National Treasure 2 to mention NWO type of conspiracy??

[Hourglassmemory]

I'm asking this because it was the question that rose into my head as I watched the teaser trailer.
It's narrated in the beggining by Nicolas Cage.
He says something in the lines of "conceils something much much bigger that crosses the globe. A discovery that the world isn't ready to believe."
It does show paris, the buckingham palace and the US government.
These are all elements in conspiracy theories.

Just watch the teaser.
http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/05/25/national-treasure-2-movie-trailer/

I wonder if Mr.Cage got brainwashed in someway. I'm in no way saying he has. I think the man has a great mind.
I wonder if it'll make Alex Jones drool uncontrolably.

Of course the whole conspiracy starts getting revealed thanks to 18 missing pages.....whose content is 100% fictional. And it goes from there, so there's no worrying.

[Unsecured Coins]

This is absurd. I mean, really...


they're making a part 2??

[boloboffin]

What Unsecured Coins said.

Did 1 really do that well in theaters? An American ripoff of the yawn-inducing De Vinci Code? Really?

Maybe in this one, Nicolas Cage discovers that Washington grew pot and tobacco built America.

Edit: I stand corrected.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=nationaltreasure.htm

$173 million domestic, $347 million global. Yeah, that means sequel. What is wrong with people??

[Hourglassmemory]

I liked it. And the thing is....it was entertaining.
The da Vinci Code and this one are very different.
I just like the feeling of going clue after clue after clue. I think they did it better than da Vinci Code.
But I'm 17...MY opinions are usually based on coolness and the wittyness and intelligence of the characters.

[slyjoe]

The letters in the credits include a masonic symbol, an iron cross and the symbol for Turkey (star and crescent). Not sure how all that ties into Paris and Buckingham palace. But then the first one didn't tie stuff together real well either.

[gumboot]

You people shouldn't take films so seriously...

Brendan Fraser did a sequel to "The Mummy", yet somehow I doubt he believes in Egyptian magic.

-Gumboot

[Alareth]

So, do we start placing bets now on how long it takes CT's to start hailing the film for bring brave enough to reveal the Twoof, whatever it may be?

[boloboffin]

Well, I doubt Cage thinks his CT movies are real either. I personally just found the movie boring. That's the only crank I'm yanking here.

And just because I didn't like doesn't mean that others could. Aesthetics isn't a science.

The Mummy. You really are trying to send me to the sickroom, aren't you?

[Hourglassmemory]

In the end it's a matter of tastes, really.
Oh...just like conspiracies!!

[Slayhamlet]

I'm asking this because it was the question that rose into my head as I watched the teaser trailer.
It's narrated in the beggining by Nicolas Cage.
He says something in the lines of "conceils something much much bigger that crosses the globe. A discovery that the world isn't ready to believe."
It does show paris, the buckingham palace and the US government.
These are all elements in conspiracy theories.

Just watch the teaser.
http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/05/25/national-treasure-2-movie-trailer/

I wonder if Mr.Cage got brainwashed in someway. I'm in no way saying he has. I think the man has a great mind.
I wonder if it'll make Alex Jones drool uncontrolably.

Of course the whole conspiracy starts getting revealed thanks to 18 missing pages.....whose content is 100% fictional. And it goes from there, so there's no worrying.

No brainwash necessary. It's fiction, and I'm sure the actors including Cage understand this.

Or one would hope. I guess you can never be sure these days.

[Slayhamlet]

In the end it's a matter of tastes, really.
Oh...just like conspiracies!!

If it included the incidents of 9/11 as part of the conspiracy then I'd say it's in very bad taste. As it is (as far as I can tell), it looks just like your generic, vague all-powerful-world-government-with-skull-and-bones-connections, typical movie plot conspiracy. Stupid, but not especially offensive.

[Mobyseven]

The Mummy. You really are trying to send me to the sickroom, aren't you?

Hey, now! Be kind!

I thought the Mummy was good fun as a movie. It's nice to be able to occasionally turn one's brain off and watch some mindless entertainment!

[boloboffin]

Hey, now! Be kind!

I thought the Mummy was good fun as a movie. It's nice to be able to occasionally turn one's brain off and watch some mindless entertainment!

Bleh. I'm going to go home and turn off my mind with The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie.

I keed. I love a good popcorn movie as well as the next. The Mummy I didn't like, though. Too much an Egypt head - I find the real stuff a lot more intriguing. But that's me, and that's not to say you can't like it. I prefer my mindless entertainment to pretend it's engaging my mind - like Wes Anderson's stuff (or even the Coen brothers - :eye-poppi ).

But I do have DCotB at home from Netflix. :D

[gumboot]

Er...

The Coen Brothers are not mindless entertainment...

I agree with Mobyseven...

I found The Mummy films and the Pirates of the Caribbean films to be just senseless fun in the same genre as Indiana Jones - just a classic pulp action adventure.

One thing I found disappointing, posting in the entertainment subforum here, is that a lot of posters at the JREF forums seem to automatically think poorly of a film that contains any "woo".

I found this a little sad, as I thought skeptics, of all people, should be able to make a distinction between fictional storytelling and reality.

The simple fact is storytelling has a long and distinguished history of portraying the fantastical and extraordinary. It's a fundamental aspect.

Should Aesop's fables be dismissed out of hand because they contain talking animals?

Good storytelling is a fiction that tells a greater truth. I have seen many many films, and read many many books, that suffered greatly by trying to adhere too strictly to "authenticity", and thus lost their greater truth.

A story like "The Lord Of The Rings" hold more truth in it than many of the most authentically written historical pieces.

-Gumboot

[Mobyseven]

The Coen Brothers are not mindless entertainment...

Something in me is telling me he meant the Wayans brothers...

I got rather annoyed recently when I finally got round to watching the second PotC movie (and then the third the other night).

I watched it, and all my friends were telling me, "Man, wasn't that movie crap? They used the best bits of the first one again, but they didn't do anything original."

It's a pirate movie for Ed's sake! Mindless entertainment! Just turn your brain off and enjoy the ride!

[gumboot]

To be fair the first one is a lot better than the second. Haven't seen the third yet.

-Gumboot

[Checkmite]

So, do we start placing bets now on how long it takes CT's to start hailing the film for bring brave enough to reveal the Twoof, whatever it may be?

Don't count your eggs. CTer's weren't too happy with the first one, because it "portrayed Masons in a kind light".

[Spins]

I enjoyed National Treasure, thought the score was pretty good as well...

:boxedin:

[boloboffin]

Oh, my, I'm in trouble.

As far as liking stories with woo in them, I adored V for Vendetta. It's not woo, it's just a subject matter thing. I liked V, I liked Pirates, I didn't like National or Mummy. Pan's Labyrinth, loved it. My only defense of my tastes is that they are my tastes.

And I love the Coen Brothers, love love love, and I can tell them apart from the Wayans Brothers, thank you. And I find their movies on the whole to be smart, intelligent, and best enjoyed mindlessly. Try it sometime.

[Alt+F4]

Folks go to the movies to be entertained and evil government makes a better plot line then real life government. "Hey Bernie, time to order more paper clips."

[Alareth]

I enjoyed The Mummy greatly but have one small issue. Awakening Imhotep would bring the "Great Plagues" of Egypt. The movie starts in the court of Seti I who was the father of Ramses the Great, therefore when Imhotep was cursed the "Great Plagues" hadn't happened yet.

[Horatius]

... therefore when Imhotep was cursed the "Great Plagues" hadn't happened yet.



Look, who are you going to believe: The Bible, or Brendan Fraser?


I thought so!

[Alareth]

Look, who are you going to believe: The Bible, or Brendan Fraser?


I thought so!

Brendan is innocent, it was Oded Fehr reading that narrative voiceover.

[njslim]

After watching the trailer (and reading some blurbs) on National Treasure 2
is that it deals with conspiracy involving Abraham Lincoln, John Wilkes Booth
I rather liked National Treasure 1 and what they did using American icons like
Liberty Bell, Declaration of Independence et al . Believe it is good harmless
entertainment as well as teaching some points of American history.

Looking forward to it.

[Myriad]

I enjoyed The Mummy greatly but have one small issue. Awakening Imhotep would bring the "Great Plagues" of Egypt. The movie starts in the court of Seti I who was the father of Ramses the Great, therefore when Imhotep was cursed the "Great Plagues" hadn't happened yet.

How about the part about a mummy coming back to life and wielding magical powers? :)

One thing to be said for conspriracies in movies is that the heroes generally manage to find actual evidence for them.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[gumboot]

Good point...

What was the slugline of Enemy of the State...

It's not paranoia if they are actually after you...

And here's the thing that makes it different to CTers... they were out to get him.

And best of all, they were out to get him because they screwed up and got the wrong guy. Far more realistic for the government.

-Gumboot