MovieChat Forums > Angels & Demons (2009) Discussion > movie..real?

movie..real?

posted 14 years ago by sadieplo
35 replies | jump to latest

I love how much effort people make to disprove "facts" in a movie.. movies are never ever real! That is what makes them movies... if they were real, they would be documentaries. They may be BASED on real life events or facts, but are almost never true to fact! Things have to be changed for a multitude of reasons, and that is just the way it is. This movie is no exception. This movie deals with an extremely sensitive subject; the Vatican and at base, the catholic religion. Many of the subjects around this topic mentioned have to be handled with care and caution, because of the possible outcomes. Insulting the catholic church or its past, or customs could be very bad for any of the people involved in the film.

Just remember that movies are for entertainment. They are meant for you to enjoy. The filmmakers made this film for that purpose. They did not intend to rewrite history or insult anyone. Nor do they intend to change facts and create a story for small minded life lacking people to verbally attack. No one attacks Scooby-Doo for its lack of facts that ghosts and sea creatures don't exist. Because no one takes it that seriously.. what should make this any different? These are actors creating FAKE characters!!! Movies were always meant to enjoy, to marvel at! I think the movie was well shot considering the many restrictions placed on them, they worked around them very well to make it appear a bit more real like. Well done to the cast and crew, I applaud your efforts, and cannot wait for "The lost symbol"

[–] amandagail1995 14 years ago

You do realize that it was a book before a movie, right?

Chuck me.

[–] sadieplo 14 years ago

yes I do realize that.. and books are no more real than movies... books even further my point... that authors write books using their imaginations... notice that this book is not found in the history section of a library.. it is found in fiction! that means it is not based on real life events or facts.. it is a story a person made up and wrote down... they are good books,yes.. i don't dispute that... but that never makes them real!

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

But Dan Brown claimed it was based on fact in the front of the novel.

She's really Tyler Durden/Keyser Soze/A Man/A Ghost/Dreaming/His sled

[–] sadieplo 14 years ago

yes.. BASED on fact.. he never said it "IS FACTUAL" .. based on is and can be a very loose term... take the Texas chainsaw massacre movies for instance.. those movies claim they are based on real life events.... but no such story exists in Texas' history... it is based on a person... VERY LOOSELY!!!! they used Ed Gein as an inspiration for the leather face charecter.. that is what they meant when they said "based on"... but the two stories are actually very different... that is just one example.. the movies always mimic real life... that's what makes them interesting, and draws us in. is the fact that its so close to our lives, or that it makes it seem that these things are possible, and sometimes they are... however, they are movies... documentaries are movies that are about real life, with real life charecters, a real life plot, setting, etc. cameras follow as the events unfold, which makes these real!

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

yes.. BASED on fact.. he never said it "IS FACTUAL

His exact words from the front of Da Vinci Code 'All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this novel are accurate'

I believe there is something similar in the front of Angels & Demons.

In other words NOT 'loosely based' 'inspired by' but 'ACCURATE'.

the movies always mimic real life... that's what makes them interesting, and draws us in. is the fact that its so close to our lives,

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim a movie is mimicing real life to make it interesting and then claim it doesn't matter if it's factual or not.

She's really Tyler Durden/Keyser Soze/A Man/A Ghost/Dreaming/His sled

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

at the start of 'fargo' the coens put a title card up saying that the film was based on true events. it wasnt. they put it there to make it more entertaining.

if dan brown wants to state its all true to make it more enjoyable then fine. if you are the kind of person who wants to learn about history from a fiction novel then you are a fool.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

at the start of 'fargo' the coens put a title card up saying that the film was based on true events. it wasnt. they put it there to make it more entertaining.

I know they did. And people believed them.
http://www.snopes.com/movies/films/fargo.asp

Why does putting 'This is based on true events' make the movie more entertaining? Either it was based on the truth or it wasn't. I'm not any more entertained by someone telling me an obvious false story if they say at the beginning 'Oh by the way, this is a true story, but I don't expect you to believe it"

if dan brown wants to state its all true to make it more enjoyable then fine.

You wouldn't by any chance be saying that Dan Brown has the right to tell a downright lie about his novel, but no-one has the right to call him out on it? Thought not.

if you are the kind of person who wants to learn about history from a fiction novel then you are a fool.

