CAP Alert

It's here.At last,it's here.

The Da Vinci Code

claim of Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute

Uh,Captain...nowhere in the Bible does it say that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.

And the film claims it was the "church" - a group of men - that decided which Books would form the Bible.
********
Also suggesting there was no holy Inspiration to deciding which Books form the Bible.
Hate to burst your bubble again,but there wasn't.It's well documented that at the time the New Testament was made there were dozens of Gospels written,and the church more or less just picked the four most popular.

am so sorry this report has taken so long to complete, a full seven days after viewing it and a full six days after its opening. I could not hope to list all of the trouble experienced. I fully believe getting this single analysis report published was plagued with more obstacles than any other of the more than 1000 other reports we have done. Hint: It all has to do with lack of donations/funding. Something tells me the adversary did not want this report published.

That the adversary is actively involved in creating so many obstacles, especially to this report, makes sense since we are fighting the adversary quite probably in his most sensitive spot -- his attacks of Jesus through His little ones.
Wow.So just because it took some time to get the ridiculously expensive donations you demand for your very obscure website,Satan himself is trying to stop you?Talk about having a high opinion of yourself.
 
I'm sure he'll accuse it of counterfeiting the scriptures,or of calling good evil and evil good.He might even call The Omen out on it's "It ain't good enough,no matter what it is" message.

And forcing the viewer to acknowledge the existence of the female form.Lots'a that.
 
oooo, I think you're onto something there, Q
 
I ****ing hate extremists. Doesn't matter what religion or party or cause or whatever, but they seriously need to take their, I dunno... 11 and turn it down to maybe a 4.

The Question said:
Is it just me who finds it weird that he knew Wolverine's real name was James Howlette?

HAHAHA nice catch.
 
The Question said:
Is it just me who finds it weird that he knew Wolverine's real name was James Howlette?
In his Hellboy review,he refers to John Hurt's character as "Trevor Bruttenholm",which he's only referred to as in the credits.Which opens up all kinds of new questions...Damn,you live up to your namesake.
 
to be fair, he could easily get "Trevor Bruttenholm" from IMDb, and there're a gajillion info sites that will tell you Wolverine's real first name
 
Elijya said:
to be fair, he could easily get "Trevor Bruttenholm" from IMDb, and there're a gajillion info sites that will tell you Wolverine's real first name

Do you think that he'd really visit a site that ranks The Godfather as the #1 movie of all time? ;)
 
The Hero said:
It's here.At last,it's here.

The Da Vinci Code



Uh,Captain...nowhere in the Bible does it say that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.


Hate to burst your bubble again,but there wasn't.It's well documented that at the time the New Testament was made there were dozens of Gospels written,and the church more or less just picked the four most popular.


Wow.So just because it took some time to get the ridiculously expensive donations you demand for your very obscure website,Satan himself is trying to stop you?Talk about having a high opinion of yourself.

The gospels that were chosen weren't chosen because of popularity, but because they were the ones found to have been written within the lifetimes of Jesus' disciples. I'd be interested to see if there were any gospels written during that period that were rejected, but most (if not all) of the rejections were written at least a century after Jesus died.

Other than that, your post is spot-on.
 
DDRSkata said:
The gospels that were chosen weren't chosen because of popularity, but because they were the ones found to have been written within the lifetimes of Jesus' disciples. I'd be interested to see if there were any gospels written during that period that were rejected, but most (if not all) of the rejections were written at least a century after Jesus died.

Other than that, your post is spot-on.
Sorry.Next time I'll do more research than watching the History channel half-asleep.:o
 
I love his closing line:

Now to my opinion of Nacho Libre. It is quite probably one of the most empty and lame movies I have ever seen and Jack Black is very well suited for it.

And I was more than a little disappointed to find no Ghost World review.I think his "It ain't good enough,no matter what it is" counter would've exploded.

Damn it,Tom,if you're going to have an irritating catchphrase,could you at least get the grammar right?
 
For his Date Movie review:

Sexual/anatomical display are as if Kinsey wrote the film, as if there are no standards or inhibitions left whatsoever

Wow,Christians are still holding a grudge against Kinsey.How long ago was that,half a century?I remember that somewhere in his site he says that the Kinsey Report was nothing but lies and that everything it said has been debunked.Which reminds me...

