Cool News
More on what is happening with DOGMA
Hey folks, gosh... Talk Back on yesterday's DOGMA story sort of got a bit out of hand. For me DOGMA is a religious satire, albeit I haven't read the script, that I'm looking at with the same set of eyes that I have looked at JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR and THE LIFE OF BRIAN. Now it is my understanding that perhaps DOGMA goes a bit further with it's satire, but you know... I have heard the rumor that Kevin Smith has said that Dogma is to religion, what pulling the pigtails of that girl you secretly loved on the school bus every morning was to love. Both are heartfelt expressions, both can be misinterpretated. But let's see if we can be civil this time....
Bob and Harvey Weinstein to Personally Acquire Rights to Kevin Smith's
"Dogma" Through Private Corporation Separate From Miramax Films
New York, NY, April 7, 1999 -- Bob and Harvey Weinstein announced today that
they are forming a corporation to acquire all rights to writer/director Kevin
Smith's film "Dogma," a satire that deals with religious issues. The
announcement comes after speculation about the film's distribution by Miramax
Films and the potential controversy that could arise.
The Weinsteins, who will personally buy the negative and film rights, plan to
sell domestic distribution rights to a third party and work with individual
distributors internationally as well. Miramax has recently collaborated with
several studios -- Paramount, Universal and Sony -- on co-productions.
The decision to acquire the film through a corporation of Bob and Harvey
Weinstein was reached amicably by all parties involved with the film, including
Kevin Smith and the film's producer, Scott Mosier.
"We all agreed that this is the best way for the film to be presented," said Bob
and Harvey Weinstein. "All of us look forward to the time when audiences will
be able to see this film; it will be properly understood and viewed for film as
film's sake."
The Weinsteins added, "Now that we are ending speculation as to 'Dogma's'
distribution, we believe the film will speak for itself and be understood for
its artistic intentions and merits."
"Through the new corporation, we intend to work with a distributor that shares
our vision of the film," said the Weinsteins. "We are confident that we will
find a marketing and distribution partner that will fully realize 'Dogma's'
potential as broad entertainment."
The film boasts an all-star cast that includes Ben Affleck, George Carlin, Matt
Damon, Linda Fiorentino, Salma Hayek, Smith regulars Jason Lee and Jason Mewes,
Alanis Morisette, Alan Rickman, Chris Rock, as well as Smith himself. Early
preview screenings of the film have played to enthusiastic and receptive
audiences who have wholly embraced it.
"It has been our hallmark to grow with and support our artists," said the
Weinsteins. "In fairness to Kevin, we do not want to jeopardize 'Dogma' from
being seen as the mainstream entertainment he has imagined it to be. We feel
that this action is the best to remain true to the film and to our corporate
parent."
Through the resources and support of Disney, the Weinsteins have grown Miramax
into their vision, producing, acquiring and releasing dozens of critically
acclaimed films including Academy Award-nominated Best Pictures "Shakespeare in
Love," "Life is Beautiful," "Good Will Hunting," "The English Patient," " Il
Postino," "Pulp Fiction," and, in addition, Kevin Smith's own "Clerks" and
"Chasing Amy," among many others.
Kevin Smith said, "As per usual, Bob and Harvey are the only ones willing to
stick by us or back our goofy little flicks. In this instance, I would say
they've shown great courage, however, I wrote the film, I directed the film, I
have seen the film many times -- in my opinion, 'Dogma' is in no way blasphemous
or worthy of the mild controversy that seems to be brewing around it."
"Dogma" is an adult fairy tale, a fantastical journey about a lone hero joined
by a band of misfits marching on to a common goal to save humanity. While each
traveler has his and her own set of beliefs, in their quest to save mankind,
each will be forced to confront their faith, and ultimately find their own
relationship with God. At the center of the fable is "Bethany" (Linda
Fiorentino), who is called up by "Metatron" (Alan Rickman) to stop two renegade
angels, "Bartelby" (Ben Affleck) and "Loki," (Matt Damon) from unmaking
existence in their quest to return "home." Along the way, "Bethany" is aided by
two unlikely prophets, "Jay" (Jason Mewes) and "Silent Bob," (Kevin Smith), a
man who falls to earth claiming to be the 13th Apostle (Chris Rock) and a
heavenly Muse, (Salma Hayek).
A cinematic fantasy filled with suspense, comedy, action and mystery, "Dogma" is
intended not to skewer, but to satirize its subject matter with good humor,
which is the point of sophisticated comedies. While plot points and characters
may be taken out of context, appearing as if Smith is attacking organized
religion, the film should be taken as a whole: a satire that comes from a
filmmaker who himself is a practicing Catholic with a solid foundation of love
and reverence to faith.
"Dogma was from first to last always intended as a love letter to both faith and
God almighty," added Smith. "It's mind bending that as we come to the close of
this century that anyone would still attack a work that has yet to see the light
of day without having seen it themselves. I just hope that my intention with
the film -- to make people, even if for only two hours, think about the reason
we're all here in the first place -- isn't lost amidst religious politicking."
-
+ Expand All
-
Wow...
I can't wait to see this and I thank god for those brothers who bring us the good stuff....
Kevin rocks and the movie should be a fun hit... -
You know, I think the people who are causing the controversy over this film should watch Spawn. Just once. That would effectively end the nonsense surrounding Dogma, because they would see a film about selling your soul, murder, demons, and all kinds of other religious taboos. Why is it that I didn't hear any of this when Spawn was in theaters? I think I'll write and film an biography of either Anton Levey or Alistair Crowley and give these people something to really piss and moan about. Anyone need a job?
-
quentin and Lane... be good.
-
Supposedly the Disney lackeys are worried about this Catholic League. Let me tell you about The Catholic League. This group is a handful of people with a big mailing list of 70-year-old widows. Every few weeks, the League looks at their bank account, and then reads the paper. If they search enough, they'll find something they can blow out of proportion. They have an office of people who then slap together a brochure about how EVIL Ellen Degeneres is or whatever, then they mail that out to 100,000 people, 1% of whom then send half their social security checks. Then the League calls up a few local news broadcasters always looking for some controversy, and they make some noise for free. Thats the end of that big threat to Catholocism, so they move on to the next one.
Disney needs to get some steel. I thought they were doing pretty well standing up to these yahoos, but I guess not. Hooray for the Weinsteins of the world.
Sorry Harry, for stirring up trouble.
-
The reason that Spawn didn't inspire this much response was because it didn't make much of a statement...hmmmmm: "Selling your soul to the Devil is bad."...well, no shit, I'll try to avoid that one Faustus, thanks for the clue. Spawn didn't specifically deal with any religion, and it didn't have any controversial commentary on God, or even on religious imagery. If they had gotten into dealing with the Angels from the comics, and the politics of heaven and hell, or with the depiction of God (an elderly lady), why then there might have been some reaction. Of course, it also would have helped if the movie hadn't sucked ass. Dogma, on the other hand, is directly satirizing religion (offensively or not), and trying to make very real statements about faith in the divine...and it's not just a comic book movie that only a couple people will see...this one will be seen by a lot of people...including me. -Loki
-
What really sets Kevin Smith apart from other writer/directors is not necessarily his "gift at dialogue", but instead his inability to just take something in a simple form. I guess that's a weird wording of what I wanted to say, so I'll explain. There are things that we hear and see which we commonly accept as a static truth. We never look at them from any different angle other than the one that is provided for us. Kevin Smith, in his writing, looks at other angles of things that are "important" to us, but that we have passed over. Two memorable pieces of dialogue from his past films are the Death Star bit from Clerks, and the Fantastic Four dialogue in Mallrats. The reason that these pieces are so memorable is because they take a pop culture reference, which we place in fantastical terms on a pedastal. And look at them in a reality, that we never accepted to place them in before.
I applaud Kevin Smith for realizing that he doesn't have to stick to pop culture in his *inspired critique.
The Catholic culture, and much of religion, is based in tradition, and there are a lot of things that just get handed out that nobody bothers to look at. Both in "Christians" accepting it, and "atheists" flatly denying it. And the same goes for Buddhists, and Hindus, and Jews, and Worshippers of the Monkey God Wokinaboleeda. Now, I haven't read the script, but based on what the article in this post says, it seems like Kevin Smith will be looking at religion from many different angles and satirizing the views of all. (I can't wait to see what Jay and Silent Bob think about God.) And who better to do that than Kevin Smith? I'm sure the movie won't be as breathtakingly spiritual as we have made it in its martyrdom, but I'm sure it will be a funny and interesting look at the nature of religion. Oh, and just to keep the survey up to date, I'm a Christian and I can't wait to see this movie. -
I am a practicing Methodist and I
personally love the New Jersey Trilogy. Some people damned Mallrats, but I loved it. Bring on Dogma, the ones who aren't ready never will be. -
First of all, I wasn't praising the merits of Spawn, I was simply stating that the movie had questionable religious symbolism, like Dogma, so why no criticism? Spawn was intended to be a bigger movie than it turned out to be, so why was there no outcry when it was in a similar stage of production? And Jim, since Spawn was directed more towards teens and young adults, I think the Catholic Church would tend to give a bit more than a rat's ass about their future funding and followers. And don't forget that Kevin Smith is a "greasy man-child fanboy" also. If you'd pull your head out of your ass and stop trying to out-dick Quentin and Lane, you might just realize this...
-
The other week when Kevin came to Tech, one of my favorite things he said was: "When we were shopping the Clerks cartoon all around, HBO said that they wanted to get a cartoon that was different than Spawn. And I replied 'Oh, you mean a *good* cartoon??'"
Not exact, but something like that..... -
I think some things need to be cleared up before everything becomes all hunky-dory again. Lane, I think you are misunderstanding my (and others) criticisms of your earlier posts. Religion, is NOT off of the table as far as discussion goes. In fact, I welcome a free exchange of ideas in talking about God. You may find this hard to believe, but I (as a deist (see my first post)) agree with many of your thoughts on organized religion and on God in general. I appreciated hearing where you came from, and what got you where you are now. I appreciated your mostly respectful tone in the past few posts (except the moronic analogy of Christians to "stupid rhinos"). However, what I do NOT appreciate is comments such as "Jesus laying pipe", "Jesus is gay", "Christians are stupid and have Neanderthal-like characteristics." These comments were NOT about a "mere" challenge to other
-
Harry, let me start by saying this: This is your own damn site and you can ban whoever you damn well please. However, something happened just recently that concerns me - you banned quentin Let me be straight - Quentin is an idiot, who seems good for nothing other than fighting with Lane. But, what warranted his banishment? I didn't see anything in his posts that was even close to being as hateful as what was in some of Lane's posts. When you put the article up about the "gay" films that are currently being developed, you warned (and rightly so) that any hate-filled, immature bigotry would not be tolerated and would earn you banishment. However, take a good look at Lane Myer's vicious post from yesterday. He calls Christians "stupid" repeatedly and openly mocks (NOT DEBATES OR CONSTRUCTIVELY DISCUSSES) their core values. Why do you apply one standard to one group (homosexuals), but a different to another? Now, let me be clear: I am not on the "ban Lane Myers" bandwagon. I have now come to see that he's a jerk, but I am not overly fond of banning anyone, unless they are unacceptably vulgar, hateful (which LM's post comes close to reaching IMO) or threaten violence. But, like I said, it's your site and do whatever you want with it. I just wish you would apply a STANDARD for banishment - which would apply to all regardless of how often they post, or how much they contribute. Thanks for your time.
-
Hey folks, first off, I didn't ban Quentin, Father Geek did. I didn't know about it till I read Quentin2's angry letter about it this afternoon. I asked Dad, "Why'd you ban him and not LaneMyers?" And he said, that if Quentin had stayed, just under DOGMA, he would have left him alone, but because he was trying to spread the 'Religious Diatribe' to the other subjects via CROSS-POSTING, that was why he singled him out and not Lane. You see folks... CROSS-POSTING is not a good thing. It does nothing but take up ban width and pisses Father Geek off. As for why all of Quentin's other postings disappeared... Well, when you get banned.... Everything you have ever written in Talk Back for all time is removed. I call it the Pharoah's Power, Remember THE TEN COMMANDMENTS when Pharoah has Moses' name banished from all obelisks and records... that's kinda what Banning does. Of course, you can always get a new name at HOTMAIL or YAHOO and join the fray again. Personally, I like Quentin's posts, and I did not see whatever it was that set Father Geek to ban him, but hey.... know that, just because someone got banned, it doesn't necessarily mean that I did it. Right now, 4 people have the power to ban. Me, Father Geek, Glen and Tom Joad. My general rules about banning is to only do it with someone that is getting out of hand and acting like a complete asshole on multiple TALK BACKS. Of course... 'What is an Asshole?" is up interpretation. And, if you are ever banned, you can appeal to me, and I can UNBAN you, but I don't believe it brings back your posts. There you have it.