Ah, so all those people who read Schindler's Ark to find out about Oskar Schindler and the holocaust were fools were they? Or the people who read Arthur & George to find out about Arthur Conan Doyle & George Edalji? Or the people who read 'The Last King of Scotland' to find out about Idi Amin? How foolish would that be since Oskar Schindler, Arthur Conan Doyle and Idi Amin all appeared in fiction novels, they're obviously not real.

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

believeing something is real for the duration of the film can enhance the events. think about the mystery of the blair witch project or even paranormal activity, its part of the fun to believe its real, even just a tiny bit. if your not more entertained doesnt mean you should stop it for others.

dan brown has the right to tell a lie about his novel but i never said no one could call him out, i was just defending his right in the first place.

i didnt say because someone is in a fiction novel it isnt real, but all of those books are using the truth to entertain, they are not historical documents and im sure you would fine some inaccuracies or the truth bent slightly for storytelling purposes. theres no problem with that. but if you want to learn the facts and the whole truth then you have to go further. sure dan brown might be an interesting place to start if you are interested in his topics but if you really want to learn you have to put down the fiction books and pick up a history book. they can be fun too.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

believeing something is real for the duration of the film can enhance the events. think about the mystery of the blair witch project or even paranormal activity, its part of the fun to believe its real, even just a tiny bit

Neither The Blair Witch Project nor Paranormal Activity ever claimed to be real. My point is, putting 'This is a true story' will inevitably mean people are going to think its true unless the claim is totally ridiculous. I don't then see the problem with pointing out it isn't.

but all of those books are using the truth to entertain, they are not historical documents and im sure you would fine some inaccuracies or the truth bent slightly for storytelling purposes. theres no problem with that. but if you want to learn the facts and the whole truth then you have to go furthert

Dan Brown doesn't just have innacuracies or the truth bent slightly. He tells whopping great lies. The Priory of Sion was a modern hoax, not an ancient secret society. The Vatican did not purge the Illuminati. Etc.

And he went on to continue to spout these claims

On May 25, 2003, Brown gave an interview on CNN with anchorman Martin Savidge:

Savidge: When we talk about da Vinci and your book, how much is true and how much is fabricated in your storyline?
Brown: 99 percent of it is true. All of the architecture, the art, the secret rituals, the history, all of that is true, the Gnostic gospels. All of that is … all that is fiction, of course, is that there's a Harvard symbologist named Robert Langdon, and all of his action is fictionalized. But the background is all true.

In an ABC TV special around the same time, Brown was asked a similar question;

Interviewer: This is a novel ... If you were writing it as a non-fiction book, would it have been different?

Brown: I don't think it would have. I began the research for The Da Vinci Code as a skeptic. I entirely expected, as I researched the book to disprove this (Jesus/Mary Magdalene/Grail) theory. And after numerous trips to Europe and about two years of research I really became a believer. I decided this theory makes more sense to me than what I learnt as a child.

Several months later, on NBC's The Today Show Brown was pushing the same message:

Matt Lauer: How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?"
Dan Brown: Absolutely all of it.
(Today Show, June 9, 2003)

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

the publicity of blair witch claimed it was real and fargo started with the statement it was true. its part of the fantasy of cinema. theres no problem pointing out it isnt, but there is also no problem claiming its real for effect.

and the same goes for dan brown. so the priroy of sion is not real, who cares. the effect dan brown creates is thriller with historical secrets and mysterys. and if there arent any good secrets why not make some up to enhace your book/film? i dont get why you have a problem with lying about FICTION.

if dan brown was writing a historical book he would lose all creditability, but to write a piece of fiction with false claims that enhance the story he has become one of the most popular writers of recent times. yes he may lie about the truth but who would write a book like his and then say oh by the way none of the societies or anything actaully exist - it would put people off buying it.

and yes it is important to make sure people know its not true retrospectively but to say he cant do it in the first place defies the point of writing fiction work.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

and the same goes for dan brown. so the priroy of sion is not real, who cares.

The many people who read the book and thought it was real?

the effect dan brown creates is thriller with historical secrets and mysterys. and if there arent any good secrets why not make some up to enhace your book/film?

Nothing wrong with that. It's when people are not honest that I have a problem.

i dont get why you have a problem with lying about FICTION.

I don't get why you have to put FICTION in capitals.

And a lie is a lie. Fiction is a perfectly respectable form of entertainment, only a very foolish person would complain about people making up stories.

There are people who write imaginative fiction that is simply that, absolutely no problem.

There are people who write imaginative fiction that is made to look like authentic documentation; in fact most literature up until the 20th Century was like that (it was always written in the first person; nearly always 'From the journal of') but never claimed by its creators to really be real documentation. No problem with that.

Then there are those who write fiction but claim it is somehow based on elements of fact. This is where it gets dodgy. There is historical fiction where the author NEEDS to get their facts right about the historical setting (don't write an Elizabethan murder mystery in which Henry VIII asks Abraham Lincoln to check the time on his digital watch). There are also essentially dramatised versions of historical events where the author needs to tread very carefully and ensure people know exactly which bits are fiction and which bits are real (There were complaints about David Pearce's 'The Damned United' making facts up which is perfectly understandable, its incredibly disingenuous to write a book about Brian Clough managing Leeds United and then go 'what you think I'm talking about reality?). How many people still think Columbus was alone in thinking the world was round for a start?

yes he may lie about the truth but who would write a book like his and then say oh by the way none of the societies or anything actaully exist

Well unless you think that people genuinely believe in Harry Potter, then J K Rowling doesn't appear to have had a problem with this. Or Stephen King. Or Terry Pratchett. Or Robert Ludlum. Or (continue ad infinitum).

if dan brown was writing a historical book he would lose all creditability, but to write a piece of fiction with false claims that enhance the story he has become one of the most popular writers of recent times

Yes, and here some comments from his readers

enjoyed the historical content as well as the various settings

Yes of course it's fiction but based on some fact

I enjoyed more the totally new point of view on Christianity and Jesus – the ultimate mystery, than the action of the thriller. I have also discovered many interesting facts about Da Vinci and other people and places that I was not aware of.

i thought the story was exciting and i learnt loads and ENOYED learning things that frankly amazed me and made me open my eyes to the world around me and its possibilities

I love books which have a facutal basis and although 'The Da Vinci Code's' facts are very controversial and debatable it's exactly this that grabs the reader and certainly leaves you thinking at end as to how much you may have learned and the seeds which have been implanted in your mind.

I really enjoyed this book. I thought it was intelligent and thought provoking. I too believe the Church manipulates what we are told as fact and it was refreshing to read this opinion. It is a book which has very interesting historical references.

His writing is brillaintly compiled to provide a balance of 'factual' research with an exciting fictional storyline.

Christianity is the basis but it really makes you think!!! I am a Christian but I really didnt read into my religion till I read this book

What a great mix of History, Art, and archeology wrapped up in a great mystery!

I devour books like this! Fiction pleated with fact!

When I finished the book I thought WOW, then I had to check on the internet for the painting of the last supper to discover if all Dan Brown had written was true. It was!

That's just from the first two pages of Amazon.

So to sum up. Dan Brown writes a novel which he claims is factual based. Plenty of people believe him.

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

well im sorry you cared so much that a book lied to you. frankly people are gullible, the world is full of lies. if you end up believing everything you read then thats up to you, you can develop a method of thinking whereby you dont have to rely on all your information about the world from fiction books.

if someone reads a dan brown novel and is really interested in the topic then surely they will follow it up and find it outs true and what isnt. if they just read dan brown and picked a bit of pop knowledge that will go in one ear and out the other then its hardly a loss.

there are plenty of lies told from governments, family, friends or whoever, thats what im more concerned by, not some airport pulp thriller and a hollywood money-making machine for the mass public. the general film-going audience dont believe anything they see in the cinema, so in terms of the film i hardly think any came out of the cinema after this one and felt any more educated then when they went in.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

well im sorry you cared so much that a book lied to you

Actually, I don't care that much I already knew about the topic before hand. I'm more concerned about all the other people who believe it.

And believe me they do. I've actually shown you the evidence for all those people who left reviews saying they liked the mixture of fact and fiction in the book. You've ignored this.

I've said that there exist many books which are presented as fact or seek to convey factual information. You've ignored this.

In fact, your whole argument seems to be that I'm not allowed to point that Dan Brown's novels are incorrect because their fiction even though he claimed they were factually based and no-one would ever believe them, even though they do.

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

ive not ignored it, i mentioned that most of those people will just carry on their lives as normal. it wont affect them, they just think they read a good book. and if it prompts them to read a real history book then they will find out the facts. no harm done.

the only way harm is done is if they take the book as the truth and set off on a world tour preaching the gospel of dan brown, in which case they will be ignored.

why shouldnt i ignore a statement that claims there "books out there that are presented as fact". thats like me claiming "there are books out there made of paper".

i wish youd stop saying that im telling you you are not allowed to point out theyre wrong, ive constantly said the opposite. dan brown is allowed to write non-fiction in with the fiction and vice versa and you are allowed to criticse and point it out. my point is that he is allowed to do whatever he likes to make his books better (in some peoples opinion) and make money from them. and claiming its true is just an extension of that.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

So, your argument is now unless someone is totally influenced to the point of abandoning your life's work and going round preaching the good book of Angels & Demons, then one shouldn't criticise Dan Brown? Because, otherwise I really can't see what your point is.

Tell me which part of this argument you disagree with

1) Some novels are purely exercises in imagination. Others, such as Schindler's Ark seek to tell a true story in the form of a fictional novel.
2) If you're doing an exercise in pure imagination, you can make up whatever you want
3) If, however, you seeking to tell a true story in fictional form, you have a certain duty to make sure what you are telling is the truth...or at least indicate to people where you have veered off from the truth, especially if you are dealing with real people, places or institutions.
4) By his statements in the front of his books and statements to the media, Dan Brown has placed himself firmly in the latter part of the fiction spectrum in part 1
5) There are people who believe what he has written.
6) However, there are numerous parts where he has got things totally wrong
7) Therefore he deserves to be called out on it (not banned from writing note).

Which of these statements do you disagree with?

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

the only thing i dont agree on is point 3.

why cant he tell a story (the story isnt true even if he claims past events are) without claiming the historical events arent true. why does a novelist have a duty? hes not a jounalist. hes a novelist, for you to claim he has a duty to do anything means you think he shouldnt have freedom of speech.

1 - correct. 2 - correct. 3- as above. 4 - correct. 5 - correct. 6 - correc and 7 - correct.

there is a difference between calling him out on what he has got wrong and calling for him to do his 'duty' and tell people where he isnt telling the truth or not.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

why cant he tell a story (the story isnt true even if he claims past events are) without claiming the historical events arent true. why does a novelist have a duty? hes not a jounalist. hes a novelist, for you to claim he has a duty to do anything means you think he shouldnt have freedom of speech.

Note, I said a 'duty' not 'he should be thrown in prison if he doesn't'.

I mean duty it the way that all writers have a duty to their readers. A writer has a duty to entertain his readers and to ensure the readers understand the rules of whatever world they're creating.

In the same way, I think a writer has a duty not to claim as truth something that is manifestly lies. Let me ask you something, would you be alright with this scenario?

Dan Brown's latest novel is 'The Joshua Key' - a fast paced thriller in which Robert Langdon uncovers a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world's governments. In it he discovers that the Jewish media faked reports of the holocaust in the second world war to gain sympathy for their cause and deliberately blackened the name of Adolf Hitler.

In the beginning of the novel Dan Brown writes 'Everything in this story is based on fact. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a real document which proves a Jewish conspiracy. The documents describing the faking of the holocaust are accurately described?'

Is this something you would be comfortable with?

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] Angel_of_Isis 14 years ago

Joshua Key stands for the lost symbol of Masonry; didn't you know?
Did the Jewish Masons really possess a secret so astonishing that it threatened the very existence of the Church Of England and the American Presidency itself?
The Jewish conspiracy to mark clothes with secret Masonic laundry symbols is Dan Brown's latest revelation.
Not to be missed!

Some create happiness wherever they go - some whenever they go.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

You're as mad a mongoose Angel, you know that?

But I like you! (As you should know).

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] Angel_of_Isis 14 years ago

AND! I'm not finished.
Those very same symbols are written in Braille on Israeli coins!
How about THAT for a fact?
And guess what?
Now those evil men are planning to shove their masonry into our very food! Don't believe me?
Have a look.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3339744,00.html

Some create happiness wherever they go - some whenever they go.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

I like the way you're thinking.

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

you opinion of duty is your own, but it doesnt make it right. i think a writer should aim to entertain his readers etc but its not his duty its his choice. it was his choice to become a writer and he can do it however he wants. someone hired for a job or paid by an employer has a duty to fulfill his job role, a writer who is financed by his own books only has the duty he has set himself.

i have no problem with your scenario. in fact there are plenty of books about holocaust denial that are meant as NON-fiction and they dont get the credit they are aiming for.

and if someone read that book and believed it all, despite the overwhelming evidence against then that is their own problem, and that is a different topic.

a fiction writer claiming everything in their book is real when it isnt is not really a huge problem. and yes, again, you also have the right to call him up on it.

the underlining factor is that by claiming lots of the 'facts' are true, it has helped sell his books. dan browns duty to himself has therefore been acheived.

