:07 PM PST by Bubbatuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

Do you suppose the Catholics will blow up the theaters? Try to chop off the heads of the people who made the movie? Slit the throats of anybody who watches it? Call for the murder of the author?


7 posted on 03/09/2006 4:26:12 PM PST by Savage Beast (Do not refer to Leftists as "Liberals." There's nothing liberal about these people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bubbatuck

You know the old story, tell a lie often enough...


8 posted on 03/09/2006 4:26:42 PM PST by Aussie Dasher (The Great Ronald Reagan & John Paul II - Heaven's Dream Team!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Are the new age circles going to influenced by this press release or even by a disclaimer at the start of the film?


9 posted on 03/09/2006 4:28:01 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
There are very few people in America who believe the book is a historical narrative or that the upcoming film is a documentary.

Wrong. The National Geographic Channel did a poll of readers of the book, and approximately one-third believed that its major premise (i.e., that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had offspring and that a secret society had covered it up) was true. One-third is not "very few."
10 posted on 03/09/2006 4:36:06 PM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: irishjuggler

Gimme a break. The article posted here doesn't even address that premise.

It addresses things that it considers "factual errors".

Don't confuse the premise with the particular "facts" offered up in support of it.

You can take any premise widely regarded to be true and make up a bunch of false facts in support of it. That doesn't make the premise any less true or false.

Likewise, you can take a false premise and selectively offer true facts in support of it.

It doesn't change a thing.


11 posted on 03/09/2006 4:42:13 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002

That's what gets me. Why Ron Howard would make this?

Tom Hanks seems like a nice guy too? Why on earth would he choose to do this film, except maybe that it's a Ron Howard film?


12 posted on 03/09/2006 4:47:21 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher
The advertisement below appeared in the New York Times op-ed section on Monday, 3-6-06.


13 posted on 03/09/2006 4:50:18 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
LOL, the story that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene is not an "anti-Catholic" lie, but an anti-Christian one. Jesus' "wife" is the Church, which includes ALL who scripturally accept Christ as their savior.
14 posted on 03/09/2006 4:56:40 PM PST by Malcolm (There's no substitute for good manners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Maybe because the book is one of the biggest best sellers in history and Howard thinks the movie might be a hit? He could use one.


15 posted on 03/09/2006 4:57:12 PM PST by karnage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
There are very few people in America who believe the book is a historical narrative or that the upcoming film is a documentary.

You must be kidding.

16 posted on 03/09/2006 4:59:15 PM PST by Petronski (I love Cyborg!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

I don't know anyone who thinks the book is a history book. Everyone I know who read it thinks it's a fast-paced novel.

It may or may not have played fast and loose with the facts, according to them, but none of them believed the narrative was anything but fiction.

Maybe we hang out in different crowds.


17 posted on 03/09/2006 5:05:33 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

I know even some Catholics who think it's true. Not "newspaper" true, but "he switched it around a bit to protect himself but we all know it's true" true.


18 posted on 03/09/2006 5:10:14 PM PST by Petronski (I love Cyborg!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher
Dan Brown is getting far more credit than he deserves - in that most people think he made everything in his book out of thin air.

I don't remember seeing anything in the book that hasn't been researched and written about before - some of it - the possible marriage of Jesus and MM - that has been postulated for centuries. And there are many books and much research done and published LONG before Brown's book.

I have read and researched much of what is in the book for decades - and much that there wasn't room for in one book - that supports much of what is.

the Catholic Church DID, fact, vilify MM as the harlot of the Bible, slandering her so some hundreds of years AFTER Jesus...the better to submerge and discredit her. (ever ask Why?)But there is not one reference in the Bible that points her out as the harlot. The Church finally admitted it, after hundreds of years - in the 1950's.

It seems much of the vilification of Brown's book is part of the ageless dance of the churches trying to protect their power, money and glory - hundreds of thousands have died for that - and science was held back for hundreds of years. 500 years ago, to dabble in science or mathematics was to court fire at the stake.

and before someone wants also to judge me and start flaming - I Count God as my Father and Jesus as my Brother - and don't know how anyone can get from one day to the other in this violent, judgmental world without a firm faith in them and their protection. I just happen to rely more on what Jesus, Himself, said and taught than the churches and their potentates...

It's no surprise some churches, particularly the Catholic Church, objects to this book and movie. If people do further reading and research, they'll find out that Brown didn't get his story out of thin air. There are dozens and dozens of books and scholarly treatises written over hundreds of years. Much has, in centuries past, been systematically burned and destroyed. That wont work now.

Do the research yourselves - (Google the main postulations and personages -) make up your own mind, either way. Don't be religious sheeple...

19 posted on 03/09/2006 5:15:06 PM PST by maine-iac7 ("...BUT YOU CAN'T FOOL ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME." Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
It may or may not have played fast and loose with the facts

People should do some independent research and study - there's a plethora of material on the subject(s) covering material for the past 2000 years.

Do "A GOOGLE" on the characters and postulations in the book - Brown didn't get his 'ideas' out of thin air.

An aside: The churches, down thru' the ages, has payed 'fast and loose' with the facts - consider the deep differences between the Christian churches - all from the same book. Maybe before they castigate Brown and Howard, they should get their own houses in order. Still, it IS a novel - Brown never said it was anything else.

If we are so insecure, unintelligent and easily led that we need writers, producers, etc to bow and scrape and explain and apologize, then we are, indeed, in deep doo doo as a people. Might as well be the Dark Ages again.

20 posted on 03/09/2006 5:26:38 PM PST by maine-iac7 ("...BUT YOU CAN'T FOOL ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME." Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson