[frequensearules]

Originally posted by mactbone
CAJONES

Where exactly is the "official threat?"

Does this mean that nobody in the governement can express displeasure because it's an official threat of censure? Meaning, words speak louder than actions? Are there any motions about this, praising, denigrating or otherwise? I just don't see what the big deal is. Some democrats are pissed off at this and want it shut down. I don't see any actual threat in thins. Even if the dems said "Cancel this or we'll revoke your license," it's an empty threat since they have no power. Of course they have no power and its meaningless prattle ......... for NOW.

The point being is they feel pretty damn full of themselves that won't be the case inthe future.

[GarryPaterson]

Vel, MrFun, are you pissed off about The Da Vinci Code?

[TravelMan]

Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi
It's portraying itself as a "docudrama", and gives no guidance as to what is docu and what is drama. That, I think, is the major problem. Using fuzzy definitions of truth and history around these events is not a good thing. Although, I suppose if it's good enough for the white house... Bingo... and a lot of people will think its all true, because people are dumb.

[Borzopayn]

Kuci - Nope. Not even a little.

Then again, the Davinci Code wasn't advertised as the "truth" or even as a "docudrama"...it was and is considered FICTION, first and foremost.

What I'm leery about is that this is NOT being billed as fiction first and foremost. Docudrama is its own category...some fiction, but mostly fact.

That puts it in a distinictly different category from Dan Brown's work of fiction, does it not?

Further, to my knowledge, there are, were, and have been no plans made to use the movie "Davinci Code" as a teaching tool....I'm willing to be wrong on this point...perhaps there are? If so, I have not seen them.

Nor are any of the major players still alive today (there are claims by Christians that Jesus is "coming back" but he ain't here yet, and so, we can't ask him)....we can, however, confer with any number of primary players in THIS drama...ask them to see if it's accurate or not.

Looks like early reports are...not.

So there are questions.

Fair questions, I'd say.

-=Vel=-

[suingincentix]

Then again, the Davinci Code wasn't advertised as the "truth" or even as a "docudrama"...it was and is considered FICTION, first and foremost.

Bullshit. Brown said at the beginning that all of the "facts" in the book were true.

[PharmACT]

What I'm leery about is that this is NOT being billed as fiction first and foremost. Docudrama is its own category...some fiction, but mostly fact.


Isn't that what we've got? Mostly fact, with a few fictional elements people are complaining about?

[cristmiff]

Isn't that what we've got? Mostly fact, with a few fictional elements people are complaining about?

No...from the opening post, I gathered that there were plans afoot to use the film as a teaching tool.

That point has been one of the major ones I've been keyed in on from the start. And the fact that we've not gotten any info (at least not on this thread) about what is being refuted. No copies of the script, no indication of what, or how much is being called into question....so no...at this point, I do not think it's safe to say that it's mostly fact with a few elements being called into question. Perhaps that will turn out to be the case, but based on the information so far...I couldn't say. Script?

-=Vel=-

[SigNeewfoew]

Oh, I agree....even when something is billed as a work of fiction, it can still be interpreted as truth.

My big beef is....given that, if you START by calling it "truth" or a "docudrama" and you know it's got lots of glaring errors in it (people quitting over its inaccuracies? If true, that would raise further serious questions), then you get an even greater impact than if you just bill it as fiction from the start.

As to the Dems handling of it so far....sleezy, to be sure...a request to delay its showing until certain questions could be answered would be one thing, but then, as you mentioned later, the station is ALREADY addressing the concerns, which would seem to render the Dem's actions unnecessary....right hand not talking to the left? Or another classic Dem blunder? I'm not sure, but in any case, it certainly wasn't the best way they could have chosen to handle it.

However, the Dems have about as much power in Congress right now as I do, so the chances that anything substantive will come of it (especially if the "docudrama" shows Repugs in a favorable light) is slim to none....

-=Vel=-

[valiumcheapll]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

What I'm leery about is that this is NOT being billed as fiction first and foremost. Docudrama is its own category...some fiction, but mostly fact.


Isn't that what we've got? Mostly fact, with a few fictional elements people are complaining about? From what I understand yes. And whats more its from people no longer in power and people that never will be. Clinton is ex, Berger has completley disgraced and discredited himself with his grabby pants act, leaving Clarke who supposedly by and large is lionized but likewise probably will never serve in public office again.

I don't see where this is a compelling issue for the Dems that they feel the need to strongarm ABC. I say this at least hearing that Bush and his crony buffoons were likewise lambasted.

[gamecasta]

I heard good things about it, and that, coupled with your recommendation, puts it high on the list!

-=Vel=-

[PickEmUp]

nm, OO said it better.

[boXGWf04]

Kuci: The subject of this thread is also fiction. So, stop whining.

Two points.

1) There's no whining going on here. At least not by me.

and

2) It's not being billed as fiction. Docudrama =! Fiction.

And there are questions.

Valid questions, IMO.

-=Vel=-

[UncoonsKala]

Originally posted by Sava
That's really the only thing I care about. I really could give have a donkey's ball about some made for TV movie. I agree save that now that all the whining is out there I feel compelled to understand why the Dems feel teh need to throw hissy fits.

[unishisse]

I just am not seeing the hissy fits. Nice try to mischaracterize things though.

[choollaBard]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I just am not seeing the hissy fits. Read the OP?

[VawSwaspamups]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Read the OP? Are you insane? Now five senators writing a letter is considered "a hissy fit"? Get a grip, man.

[katetomson]

It seems all they want is for it to be clearly labeled as fiction instead of a documentary. That's hardly a hissy fit.