-
I'm not saying that Spawn didn't get any uproar when it was released because it was a pitiful piece of shit (Which it defiitely was, but that's not my reason). The reason it didn't have any response like Dogma does is because Spawn is a comic book movie...those watchign the trailer see that there's this guy in weird tights with a cape whose going around kicking ass...there's no overt religion in it...now, if you're wondering why the controversy didn't arise after it came out, then that partly has to do with the movie sucking, and partly to do with the portrayals of religion aren't all that controversial. While Dogma has a descendant of Christ's family tree working in an abortion clinic and swearing alot about the Catholic church, Spawn had the message that the Devil's a tricky son of a bitch, and you shouldn't make deals with him...pardon my french, but NO FUCKING SHIT. "Paradise Lost", "Dr. Faustus", "Faust", "Genesis"n etc., have all stated that in a way that isn't devoid of any semblance of intelligence. And now here comes Dogma, which I'm expecting to make me laugh...it's not going to convert me to another religion...I'm just looking for some entertainment. Hope to see you there. -Loki
-
Thanks for the reply, Harry - that clears things up quite nicely (now fix the site please - these posts are all out of order....JK). JR - if you had read my posts, you would have seen that I am a self described deist (believe in a higher power, but don't believe the rest). That was part of my point - although LM was not dissing my PERSONAL religion or beliefs, I won't sit back and allow him to be a jerk to another group's religion without calling him on it. He has the right to say what he likes. If I find it offensive, I have the right to let him know. As to your comments on religion, I think that you are right in many respects. Many people do believe in God because of their collective fear of death. But for others, I think it is different - and deeper. For me, I think of it this way: We are "constructed" of proteins, carbohydrates, phospholipds, lipids, etc. which are molecules which are made from atoms which are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, which are made form quarks, which are made from prions, which are made from god knows what. But why? How did this arrangement come about? Will prions be made of smaller particles, and those particles be made of smaller particles still, indefinitely? What the hell is going on? Why is there gravity, electromagnetism, and strong and weak nuclear forces? Even if you could unite these principles eventually by tracing it back to the Big Bang - then why did the Big Bang happen? What if you were able to figure out why the Big Bang happened? Then you have to answer: why did the events immediately preceding that happen? I just find it hard to believe that there is NO reason for our existence and the existence of molecules, and quarks, etc. FYI, this is similar to Aristotle's "Prime Mover" bit of philosophy. Is it possible that God doesn't exist? Certainly. But I, for one, just can't imagine how everything could be without some kind of higher power or some kind of ultimate reason for being. Well, that's my take on the existence of God. I actually do enjoy these Talkbacks - it's just the lack of respect at times that gets me bent out of shape.
-
Its welcome knowledge to see that the brothers Weinstein are willing to support controversial material in a film, not that that's a terrible surprise judging from the grief they've had to deal with in the past regarding other Miramax films (Priest, etc.) No doubt it gets easier everytime you do it, like riding a bicycle or downloading porn. As for the discussion in here on religious thought, I do have to say that in a three-way grudge match between Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism, I'd really have to with the chubby Buddha. Sure, Jesus is in good shape and has strong hands from all that woodworking, but Buddha is Sammo Hung in a toga. I can't really judge how the Prophet Mohammed would do though. Old guy, long beard, likes to kill the infidels. He's scrappy, so I'll give him an edge over the non-confrontational Jesus, but then Buddha comes in with a leg sweep and arm lock and triumphs. Incense for all!
-
My comment? No comment!
-
Aren't there about 3 billion other sites where you can rant back and forth about religion? If Bob and Harvey are ponying up $10 million of their own personal money, then I seriously doubt they are looking to send a religious message to the public. They are looking to exploit every shred of publicity they can get in an attempt (hopeless in IMHO) that they can recoup their money. This is, in all probability, more revenue than the sum total that all Kevin Smith movies have grossed from all revenue streams worldwide up to now. Kevin's a nice guy, and sometimes funny, but I certainly wouldn't lay out ten mill for his next film, no matter what it's about. But then Bob and Harvey have Matt and Ben, and they certainly know how to market a film when they feel the need. And now they feel the need.
-
I wish everyone would quit jumping into the ring to fight each other about the religion and opinions of others. Instead i wish someone would tell me where i can see this "Dogma" trailer ive heard so much about. Smith has proven himself 3 times. If a director can do it three times, that is not blow his sophomore effort and then get all misty and make another movie without any passion. Then he has my ticket for the weekend. Unlike joel shitmacher who will never get the good nickels and dimes i work for again.
-
It's me, Quentin. Harry banned me from Talk Back, so I had to change my name. Look, I'm very afraid that if I even dare bring up Lane and his rantings, Harry will ban me again. So, let me just move on... ANYWAY, I've got the Dogma Script. Haven't read it yet, but I plan to. I got it from the Daily Script, a great website. http://www.un-official.com/The_Daily_Script/ Check it out! You'll find the script there.
-
Harry, I'm sorry. I didn't look through this Talk Back. I appreciate the fact that you took the time to read my letter. Thank you very much. As you can see, I am being good, while Lane is up to his old dirty tricks again. Let me just say that I do not understand why Father Geek called my posts "Religious Diatribe".... I am an atheist. I do not practice ANY organized religion whatsoever. Please understand that. And the use of that term makes absloutley NO SENSE to me! Diatribe is a violent outburst, right? Yes, I did say some very nasty things to Lane. But I never made any "Religious Diatribe"... That is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of the truth. I don't know if that is Father Geek's term or yours, but it is COMPLETELY WRONG. I attacked Lane for attacking religion because we live in a world in which more than half of the human population practices some organized religion, or at least believes in God. When I was young, I did the same things that Lane does. I told people that Jesus was bastard, and that "God" and Santa Claus are twin brothers. I made some pretty funny anti-religious rants in my days. But my father taught me something. He told me never ever ever touch religion. Never ever attack another person's religion. No matter what they practice. If you are trying to change someone's mind, you won't succeed. You'll never get anywhere in an argument like that. And why argue? Just because they practice religion doesn't mean that they are stupid or dumb. Most of my friends are Christian. I never ever touch the subject or religion because I know how sacred it is to people. I never make fun of what people believe because I know how dear beliefs can be. I AM AN ATHEIST. MY POSTS WERE NOT "Religious Diatribe". Thank you for "liking" my posts, Harry. I appreciate it. However, now that I know that Father Geek is creeping around the Talk Backs, I am very very scared. I probably won't post stuff like I posted yesterday ever again. I sure as hell won't post the same thing in different Talk Backs ever...EVER. Father Geek has got me pissing my pants in fear. Thank you very much. PS: I still think that Lane should be banned.
-
I don't understand the furor over Dogma... Maybe I am stupid, but any movie which seeks to enhance faith by means of thought provocation is in my opinion, a film which deserves praise... THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST took a lot of flak, but it was a great film and it made me see Jesus, my savior in a new light... i expect that DOGMA will do the same. Smith is a genius; "Clerks' was phenomenol. If this film has Temptation's power with Clerks' comedy, it will be a surefire addition to my personal top ten. I support Miramx, respect the religion of others, and believe that I shall see the film.
-
What pisses the Squirrel off will come up in a bit. But first, a rebuttal to Ryalto's pointless message about geeksploitation. **** Now, Ryalto, I know you can't accept this, because you just don't like Smith, but it's my firm belief that Kevin Smith HAS an ability to look at things from an angle that we generally pass up. My point in the previous message was that he is moving beyond pop-culture references. How is that geeksploitation? And why do you think that because you thought up a nifty word that it's instantly a legitimate term for cinema philosophy? **** With that said...
I don't care if we talk about religion on this site, as long as it directly deals with the film. Religion is VERY evident in film, and many of the great films of our era have religious undertones. (The Godfather has a lot of ties to Hebrew tradition, even). On the other hand, if you want to "prove" that atheism or any religion is the right and only way, go to a religion debate site. There are plenty. We're film geeks, not theologians. You'll get better answers for your questions there. Of course, chances are that you would never go to a religion debate site, because you know that you'll actually have to use some intelligence. So, if you're really into this whole thing let's start a group e-mail for everyone who would care to logically debate religion.
I'm trying to abide by the premise of discussing FILM, and a lot of people are. Just because you break "the rule", and no one will respond to you doesn't mean that you're right. -
Okay, since this is like some form of game, I just thought I'd mention the score on the board today. PDaddy is about even, having lost a point for confronting Harry, but gaining it back for apologizing; BraveNewSquirrel gets a point for his slightly over-exubberant praise of Kevin Smith, and an extra point for having an incredibly cool name. Javacycle gets two points for tellng us the odds on the Jesus vs. Buddha vs. Mohammed (thanks man, you made me laugh); Lane Myers gets a point for apologizing and explaining himself in a mostly non-confrontational manner. Now Jim Ryalto gets a negative point for giving no ground whatsoever in his Marxist criticism of religion (as "bullshit" no less)...come on, I'm an atheist, but I'm a relatvisit as well...I don't know if I'm right, but I think I've got it...remember, we can't prove any of this; it's what we believe, andd we'll only know when we get to the other side. Now, back to the scoring. Quentin2 gets a negative two points for continuing to bitch about being banned, then bitching some more about his "religious diatribe", and continuing to insist on Lane's banishment. Harry gets 10 points for explaining the rules of banning. And me? Well, I would hope I have a point, at least for my defense of Dogma against Spawn..but I can't score myself...someone else will have to do that. I'll just give myself a point, and change it if contested too much. So, the score here. PDaddy=0, BraveNewSquirrel=2, Javacycle=2, Lane=1, Ryalto=-1, Quentin=-2, Harry=10, and Loki=1. Updates to follow. -Loki ps. Stop by "Lake Placid" for a break and compete in the Six Degrees of High Art.
-
This is not a religious discussion page, but why do so many people feel the need to say outrageous untruths such as "religion is a crutch" or is merely there because "people fear death"? This is ignorance. All of you answer me this question: Where did the basic particles from which the big bang occur come from? Nowhere? Did matter come out of nothing? Even the Big Bang came from somewhere. Religion is about logic and thought. People who are religious merely spend more energy on such thought. Logic and History are the keys to Catholicism. If you disagree, ask a knowlegeable Catholic. By the way, Star Wars Rules!!!
-
your argument still loses when it comes to logic. Atheists are just using Occam's Razor when it comes to the creation of the universe. Your argument about "matter having to come from somewhere" also has to apply to God. Somewhere along the line there needs to be a first cause. Religious people put that with God, but Occam's Razor says it's just as likely that the universe sprang from nothing than it did with the help of a divine hand. Somewhere along the lines, our conception of logic has problems...atheists would say that's why people create God. Religious people would say that's where God takes over. Me, I understand that I can't understand the universe, but it's a lot easier to understand if I don't believe in God (in my opinion, the belief in Gods comes from not understanding everything, but wanting to trust in something that CAN understand everything). The point is, logic and reason always break down somewhere...I'm just looking for the simplest solution. -Loki
-
Loki, a scoreboard? Nice idea! Nice idea, indeed. I like it. Although I have -2 points, the idea is funny. But come one, man! I was fucking banned from Talk Back for blasting someone for blasting peoples religion! That just ain't right. Now, onto Dogma... Damn! This thing is REALLY GOOD! I like where KS has gone here. You've got to realize, not only is this movie a satire on religion, it is a GOOD satire on religion. I don't want to say too much. go to http://www.screentalk.org and download it now! You'll see what I mean...
-
Loki - I give you -2 point for having Lane beat me in points.... Just kidding. Your points (of your post) about the origins of the universe were all good ones - and I have considered them before. I think your views are completely valid, but I simply can't get over my disbelief that existence could just BE. I mean, why is there anything at all - space, matter, time. OK, enough of this philo 101. Dogma, I think, could be quite good. I thoroughly enjoyed KS's past three films, and there's no reason not to have high hopes for this one. Regardless of whether other groups deem it "offensive", I probably will see it for myself so I can make up my own mind. I just always feel the needs to make up my own mind. It's been my experience that often "offensive" films aren't neasrly as "offensice" in THEME as others have said. A perfect example is The last temptation of Christ. It's actually an uplifting film for Christians, IMO. In my undergrad days, I went to Notre Dame, and my rector (who was a priest) actually owned his own copy. (Just goes to show that not ALL Catholics (even those in a position of authority) are closed-minded or intolerant). That's it. P.S. Lane - I still think your apology was half-assed - make that quarter-assed. As much as you try to posture that you were "challenging" Christians' faith for the sake of seeing how weak this faith really is, in reality, you just hate them (as your post said) and were baiting - plain and simple. You were knowinggly offending just for the sake of offending. Even if they are absolutely wrong about their beliefs, what the hell difference does it make to you? Let them be "fools." Such a desire to deride their beliefs is pathological, IMO. The End.
-
Dogma's gonna be cool... the religious right's just a bunch of vindictive glory hogs who want to flex their muscles... It's a damn shame the Jesus cartoon wasn't animated... any Benny and Matty film is gonna make a lot of scratch... Kevin's proved himself before, have some faith... and finally, but most importantly, Babylon 5 was highly overrated and we should all live in teepees cuz it'd be better in a lot of ways. Thank you, good night.
