angels and demons: the movie

[Dante1]

Well, I just watched the Tom Hanks movie and I should have seen it coming. What a crock of absolute shit! As usual, Tom Hanks (an orthodox catholic as is his wife) and Ron Howard (major xtian propagandist) have teamed up to dupe the sheep again. This time they have the church being infiltrated by bad guys, while making some reference to the churches "bad" early days. The overall message being that the basis of the catholic church is "good" and "for the betterment of all" with some "bad apples" occasionally being mean. The movie vacilitates back and forth between the church being bad and then just "misunderstood." The end has the usual Ron Howard xtian warm and fuzzy ending with all parties reaching consensus that the church has done it's best and is trying to reconcile science with religion via a "progressive" new pope (who Tom hanks just happened to save in the movie from death) with better times to be had by all. The movie seeks to expose past abuses by the church by insinuating it was bad decisions and some bad apples but not the overall churches fault. Sick movie meant to mindfuck the masses. Tom Hanks is an asshole for doing this, but what do you expect from an orthodox catholic playing the role of an anti catholic academic?

 

[Monie]

Whew, I saw it coming and I won't even bother to watch the filthy movie!
I could smell the jew-stench when I saw the previews and another Tom Hanks film.....

Not to mention the "insulting and blasphemous" insinuations in the movie about evil and the devil and all that bullshit.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Dante" <heathendante@... wrote:

Well, I just watched the Tom Hanks movie and I should have seen it coming. What a crock of absolute shit! As usual, Tom Hanks (an orthodox catholic as is his wife) and Ron Howard (major xtian propagandist) have teamed up to dupe the sheep again. This time they have the church being infiltrated by bad guys, while making some reference to the churches "bad" early days. The overall message being that the basis of the catholic church is "good" and "for the betterment of all" with some "bad apples" occasionally being mean. The movie vacilitates back and forth between the church being bad and then just "misunderstood." The end has the usual Ron Howard xtian warm and fuzzy ending with all parties reaching consensus that the church has done it's best and is trying to reconcile science with religion via a "progressive" new pope (who Tom hanks just happened to save in the movie from death) with better times to be had by all. The movie seeks to expose past abuses by the church by insinuating it was bad decisions and some bad apples but not the overall churches fault. Sick movie meant to mindfuck the masses. Tom Hanks is an asshole for doing this, but what do you expect from an orthodox catholic playing the role of an anti catholic academic?

 

[waltermassey1]

woah woah people, hold on here, the book was all about church cover ups, how science was suppressed by the church, all sorts of things we like. i didn't watch the movie, because i have my principles about movies&books, but i know the book was quite anti-church, as was the da-vinci code. even the the latter was pro-xianity, but still anti-church

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Monie" <hecatemother@... wrote:

Whew, I saw it coming and I won't even bother to watch the filthy movie!
I could smell the jew-stench when I saw the previews and another Tom Hanks film.....

Not to mention the "insulting and blasphemous" insinuations in the movie about evil and the devil and all that bullshit.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Dante" <heathendante@ wrote:

Well, I just watched the Tom Hanks movie and I should have seen it coming. What a crock of absolute shit! As usual, Tom Hanks (an orthodox catholic as is his wife) and Ron Howard (major xtian propagandist) have teamed up to dupe the sheep again. This time they have the church being infiltrated by bad guys, while making some reference to the churches "bad" early days. The overall message being that the basis of the catholic church is "good" and "for the betterment of all" with some "bad apples" occasionally being mean. The movie vacilitates back and forth between the church being bad and then just "misunderstood." The end has the usual Ron Howard xtian warm and fuzzy ending with all parties reaching consensus that the church has done it's best and is trying to reconcile science with religion via a "progressive" new pope (who Tom hanks just happened to save in the movie from death) with better times to be had by all. The movie seeks to expose past abuses by the church by insinuating it was bad decisions and some bad apples but not the overall churches fault. Sick movie meant to mindfuck the masses. Tom Hanks is an asshole for doing this, but what do you expect from an orthodox catholic playing the role of an anti catholic academic?

 

[blackshadowstallion]

That's the book, though.

