Ron Howard: No need for 'Da Vinci' disclaimer

the cartoonists to toe the line
afraid of the peacefull people cant name them as it may insult there members here

It would be a commonsense disclaimer. What's the matter with reminding people that ANYTHING is a work of fiction? Is it because the blurring of the line is what generates revenue? Me thinks so!

they think it's true. Telling them it's a work of fiction could kill ticket sales.

said:
"This is a work of fiction that presents a set of characters that are affected by these conspiracy theories and ideas..."
"Those characters in this work of fiction act and react on that premise. It's not theology. It's not history."

Ron Howard would have a say, as well as the Producers, to Sony on the feasibility of a disclaimer.
Opus Dei, urged movie distributor Sony Pictures Entertainment in April to consider running a disclaimer. I'm thinking....the Japanese own Sony, and what the majority of their religion is.

JR

... there is any religous animus intended by making this movie, etc. Perhaps, but I would like to believe not?

All involved serve to make more money the more controversy they can muster. Not putting a disclaimer on the movie shows their desire to do this, at the risk of appearing petty, but the media push for this movie shows they have little fear of this. I have no doubt that were this some work of fiction about Mohammed (if ever even made) the disclaimer would probably be scrolled along the bottom periodically during the movie!

but of course a disclaimer, or ...........

Yeah, the $$$,$$$,$$$ is the almighty ruler.

are the ones where you can easily guess on what sensationalized case the story is based!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

... claims it is fiction based on fact. That's usually where disclaimers are used. If it is so obviously fiction as Howard et. al. claim, what is the HARM in putting the disclaimer? The answer to that question reveals motive.

they don't argued about religion .. they argue about money.. the people who ask for disclaimer or suing the movie.. need money. the producer also need the money..

they are not fight about history and/or religion nor disclaimer..

Money .. Money... Moneyyyy.. (from The Apprentice tv series..).. LOL

Not saying they won't/can't, but just not seeing it.

We will just wait and where it going to end...

Maybe.... by blowing up the case (or creating a case).. more people will watch the movie ... just like all other holywood style marketing .... in the end, we don't know, where the money flows...

who asked for the disclaimer, would make any $'s from the movie. Please google to see about Opus Dei.

Dave, if that is the case, should the third Godfather movie have a disclaimer?

route of Kevin Smith and his disclaimer from "Dogma":

Disclaimer: 1) a renunciation of any claim to or connection with; 2)disavowal; 3) a statement made to save one's own ***.

Though it'll go without saying ten minutes or so into these proceedings, View Askew would like to state that this film is from start to finish a work of comedic fantasy, not to be taken seriously. To insist that any of what follows is incendiary or inflammatory is to miss our intention and pass judgment; and passing judgment is reserved for God and God alone (this goes for you film critics too...just kidding).

So please before you think about hurting someone over this trifle of a film, remember: even God has a sense of humor. Just look at the Platypus.

Thank you and enjoy the show.

P.S. We sincerely apologize to all Platypus enthusiasts out there who are offended by that thoughtless comment about Platypi. We at View Askew respect the noble Platypus, and it is not our intention to slight these stupid creatures in any way.

Thank you again and enjoy the show


Dan