-
Maybe I should jump in to those talkbacks more often. It seems like a lotta fun, and also if I told you how much free time I have, you simply wouldn't believe me. One thing I hate, though, is how we have to be apologetic about going off the topic. I don't like that. I enjoy people going off the topic. I usually skip over most posts that talk about the article and nothing else, because those get repetitive very quickly. But anything that goes off on a tangent, or even starts on something totally new, as long as it's well thought out (or well improvised, I suppose) and written nicely with at least casual grammar (as exhibited right here), is beautiful to me. About religion: Personally, I've gotten to a point where religion means nothing to me. I was raised methodist (in the typical half-assed American way), and read a lot of buddhist and other eastern stuff during the first couple years of high school. But in the end, it just seems that all religions take themselves too seriously, and think they're something much more than they are. I would think that religion would tie in with the nature of the universe. At least, to me it does. But we, these silly little people on this silly little world, are nowhere near understanding the nature of the universe, and even if we were told what it is, our tiny minds would not be able to process it, and they never will be able, since evolution has died in the human race (simple explanation: Who in the world is unable to have children?). When I think back on the Sundays that I used to go to church as a kid, there's no magic or spirituality at all in that. I think that what I was meant to feel that whole time was something like the feeling I get when I look at the stars. And that's where all spirituality comes from, I think. About Christianity specifically: I'm basically a libertarian, so I have a real problem with Christians trying to impose their beliefs and project their moral values on to us. I know that not all Christians do that, but still I think it's in the nature of the religion. As long as Christianity stays in the same basic form that it's been in for hundreds of years now, they're not really going to change. But I think that over the generations, it's going to shrink, smaller and smaller, until eventually it will just be a cult of deluded individuals up in the mountains. That's all. The human race will never find what it's looking for in religion. The nature of humans will always be projected over whichever medium we progress to. These TalkBacks, actually, can be very symbolic. The internet is a huge advancement for the human species, but as far as any ideal "advancement" goes, it's empty. I think reading these talkbacks every day has taken away more of my faith in humanity than all three years of high school put together (*the fourth year was correspondece school). Err... That's all
-
awhile back, on a review of Dogma someone called KS the modern day equivlant to Artisphonies(I know I just butchered his name)the only reason that stuck in my head was becasue I was performing Artisphones at the time. It seems like a valid pint. After all Arstiohines one several awards in ancinat greece for his crude/comedic writing skills ans so has KS(well 2...Clerks and Amy...I think Amy won some kind of Award...but I digress)When I read the dogma script(being somewhat religous...growing up in and attending a "fundemetlist" protestant church) i thought the issues that KS brought up were on the mark, not just about the Catholic church but about THE CHURCH in general. I felt similar feelings when I read Wole Soyinka's brillent satire "The Trials of Brother Jero"...what Artsiphonies, Soyinka, and Smith have in common, I belive is not a common distaste for their subject, but a genral love for it and the hopes that they can help progress it along but showing us, in a farciful manner, the extremists, the foolish, and the idiotic. I think that KS Cardnil Glick and soyinka's Brother Jero would get along fine if they ever met in a bar...ok LOKI I made 2 literary allusions in defending KS and the dogma script, I don't think I cussed once and I hope I remained respectful of everyone's ideas...how many points*smile*
-
I'm basically a Nietzschean when it comes to religion (not totally, but kind of), and he has a quote I love about the nature of the universe. We keep searching for meaning, and maybe we have such huge disagreements on the ultimate Meaning because there is no meaning (I'm not saying this is the way it is, just the way some people view it). Nietzsche said, "That my life has no aim is evident even from the accidental nature of its origin; that I can posit an aim for myself is another matter." There may be no set ultimate meaning for the universe, but we can work on creating our own; not just making it up, but active creation. The universe may just exist, and we work and create and die...scary, but it affirms your own individuality and your own creativity and your own consciousness, not as a part of a divine plan, but as a plan you make up and fuck up as you go. -Loki
-
Geez, I'm sorry that I missed the epic debate yesterday. I have seriously enjoyed weaving my way through the vast verbal tapestries of the last Dogma talkback section. Anyway, I just had to say a word about all those people who were shouting "hypocrite" ( and using all caps in a desperate cry for attention ) when screaming about the ones bashing Christianity and at the same time crying for tolerance. This is bullshit. Think about it. "Oh, if you inserted 'Jew' or 'black' or 'indian' or 'Hindu' with your comments about Christians, you'd be shot, blah, blah, blah ..." NOt the same thing. As much as Christians LOVE to play the role of the crucified underdog oppressed by a nation gone wrong and ruled by an evil liberal empire, nothing could be further from the truth. According to polls in USA Today recently, over 90% of this country is Christian. You are not an oppressed minority like the Jews or native americans or whatever, nor have you been since the first half of the Roman Empire. That's the problem. See, the original spirit of something cannot, in most cases anyway, survive the transition into institution. Spirit is inherently dynamic, institutionalization is inherently static. It crystallizes and loses its power and becomes, pardon the pun, "dogma." This is nowhere more evident than in Christianity. I have said many times that the very people who worship Christ today are the same ones who crucified him two thousand years ago, and I still stand by that. It was the mentality that did it. The one that feared change, freedom, life itself, etc. Christ was a LIBERAL! A revolutionary, not some Nazi Southern Baptist who didn't do anything but spout off recycled spirituality. Yet that's exactly what we're stuck with here. Ironic, isn't it? I wrote a wonderful poem once called the Grand Inquisitor in which, yes Christ returns to Earth and is told he is no longer wanted. The kick is, he's denounced by the 700 Club! The poem climaxes when Pat Robertson condemns Jesus as a "long haired, New Age hippy." But I digress. Yet while I'm on the topic, Christians on here bitch and moan, those extremists don't represent us! We dont like Falwell! Well, funny, they call themselves Christians and have scripture to back up pretty much everything they say. And if they don't represent you, why do you not only allow them to preach but to flourish? As a lapsed Presbyterian, I have had Christian friends, relatives, gone to Sunday school, attended a Christian schoolfor nine years, and have memorized more than one Bible verse, and I can honestly say those people ( the ones who preach that Barney is a kiddie AntiChrist in an article on the net called "The Purple Messiah", who believe that Tinky WInky is subliminally shooting homosexual wavelengths into their children's heads, who have websites titled godhatesfags ) DO represent you. Hasanyone read Leviticus lately? Why, jsut the other day in college someone was reading an article in the Viewpoints section from a Christian ( and this is one in college, though it scares me to think what the uneducated ones think ) about how technology could be used to build a new utopia. Neuroscience could be used to wipe out free thought and questioning God! The author went on to say how computer chips cold be implanted in humans at birth so they'll never have to think and always know the truth about God! Of course, somewhere on the net a Christian is raising his hand in protest "Ooh, ooh, but he doesn't represent me! I don't want that!" Well, just because you were a Nazi in WW 2 and didn't PERSONALLY kill any Jews, you're still a Nazi dipshit. And it isnt by any mistake that these people are Christians and that they think this way. It's what the Bible teaches. At least the Old Testament. Then someone will say "Ooh, ooh, but the New Testament is all about peace and love", but that's another problem. Everything established in the Old Test. is contradicted by everything in the new Test. Okay, back to my original idea, and then I'll shut up and go away. The problem with Christianity is that it's true spirit, which I believe is the spirit of all religions, died after the Council of Nicea. It can't survive Fundamentalism.Look at our politics. Same principle. A bunch of idiot militia rednecks running around blowing up federal buildings because they think this is the same government that was formed in 1776! My goodness people! Don't put your faith in institutions! Take me, for instance. I believe in Romanticism. As in the literary and historical movement. As in the Gospels according to Blake and Wordsworth. And yes, any of the Romantic poets, writers, artists, or philosophers CAN and DO represent me. I'm not going to play like a Christian. This is a wonderful surrogate faith for me, and one that I discovered on my own. ANyway, if at any time someone tries to erect a First Baptist Church of Romanticism, I can only assure you I'll be out there throwing gasoline on it. Oh, and I kind of like Lane Myers now. He seems like a thoughtful, though sometimes over the top, individual.