Once something goes through the big channels in Hollywood, it must be jew-approved.

I have always liked Tom Hanks. Ron Howard I'm not so sure about.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "waltermassey1" <walter_massey@... wrote:

woah woah people, hold on here, the book was all about church cover ups, how science was suppressed by the church, all sorts of things we like. i didn't watch the movie, because i have my principles about movies&books, but i know the book was quite anti-church, as was the da-vinci code. even the the latter was pro-xianity, but still anti-church

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Monie" <hecatemother@ wrote:

Whew, I saw it coming and I won't even bother to watch the filthy movie!
I could smell the jew-stench when I saw the previews and another Tom Hanks film.....

Not to mention the "insulting and blasphemous" insinuations in the movie about evil and the devil and all that bullshit.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Dante" <heathendante@ wrote:

Well, I just watched the Tom Hanks movie and I should have seen it coming. What a crock of absolute shit! As usual, Tom Hanks (an orthodox catholic as is his wife) and Ron Howard (major xtian propagandist) have teamed up to dupe the sheep again. This time they have the church being infiltrated by bad guys, while making some reference to the churches "bad" early days. The overall message being that the basis of the catholic church is "good" and "for the betterment of all" with some "bad apples" occasionally being mean. The movie vacilitates back and forth between the church being bad and then just "misunderstood." The end has the usual Ron Howard xtian warm and fuzzy ending with all parties reaching consensus that the church has done it's best and is trying to reconcile science with religion via a "progressive" new pope (who Tom hanks just happened to save in the movie from death) with better times to be had by all. The movie seeks to expose past abuses by the church by insinuating it was bad decisions and some bad apples but not the overall churches fault. Sick movie meant to mindfuck the masses. Tom Hanks is an asshole for doing this, but what do you expect from an orthodox catholic playing the role of an anti catholic academic?

 

[chalchiuhnenetzin]

I think I'm going to be seeing it because my daughter wants to (since she got married in January we don't have all that much mother/daughter time together--LOL) and hope I don't toss my proverbial cookies ... Sounds like another of their junk movies ... (You can sometimes get a laugh, but not when the script extends to blasphemy ...). Personally, I prefer books ...

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "blackshadowstallion" <blackshadowstallion@... wrote:

That's the book, though.

Once something goes through the big channels in Hollywood, it must be jew-approved.

I have always liked Tom Hanks. Ron Howard I'm not so sure about.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "waltermassey1" <walter_massey@ wrote:

woah woah people, hold on here, the book was all about church cover ups, how science was suppressed by the church, all sorts of things we like. i didn't watch the movie, because i have my principles about movies&books, but i know the book was quite anti-church, as was the da-vinci code. even the the latter was pro-xianity, but still anti-church

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Monie" <hecatemother@ wrote:

Whew, I saw it coming and I won't even bother to watch the filthy movie!
I could smell the jew-stench when I saw the previews and another Tom Hanks film.....

Not to mention the "insulting and blasphemous" insinuations in the movie about evil and the devil and all that bullshit.

--- In [url=mailto:[email protected]][email protected][/url], "Dante" <heathendante@ wrote:

Well, I just watched the Tom Hanks movie and I should have seen it coming. What a crock of absolute shit! As usual, Tom Hanks (an orthodox catholic as is his wife) and Ron Howard (major xtian propagandist) have teamed up to dupe the sheep again. This time they have the church being infiltrated by bad guys, while making some reference to the churches "bad" early days. The overall message being that the basis of the catholic church is "good" and "for the betterment of all" with some "bad apples" occasionally being mean. The movie vacilitates back and forth between the church being bad and then just "misunderstood." The end has the usual Ron Howard xtian warm and fuzzy ending with all parties reaching consensus that the church has done it's best and is trying to reconcile science with religion via a "progressive" new pope (who Tom hanks just happened to save in the movie from death) with better times to be had by all. The movie seeks to expose past abuses by the church by insinuating it was bad decisions and some bad apples but not the overall churches fault. Sick movie meant to mindfuck the masses. Tom Hanks is an asshole for doing this, but what do you expect from an orthodox catholic playing the role of an anti catholic academic?