Customer Review

195 of 229 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars In Our Day and Age... ****1/2, April 28, 2005
This review is from: National Treasure (Widescreen Edition) (DVD)
National Treasure is proof of what us "common" listeners, movie goers, readers and observers have suspected for a long time; That critics are usually wrong/stupid. This movie got bad reviews. Not even bad - abysmal reviews. And do you wanna know why? After everything is said and done, it's because there's no sex, no foul language, and it's entertaining instead of disturbing. Well we can leave them to the business of deciding what our likes and values "should" be, and we they can pontificate why movies they view with disdain end up as year-end blockbusters. With that being said, I feel I should come from a different angle. This movie is also NOT an anti-Christianity film (and I find it interesting that people would equate it as such, seeing as there are so many other mediums that are). The plain and simple facts: pretty much everyone involved in shaping this country: from establishing it, to breaking from England, from the signing of the Declaration of Independence, to the men we've elected as Presidents have been Christians. ALSO, more than half the men that signed the Declaration were Masons. Simple facts. George Washington was a Mason. Ben Franklin was a master mason. Lodges were established pretty much everywhere across the East Coast. There's no way to dispute these things because they happened. Coming to the conclusion that masonry is anti-Christian just shows a lack of knowledge on the subject (especially since most masons are Christian to begin with). This is a completely different topic (something that I wouldn't mind discussing with anyone via e-mail), so onto the movie.

It's well written, interesting, with a cliff-hanger look into history that more than acknowledges Dan Brown. (By the way, Dan Brown's new book is on the same subject as this movie. I'm not sure which is interdependent.) It's well produced, well casted, with very few lagging moments. The story is great and the American historical sights are filmed very well, showing masonic influence in virtually everything our Founding Fathers did. I really don't see how this can be construed as negative. Perhaps critics don't like Disney.

Seeing an early edition DVD of this movie, I can say that the special features are certainly lacking. Putting any type of "history channel" type documentary of the evolution of templars-to-masons would have been nice. Even masonry in American history would have been good. Basically, there's a 5 minute mini-history that covers the same ground as the movie or is common knowledge. Perhaps the "special edition" will have more. The lacking special features pales to the greatness of the movie. One of the best!

Overall: 9 out of 10.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-9 of 9 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 15, 2007 9:17:56 AM PDT
Joe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on May 20, 2007 8:14:39 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 20, 2007 8:17:37 PM PDT
You know, Joe, you're entirely missing this reviewer's point. Of COURSE critics don't openly criticize a movie for its lack of profanity! But just look at the movies that usually win Oscars. With few exceptions, they are usually chock-full of profanity!
By the way, how can you explain the fact that, according to you, the writing "sucked""(wonderful choice of words....do you ever read anything beyond third-grade level?), and yet the movie was a blockbuster??
Also, your comment that this reviewer is just "creating your own version of events to suit your own personal fiction" doesn't even make sense!! How about checking out YOUR writing, which is sophomoric, to say the very least?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2007 12:34:30 PM PDT
Joe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2007 12:16:19 AM PDT
My2cents says:
Please don't insult the reviewer, or those who disagree with you. Personal attacks ruin your argument.
That said, I agree with with the reviewer. This is a fun romp through history. As a Master Mason myself, I had a ball watching the story unwind. I laughed at the fallacies. But I watch it over and over precisely because it is fun, clean, and nobody is grinding their personal axe against my sensibilities, masonic affiliation, or my faith.
I listened to critics pan this movie left and right. Ebert and Roeper thought the action was not believable. ...and yet Indiana Jones can sneak halfway around the world on a Nazi sub with no one the wiser. LOL
I watched Christian critics echo the reviewer down the line. Then by pure luck a week later IFC channel ran a series on "Indie sex" in film. The critics gushed over films portraying child rape and other sick subjects acted out (On-Screen). They glowed as they rambled on about how one director after another pushed the "edge" and took them to places they didn't want to go. Showed them scenes they could barely stand, or couldn't stand to watch. In the end, no matter how sick, the film is nearly always portayed as a masterpiece.
I've cringed while "Facing The Giants" got a PG rating because of "strong religious content." The reviewer has a point and many people will stand up and agree. Hollywood, independent films and the critics live to push the gay anti-Christian agenda. Conservatives are bigots and left wing atheists are the enlightened-gods of tolerance leading the great Christian unwashed into their post modernist truth. Yes there are exceptions and generalizations are subject to error. This time, however we are far closer to being right than wrong. You just refuse to believe it.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 27, 2007 9:14:15 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 27, 2007 9:16:34 PM PST
1. Many of the founding fathers of the United States were Deists, not Christians - especially the most influential ones we honor today. They actually fought hard to keep the the religious advocates from influencing the secular government they were founding because the church controlled the British government to disasterous ends.

2. "the gay anti-Christian agenda" is a hypocrisy. There are many gay Christians and many Christians who support homosexuality (or at least equality from bigotry of any sect of society). Perhaps what B. Jeffrys intended to say was "anti-social conservative Christian agenda". There are many factions of Christianity and many interpretations of Christ's teachings. One well-funded and well organized sect that has undertaken a 30 year campaign for power by pushing a couple agendas (gay and abortion) because these issues raise money for their churches (this has been stated by church leaders) do not represent Christianity and CERTAINLY do not reflect Christ's teachings in any way.

3. I think one must look at movie reviewers in the same way we might look at architectural critics. They see so much of one thing (be it a style of movie or design of building) that when something new comes along they fawn over it as incredibly ground-breaking. In reality, it's just breaking their boredom. 20 years later, most architecture that was lauded as ground-breaking is universally considered an eyesore today. I think National Treasure will sustain more viewings over the long-run than most of the movies over which they fawn today.

Posted on Dec 7, 2007 3:19:30 PM PST
Amazon didn't post it's usual helpful/not helpful boxes. So I just wanted to say the author's review was very helpful. It's just what I always suspect about movie critrics. It never seems to fail that movies that are originally panned turn out to be under rated, overlooked, or neglected in hindsight.

Caddams

Posted on Jan 22, 2008 11:20:45 AM PST
Ricky N. says:
It was refreshing to see a film without the profanity, violence, and sex. Too many films put in profanity and nudity when it does nothing for the story line. "Jerry McGuire" was a prime example. I go to movies to be entertained and I was entertained. That is the bottom line for me. There are some Oscar winners that are bad films in my opinion. I just saw "National Treasure 2" and is just as entertaining as this one. I couldn't care less if the critics like it or not.

Posted on Jul 6, 2011 11:54:09 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 30, 2011 9:18:48 AM PDT]

Posted on May 20, 2012 3:11:14 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 20, 2012 3:11:58 PM PDT
Zuk says:
Interesting that you chose to use 3/4 of your 'movie review' to comment about your political and religious beliefs. Let's stick to the movie reviews here, and not go off on tangents about how christian the founding fathers were. That's not the story here or in the movie.

On that note, the movie had some continuity and logic flaws, but it's aimed at the very forgiving family and kids audience and was very entertaining. No spoilers, but both National Treasure movies were good with basically the same plot device. Similar, but both good family fun.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details

Item

4.3 out of 5 stars (933 customer reviews)
5 star:
 (519)
4 star:
 (264)
3 star:
 (80)
2 star:
 (37)
1 star:
 (33)
 
 
 
$14.99 $9.09
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Reviewer


Location: Dallas, TX USA

Top Reviewer Ranking: 1,774,483