-
Well let's see, Quentin gets an extra point for his semi-apology, his willingness not to attack anymore (for now, at least), and for kissing my ass. Everett Robert, you get one point for remaining respectful, saying something interesting, and being literary. You almost lost it because it was literary about Aristophenes, and I have a grudge against him for picking on my man Euripides, but I'll let you have it. That's it for now. Someone has to start scoring me, because I'd feel bad if I just gave myself points for every entry I had (though I'd like to feel as if I deserve it). -Loki
-
Seeing as though its the end of the day, many people probably won't read this, but what the heck. I find it rather disturbing that so many people are going so out of their way to condemn not just Christianity, but "organized religion" as a whole, in a majority of the Dogma Talk Backs. As a Catholic, and someone majoring in Philosophy, I really don't mind people having questions about the Faith I hold; questions can only lead to answers, and are, in fact, a healthy thing. If that is what we were to find in Dogma, honest questions about the Catholic Faith, then I would have no problem what-so-ever with it. However, having read the Dogma script on line, I can honestly say that Mr Kevin Smith does not seem interested in providing a serious reflection on Catholicism. He seems generally ignorant of most of the Catholic teachings he wishes to lampoon. For example, he seems to be greatly lacking in the Church's understanding on indulgences (CONFESSION forgives sin... not the indulgence, thus walking through a door could not erase sin), the nature of angels, the Mass, the fact that there is no Cardinal in whatever diocese they are supposed to be in in NJ. These are not just throw away lines, but important parts of the story we're dealing with. And I think it important to mention the lack of internal logic: they go on to mention how unimportant actual dogmas (ie-teachings themseleves) are, then go so far as to claim that just such a little Catholic Dogma (the above mentioned walking through the door forgiving the Angels' sins) could cancel reality! If dogmas aren't important, then how could one such "man made" dogma have such disasterous consequences? The one part of Catholic Dogma that mr Smith seems to get right is Catholic teaching on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, which he turns into a snide joke. If this film is supposed to be a serious look at the nature of religion, then I don't think its too big a thing to ask that they actually know at least the basics of the religious system they desire to mock. Based solely on his script treatment, I find it hard to believe the claim that Smith is a "practicing Catholic", or even a Catholic at all. Now, as for the talk backs themselves, many of them seem to offer nothing more than unintelligent bigotry aimed at not only Catholicism, but Christianity and "organized religion" as a whole. In regards to people like Evil Genius (who seems to have the "real story" of "those yahoos" at the Catholic League), and Jim Realto, who seems to have figured out the sham that religion is (a crutch for those who can't handle reality and to keep them from going mad with terror!), I ask nothing other than some sort of rational defense of their statements. In regards to Mr Rialto, I find it insulting that he thinks such a complex thing as religion can be so obviously reduced to such a simple equasion, or imply that the only reason one holds to any religious creed (or even in the idea of God) is due to some sort of base ignorance or fear. Far enough people throughout history (for example, St. Francis of Assissi and St Thomas Aquinas, probably one of the most intelligent people to have ever lived--I suggest reading his Summa Theologica) have believed in God based on rational grounds and such motivations as love (and certainly not ignorance or fear) to cause one to seriously doubt the validity of Rialto's statement. Likewise, anyone who can, in the same breath, condemn INTOLERANCE, then condemn ALL CATHOLICS AS BELIEVING IN LIES, or ALL CATHOLIC PRIESTS AS PEDOPHILES, or RELIGION ITSELF AS A PHSYCOLOGICAL CRUTCH MECHANISM REACTING TO FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN, is nothing more than a self contradicting bigot! As a Catholic, I really don't mind if your views differ from mine, or if you have questions about any tennet of my Faith, I just ask that A) you have some sort of RATIONAL defense to back up your beliefs, and B) you at least take the time to find out exactly what my views are before you condemn them. Again, I'm sure very few people will take the time to read this, and I apologize for it being so long winded, and I wouldn't be surprised if I get flamed for anything I've said, but I feel it had to be addressed. Feel free to E mail me. Borromeo.
-
Hi, I'm trying to respond to the post that just went before me; the catholic philosopher. You have some good points, especially in response to others, but I think that you've misread parts of the Dogma script. The thing parodied by the angels walking through the door of the church is the infalliability of the pope...he stretches it, but that's what he's going for. What he's saying is that, if the pope is infallible (which he's not, not all the time, even according to Catholics...he's only right during certain circumstances), and a "Clense all your sins day" were declared by this infallible, and there were angels banned from ever entering heaven, the angels entering the church, being clensed of sins, and then dying, would "prove God wrong", and if God is wrong, the universe collapses in contradiction...does that make any sense? Yes, of course Smith plays a lot of it for cheap laughs, but he's also making some decent points. The movie is about how man's attempt to explain divine power is illogical and stupid. The ultimate message is still of a God who loves his/her creation. I don't know if Smith is Catholic (probably not a strong Catholic, at least), but his message is ultimately an affirmative Christian message. -Loki
-
Apr 08, 1999 10:48:02 PM CDT
LaneMeyers, the confused, articulate 12 year old at his computer
by cronksty
First off, I have NO IDEA what's going on around here concerning banning, Lane Meyers, and Quentin. But I have read some postings from a few athiests around here. Are you athiests getting your perceptions of Christianity from the people who show aborted fetus's to children, think gays will burn in hell, punish their children for masturbating, attend church that learn nothing yet believe each time they go God throws a penny in their pot, the Baptists youth groups in high school that protest evolution and insist that men came before dinosaurs. The same people who hold all of those real Greek Mythology like beliefs. The same people who never stop to question the Bible since it's likely been changed and that God probably did not write it. Hrrrmmm, after all that, you might think I'm an athiest. Well, I'm not. I'm a Christian. One who tries to let go of human ignorance and bring simplicity to my personal view of God. I think you guys are just seeing way too much of the aforementioned behavior. Believe me, many Christians are NOT like that. Yes, I believe in the validity of many Bible passages, but it contradicts itself a lot (and by saying "religion is a crutch," you're quoting John Tuturro in Unstrung Heroes). My basic question is "how can you believe that there's nothing behind all this?" "How do you know that God didn't just throw a mass at another and ended his involvment right at the Big Bang Theorey?" "How can you look at your body, which has the potential to operate for a hundred years, is just an evolved piece of dust?" "how can you experience love if you have no soul?" "why couldn't your soul escape your body to live among vast other entities?" "how can you explain you and your thoughts?" "and what about human reproduction, I'd say it's quite miraculous." Think about these.