[–] Angel_of_Isis 14 years ago

But it is not just the holocaust thing and the Jewish Masons. You don't have to be Jewish to recognize them!
For instance, observe two black men when they meet. Note the ceremonial secret handshakes before the final, "normal" one.
Thus it is also a black conspiracy.
I do hope that Dan Brown himself is reading this. He may decide to - yet again - reveal the evil in our midst.
That man is a genius; and should get the Pulitzer!

Some create happiness wherever they go - some whenever they go.

[–] Angel_of_Isis 14 years ago

Actually, I don't care that much I already knew about the topic before hand. I'm more concerned about all the other people who believe it.

Exactly. It is either the truth or a lie.
Life is about white and black, and the people who start talking about "gray" are misled. These are the people whom mama never taught that colored laundry should be washed separately. And some laundry should not be washed at all.

Some create happiness wherever they go - some whenever they go.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

I never wash my underwear at all, its only the stubborn stains that are holding them together.

http://culfycavy.blogspot.com

[–] BobFlame 13 years ago

There WAS ACTUALLY A " Priory of Sion " in 16th Century France THOUGH it had NOTHING to do with The Holy Grail , A Bloodline of Jesus , Mary Magdalene or The Supposed " Famous " Grandmasters !Yes , The Theories in " Holy Blood , Holy Grail " and " Da Vinci Code " WERE LARGELY BASED ON The Plantard Hoax , HOWEVER LIKE MOST GREAT Con Artists Plantard`s Hoax LOOSELY USED REAL HISTORY AND SENSATIONALIZED IT !

[–] BobFlame 13 years ago

Also , Brown`s Portrayal of The Conspiracy Theories about Opus Dei WERE RIGHT ON THE MONEY ! " Purification " through self-flagellation , brainwashing , cutting off ties with one`s family and friends and starvation ! According to Former Members of Opus Dei in Real Life , THAT IS ALL TRUE ! Ofcourse , they DON`T have Monks BUT I consider Silas more of An Assassin working for Opus Dei THAN A FULL Member !

[–] Elynne 11 years ago

Artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals can all be accurate ~~~ that doesn't mean that the plot of the book is based on reality or that the characters in the book have been based on real people.

So YES ~~ you can have it both ways if you are simply using real places, buildings, artwork, documents, etc. that exist now (or have existed in the past) as your setting ~~~ but the plot of the story and the characters (whether it's a book or a movie) are made up.

[–] Culfy 11 years ago

None of it was accurate though
Ever tried. Ever failed. No Matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Elynne 11 years ago

Hmmm . . . I have to give this some thought. The Vatican LOOKED like the Vatican (I've been there) ~~ and artwork in the various places that were shown looked accurate. Perhaps we have a misunderstanding with the use of the word "accurate" as opposed to the concept of "the real actual Vatican buildings" or "the real artwork." If it's a set, a model, or a copy, it can still be an accurate depiction, even if it's not the genuine piece of artwork or the genuine Vatican.

That's what I meant in my earlier post. I hope that I'm making sense!

On the other hand, I was very aware while reading the book and watching the movie that it would be be next to impossible for our characters to get from one place to another in Rome within the short amount of time that they were given.

[–] glenn-299 14 years ago

Zombie flick 'Return Of The Living Dead' also claims it was based on fact.....so did 'Blair Witch Project'...this is a tease to sell more books/movies/whatever

[–] shonoffilm 13 years ago

The OP sounds like the idiot that rang up my purchase of the The Da Vinci Code at Boarders Book Store. I was a young teen when I bought the book, read a synopsis about it in a magazine and it seemed interesting so I decided to go buy it. I obviously found the book with ease in the FICTION section of the bookstore yet the cashier took it upon them-self to inform me that the book was fiction while giving me a stern look. That *beep* pissed me off and insulted my intelligence. If I weren't so young I would have known to report them to their manager. The Op reminds me of that idiot. I'm sure everyone who watched this movie or read the book understands that it is fiction. But the themes focused on in this fictional tale are interesting topics that make you re-think the aspect of religion and as a Christian I see nothing wrong with that.

[–] Culfy 14 years ago

No one attacks Scooby-Doo for its lack of facts that ghosts and sea creatures don't exist

I agree.

We should give this movie exactly the same respect and attention as we would to an episode of Scooby Doo.

She's really Tyler Durden/Keyser Soze/A Man/A Ghost/Dreaming/His sled

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]