Captain Tom's review of American Pie said:
The movie starts out with a teen boy watching a porn flick on cable TV (audio present) -- and he is doing that which the entertainment industry and pansexualists want you to think about what teenage boys do if watching sexual material alone in their bedroom.

That's right,ladies and gentlemen,this man is convinced that teenage boy's never *********e,and that the dreaded Liberal Media just wants you to think they do.Probably because they get their orders from Satan.
 
Man, this guy is gonna s**t a brick when he reviews Superman Returns! I mean Lois with a child but not married and Superman as a pseudo-Christ figure.

I'll bring the popcorn.
 
UltimateBatman said:
Man, this guy is gonna s**t a brick when he reviews Superman Returns! I mean Lois with a child but not married and Superman as a pseudo-Christ figure.

I'll bring the popcorn.
http://www.capalert.com/capreports/supermanreturns.htm

All right,boys and girls,let's review:

Isn't there an increasing trend in the prevailing centers of childhood development -- in public schools for example -- to teach that the only safe sex is no sex (not that the school has any business teaching kids about sex in the first place)? If true and if movies really do reflect real life instead of engineer it, shouldn't movies follow suit instead of conflict with it?
Yes,because those programs are working so well.I'm reminded of what Penn and Teller said on their abstinence episode:"Youth abstinence programs are designed under the assumption that 50's sitcoms actually existed."

In some or maybe even many cases, the big screen is a better teacher than the one in front of your child Monday through Friday. And, yes, mom/dad, by no fault of your own the big screen might sometimes be a better teacher than you.
I grew up in a racist environment,and it it weren't for movies and television I wouldn't know any other perspective on life.Yeah,damn movies corrupting our children.:down

Now this is very dissapointing:

Clerks II R. This film, Kevin Smith's sequel to Clerks 1994 which was edited from NC-17, will likely NOT be analyzed because it, being a sequel, is likely to be as graphic as the first Clerks.
I think I speak for everyone when I say:Holy crap,there's an NC-17 version of Clerks?I gotta see that.
 
Superman Returns is a very violent film. At least as violent as some of the "hard" R-rated films of violence, just without the gore. Indeed, in one sequence a super machine gun first kills a number of police officers then peppers the chest of Superman for several seconds, then the assailant fires a round of .45 ammo onto the eyeball of Superman. But no body parts are strewn, no pounds of flesh are blasted out and no blood is splattered in any of the killings or attempted killings. The no-gore is a nice-to-do move on the part of the filmmakers but little do they seem to know the mechanisms of violence influences less than the attitude.


BWAHAHAHAHAHA! No cops got shot in that scene lol.
 
Man this guy is crazy. Sin City and American Psycho both got a zero and they are two of my favorite movies.
 
Even if there are more Scary Movies I do not intend to spend the money to analyze them ... unless they are PG or PG-13. But the chances of one of them being PG are about the same as the chances of a frozen orb of crystalline dihydrogen monoxide surviving unscathed, entry through exit, an excursion through the subterranean location of exceeding exoenergetic electromagnetic radiation in the thermal band.
Gee,first he brags about how much he can bench-press,now we all have to know how smart he is.

intercourse with a cooked turkey
facial deformations due to oral sex with an invisible ghost
war of vomiting on each other
a huge "demon" made of marijuana
As bad as the movie was,it's pretty funny to see him describe this stuff in his offended,matter-of-fact manner.

One fellow donated $1200. Another donated $500. Another donated $300. And our monthly donors include a $100, a $75 and a few $25 donations. One family even donated $2000 in the last quarter of 2005. If it were not for these people, you would not have this free service. But their generous donations will not last forever. Our nominal budget target is $3500 per month. And we cannot continue to make up the difference with family funds.
I don't know which is harder to believe:That multiple people are paying him sums of money that outrageous ,or that it could possibly cost $3500 a month to run that site.

Let's see what Thor has to say on the subject:

spiralthorvspriest.jpg
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"