-
Sounds to me like a lot of the same bullshit that was flung at THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. People were damning it before even seeing it, in the name of good moral Christianity. Problem is, in a country like ours, how can you accomodate both religious freedom and artistic merit, while still having a good moral code, when the two realms are bound to intersect.
-
What I don't understand why people are causing a big fuss over a movie. That's all it is. It's a fake story involving fake characters in fake situations.
End of fucking story. -
I know I'm going to probably get negative points for getting involved in the religious debate, but I'll try to keep it tied to dogma and movies as best I can.*****
Orpheus, your comment about the Old Testament contradicting the New Testament is wrong. Both testaments have about the same balance between "righteous indignation" :) and "peace and love." It's a common miconception that starts from the tearing of the curtain when Jesus dies, and runs all the way to the connotations of the words old and new. ***** The fact that a person disagrees with organized religion is no excuse to not accept some type of religion. What would you think of George Lucas if all he did was complain that no one knew how to make sci-fi right, and never made Star Wars? The greatest religious leaders are NOT those that agree with the system, they are those who learn what's wrong and address it. They are revolutionaries. Take Martin Luther... He didn't agree with the Catholic church and he did something about it. If you don't agree with religion, that's fine, but the fact that you hate organized religion is no reason. (Judging from response to Dogma, Kevin Smith doesn't exactly think the organized Catholic church is right on, but he doesn't cease to call himself a Catholic, as Harry cites) If it's your only reason then you need to re-evaluate things. I HATE organized religion. My family was practically chased out of our church by a pastor who didn't think we were conservative enough. But I'm still a believer. ***** To me, it seems pointless not to believe (in some form of god or heaven). If there is a God, and it's the God I worship, then I get to avoid the rush to Hell, and go to Heaven. If there isn't a God, then... hey... I've spent my life trying to be a happy person free of the worries and troubles of the material world. I'm not seeing myself as losing in either position. Attack the faith all you want, and it's not going to break me. Why even try to prove to a Christian that he or she is wrong, really? ***** In the end, though, it's up to each and every person to decide for themselves. Whatever will make you the happiest, follow it, whether it be Cicero or St. Augustine. Always search for the truth, and never accept anything at its face value. I've researched my faith long and hard, arguing it with Muslims, Mormons, and Monkey-Descendants. (There's nothing that I've found so far that has made me falter, but I'm willing to if I can ever be convinced) I encourage everyone to do the same. Look for the truth and live to be happy. I applaud anyone who is doing that, whatever doctrine or dogma you fall under ***** With my peace stated, I'm moving on to other cool news. Ain't that cool? -
I want to know where I can rent a goddamn copy of "Last Temptation"!
I actually have so much to say about this, but I'm not in for typing a thesis into the talkback.
What this site needs is a chat room! Then again that would probably cause a bit of chaos. Anyway, the streetwise wizard is out. Don't ya know I be pimping these lil hobbits for all they worth! -
Dogma- I haven't read the script, and I won't, because I want to be surprized when I see it. But I definatly want to see it
religon. I haven't seen any of Kevin smith's stuffr, but I defiantly plan to now! -
Religon-To Loki and Dalton's argument-Loki, Dalton's point breaks down because of Occam's razor doesn't entirely work, because there are a series of questions that science has even been close to being answered, and haven't offered a solution. I am not claiming that religon is the correct answer, but nobody has put any other ideas on the table. Everyone should check out this website http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1999/040499g.htm
Orpheus- I was in total agreement with your arguement about how spirit cannot survive institutionalization, and christ being a liberal includeing your poem (would love to read it).
As for why they represent us, it is because the extremist are always the most vocal in a democratic society-Case in point, author of COMMON SENSE during the revolutionary war (Can't remember his name). Also, we live in a society that teaches us it is bad to think, and is good not to care. I don't let them represent me because I do try to be vocal for myself. And as long as a person is speaking about there own opinions, they are representing themselves. If a person calls themselves a Catholic, but says I believe that homosexuality is okay and abortion is okay, then they are representing themselves, and not letting the church represent them. And, yes, Christians aren't what I would call persicuted, and yes, quite a few preach tolerance and love while practicing hate, and that does make them hypocrates, but the same goes for atheist (or anyone else) who preach love, respect, and tolerance and practice hate.
Score (since this probably won't be seen by anyone, I can make the score whatever I likke)
Proph-infinity
everyone else - 0
I win
other rants (my response, I say what goes)
Babylon 5 kicks ass, Star Wars kick ass, but I bet it won't win any awards, since people are scared of it! -
First thing is first..everyone seems to be lost in this farcical debate on religion. What about the actual film? I have not heard one thing about the actual movie, any of the performances or any views on the finished film. Harry what's happening. Do you see what's going on you're getting lost in menial debate. Religion always provokes huge discussion which is why Dogma - good or bad - will make Kevin Smith the hotest director around. The studio suits know that religion is a dodgy business but the buzz generated already should give some indication of likely box-office success.
I know people claim Smith's a better writer but I disagree. He makes movies he doesn't specialize. -
I think we are all getting away from the subject matter - Disney could not give a rat's ass about religious protests. They want to distanst themselves from the walking nightmare-about-to-be known as Kevin Smith.
Let me digress! He's fine with dialogue, but so are the countless other comic book writers in the country and internationally. Hell, the medium of film and comics have so much in common it's no wonder comic writers make great screenwriters 75% of the time, especially when it comes to dialogue. More especially since comic writers and artists make great storyboard work.
Kevin Smith is inept as a director, however. Some of you might say directors are born, not made. That's true, it usually takes a director some amount of time to grasp the fundamentals of his/ her (love those ladies!) art form. From what I've seen in his movies, he has yet to develop blocking skills, pacing and/or rythm techniques (which can be done in the editing room or done on the set via multiple set-ups), the mechanics of the camera and of camerawork, but more importantly, especially in film where the movie screen inflates everything, the subtle undercurrent of what's going on with the actors and/or the actors and their environment - in other words, sometimes the unspoken "events" are much more important than what's being spoken.
Who knows that ten years from now Mr. Smith might develop into a real-life auteur, but he would have been better off just writing and perhaps exec producing his movies and getting a hired gun who knows his way around a film set to direct (aka a film school hack) rather than jump into the water with the sharks on his first few times out. -
All this banning bullshit is outta hand and i dont wanna be a part of some site that will ban people left and right, willy-nilly, just for speaking there minds... yeah yeah its Harry's site and and he can do what he wants with it, but whats the point of having TALKBACK in the first place if you cant talk freely without fear of being banned and having all your posts wiped out??? So I'll keep reading the articles that interest me, but im outta TALKBACK now... For those of you who somehow manage to survive the hand of Harry, enjoy...
-
Hello. It's Donkey, Quentin. DONKEY was just banned from Talk Back and had to get a new name. Obviously, DONKEY will be banned again once Harry realizes that DONKEY have risen from the grave. DONKEY have only one question: Why was DONKEY banned? Because DONKEY posted novel-length messages? Because DONKEY let a personal quarrel consume the Talk Back feature? This is so fucking ridiculous. Harry, you've made a big mistake. DONKEY told you that The Anti-Donkey should be banned, but you didn't listen. What have DONKEY done that The Anti-Donkey hasn't? Where did DONKEY go that The Anti-Donkey didn't? DONKEY come back here and DONKEY find that you have deleted every single one of my messages. DONKEY half-expected to see the same done to The Anti-Donkey, but DONKEY was shocked to find his bullshit still on the Talk Back! Harry, this is ridiculous!!!! Did The Anti-Donkey send you an e-mail or something?! Just because you two are friends, you're going to let him get away with all of his bullshit??? DONKEY bet he e-mailed you saying "Hey, Harry. There's this guy that's bugging Donkey. He's screwing up the Talk Back. Can you ban him?" "Sure thing, pal." And you can't even send Donkey a single word. You can't even try to reason with Donkey??? Oh, DONKEY forgot. You're a pro now! You don't have the time, right? Yet you have the time to come of here and delete Donkey's messages and ban Donkey from Talk back?????????? DONKEY swear to the SUPREME DONKEY, DONKEY'd bet my right hoof that you didn't even read a single letter DONKEY typed! Did you consider what The Anti-Donkey has said? Did you consider that, although DONKEY might be an asshole, that maybe, JUST MAYBE The Anti-Donkey has done something wrong here?????????????????? THE ANTI-DONKEY FUCKING TURNED THIS TALK BACK INTO A RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION! THE ANTI-DONKEY WROTE LONG DISPLAYS ABOUT HIS INTOLERENACE TOWARDS THE RELIGION OF OTHERS!!!!! DONKEY know for a fact that if DONKEY wrote that bullshit, DONKEY'd be banned in a second! Not only have you shown your ignorance, but you've shown your complete and utter disregard for the ridiculous bullshit spewed out of The Anti-Donkey's mouth! Why was DONKEY banned???? why? It doesn't make sense!!!!!!! DONKEY stopped bashing The Anti-Donkey! DONKEY even apologized!!!! Donkey's last message was about DOGMA! DONKEY told everyone that DONKEY was going to forget about The Anti-Donkey and get back on track! You even deleted MY DOGMA POST!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why did you delete that one??? What reason could you have for deleting that message? You could have at least left that one alone! DONKEY didn't even swear in that last post about Dogma! That was my fucking opinion on the fucking article, you ASSHOLE!!!!!!! WHY THE FUCK DID YOU DELETE IT???? That post abour Dogma which DONKEY wrote was deleted. yet, The Anti-Donkey's anti-religious rant IS STILL UP THERE!!!!!!! DONKEY am NOT RELIGIOUS! DONKEY AM NOT EVEN A CHRISTIAN!!!!!!!!! DONKEY A FUCKING ATHEIST, YET DONKEY KNOW THAT YOU DON'T MESS WITH OTHER PEOPLE'S RELIGION! And my post blasting The Anti-Donkey, my post that was free of derogatory remarks, my post that said that The Anti-Donkey should be banned, was deleted!!!!!!! why?????? why??????? FUCK YOU, HARRY! Ban Donkey for that, you prick. And you're gonna be on Ebert's show in a few weeks??? This is fucking bullshit! You're acting like your some teenage punk! It's not proffessional, harry. It just ain't proffesional.
-
You get 6 points for the whole concept of points and scoring. If a person didn't feel like reading each and every rambling post, they can just look for your name to see what's going on. I like the concept immensely. Regarding Dogma - I've looked forward to it ever since I read the script. I thought, ah - religious satire - I love it! Little did I realize the furor it would cause on the talk-back. I didn't see anything about a hoped-for realease date. Does anyone have a clue?
-
First off, Brave New Squirrel, as a Worshiper of the Monkey God Wokinaboleeda, I am offended that you would bring my deity into this discussion of the heathen Christianity. May he curse you to the nether regions of lower banana hell for your using his name in hell. Second, Loki, your killin' me here. A breath of fresh air in a steadily stale arguement. Thirdly, Orpheus, brilliant, absolutely brilliant!
Fourthly, great script by Kevin Smith that introduces questions to a branch of belief that has constatntly needs them (my old Catholic priest told me questions do not deny faith, they increase the strength of that faith).
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- UPDATED!!! A Six-Pack Of New Character Posters For THE DARK KNIGHT RISES Forecast A Lot Of Gotham Rain And Snow!! -- 188 total posts 188 posts
- Tom Cruise Saddles Up For A Remake Of THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN!! -- 126 total posts 124 posts
- A Fire Definitely Rises In The New DARK KNIGHT RISES One Sheet!! -- 215 total posts 109 posts
- Baz's THE GREAT GATSBY explodes with one helluva dazzling trailer! -- 122 total posts 108 posts
- Mark Millar Offers Some Interesting Insight Into The KICK-ASS Movie Sequel!! -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- Quint sees some DJANGO UNCHAINED footage at CANNES!!! -- 325 total posts 94 posts
- SPOILER ALERT! AICN COMICS/POPTARDS PODCAST: JUSTICE LEAGUE! DANCER! INCREDIBLE HULK! HARDCORE! NEW CRUSADERS! INVINCIBLE IRON MAN! DANGER CLUB! -- 69 total posts 69 posts
- When there’s no more room in Hell The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day will walk the earth. -- 69 total posts 69 posts
- Stay Away From The Creepy Girl Alone In The Parking Lot For THE POSSESSION's Poster!! -- 41 total posts 39 posts
- Zach Galifianakis Is Ignatius J. Reilly? -- 35 total posts 35 posts