Talk:Dogma (film)

message: *"In the wake of said attack, the leader of the "Free World" outed himself as pretty damned Christian."
-Eh? when was Bush not ready to say he was a born-again Christian? You'd have to be pretty unaware of the man's beliefs to not know that prior to 11-9.
- Yes and no, he wasn't officially making policy based on "Jesus" before 9/11. That's really where it starts being relevant.
I dont think its a reference since very few people cared about Bush in 1999, seeing as he became president in 01.
Actually they did.  The process to become President is a long one and Bush was elected in 2000.  He just assumed office in 2001.  Bush didn't "out" himself after 9/11.  He talked about his faith on many occasions.  It was no secret.  With all due respect to KS his knowledge on this subject is horrific.  That comment alone shows it.  I also think it is interesting that he decided not to make the film due to fear of Muslim extremism.  Maybe he should admit that there are peaceful religions that aren't that bad while there are violent ones that are.  Instead he seems to want to pair Christianity with Islam while at the same time his fears prove that they are different.  That doesn't seem to be far off the mark for him.  He wanted to make a movie called Redstate (referring to republican states) but the extremist he spoke of as an inspiration was Ken Phelps who is a democrat politician.  C'mon KS try to do a little better.  Don't fall into the typical Hollywood political claptrap and look like a fool.  
^ His fear only proves that they're different NOW. But that's now. The Christians have the Islamic beat to shit when it comes to commiting mass murder in the name of God. In fact, you could argue that they're at least partly to blame for some of the religious violence we see today. Certainly attacks on the west anyway.--94.171.184.82 (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Bush Referrence

message: :The word "fuck" is used 120 times in the film, a rough average of about .92 times per minute.
and the film is 130 minutes in length?
:According to the booklet accompanying the DVD, it's approx. 128 mins.--Absurdity 20:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it really necessary to have a "fuck" rate? "0.82 "fuck"s per minute" is a silly way of demonstrating that there is a lot of swearing in this film.  Also, is this sort of thing that needs a source?  I'm not sure if a count goes into original research or not. --Transfinite (Talk / Contribs) 03:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fuck Rate

message: 'the only living descendant of Mary and thus the only living relative of Jesus Christ,'
It never said she was a direct descendent of Jesus.
Or even a descendent of Jesus.
*In fact, Rufus explictly described her as Christ's great great great (...) great niece.  - SkarmoryThePG 15:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bethany's Decendant Status

message: Where in the movie did it say Bartleby was a Grigori?  I don't remember this
:during the chat with the messenger at the restaurant in beth's dream.
Metatron: Because he listened to his friend - a Grigori by the name of Bartleby.
Bethany : Grigori?
Metatron: One of the choirs of angels. They're called Watchers. Guess what they do?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DamianThalla (talk • contribs) 20:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: (?) (is this a Guardian?) --129.69.140.138 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Bartleby's Status

message: Ben Affleck as Bartleby, a former grigori. The link is not good. Perhaps it should go to Watcher (angel). 
:(?) (is this a Guardian?) --129.69.140.138 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bartleby, a "Grigori" 

message: Watcher_(angel)#Second_Book_of_Enoch / ("Grigori" redirects here. For the masculine given name, see Grigori (given name).) / --129.69.140.138 (talk) 17:06, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Book of Enoch 

message: Somebody added a bit to the trivia section pointing out a plothole (Saying that, since B & L were forbidden to reenter heaven as angels, it wouldn't matter if they entered as human and therefore there was no reason to keep them out), but that was inaccurate.  They were forbidden to re-enter heaven, period.  There was no mention of whether or not they had to be in any specific form, so even being human would have destroyed existence. JBK405 03:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Plothole

message: :"Over time, the filmmakers received over 300,000 pieces of hate mail including two-and-a-half death threats."
:If I may be so bold, what precisely constitutes "half" of a death threat?
Ruthfulbarbarity 17:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to go out on a limb and guess it's what is mentioned in the first paragraph of "Controversy", where he states that one letter started off threateningly, but became nicer, later on. --Alcalde 19:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Odd

message: Why is this listed as a cult film? 75.132.21.149 02:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cult

message: Shouldn't "Dogma (film)" point to the article about "dogma style" in filmmaking, the method and art ideology invented by director Lars von Trier? It is one of the most significant movements in art film making, many other directors follow this rule, especially in Europe. This Kevin Smith Dogma comedy is perfectly unknown and insignificant, nobody heard about it in Europe. 195.70.32.136 13:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is dogme. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually Dogme 95.--Absurdity 18:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And Europe has heard about it a lot. 78.43.231.69 (talk) 17:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dogma as in Dogville 

message: Why are there references to films which had not been made when Dogma was produced?  Surely the other films are referencing this one, not the other way round... Dave420 21:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to other films 

message: In the film, there are possible inconstitancies with religious mythology, for example: Azrael is actually one of the names of the Angel of Death; "Watchers" as a group were actually banished from heaven quite a time before the events depicted or mentioned in the film (and the reason for the Great Flood). Another is that the role of Metatron in the movie seems to be based mostly on the character's role in Good Omens, and that Metatron is considered somewhat ambigious, given that there "is no consensus as to his genesis or the role that he plays in the hierarchy of Heaven and Hell" (taken from the page on Metatron). (Note: I'm not saying that Kevin Smith explicitely stole the character, he gives credit to Neil Gaiman (co-author of Good Omens, along with Terry Pratchett) as one of the sources of inspiration for the film.)
Does anyone else think there should be a new section detailing any of this? I'm proposing the idea here simply because there are many more, and I may not be aware of all of them. --Absurdity 07:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand the need. In Norse Mythology, Thor didn't run around with a red cape and hubcaps on his chest, yet he does in the Marvel Comic books. If Kevin Smith wants to make a movie saying that Heaven is in Cleveland and Hell is in Belize, then, in the context of the movie, Hell is in Belize. And then Kevin Smith will be sued by the Belize goverment. Lots42 20:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Section?

message: Does anyone know if a video of this exists on the internet? --Discharger12 01:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check YouTube. --user.lain 23:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: http://glumbert.com/media/dogmaprotest Yeah. I'm removing the citation needed tag.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.221.0 (talk) 17:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dogma is Dogshit 

message: Under the description of Jay and Silent Bob, it says they saved Bethany from "demon hockey players". I think it would be more clear if they were simply referred to as "The demon triplets" or "the demon teenagers", as they do not play hockey so much as use the equipment to attack people. Noodlysoup 03:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Demon hockey players sounds right. They -look- like hockey players... Lots42 20:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demon hockey players or just teenagers? 

message: :[...]Though this may seem like an error, it is not, due to the fact that in the View Askewniverse timeline, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back occurs before Dogma. However, Strike Back does NOT occur before Dogma as Strike Back had various references from Dogma in the movie[...]
The way these two statements directly contradict themselves is bizarre... on what grounds does Dogma take place after J&SBSB? - furrykef (Talk at me) 22:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  So which is it? 

message: in the beginnig paragraph they censor a few curse words. I am removing this, due to wikipedia not being censored.66.176.172.119 05:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  censorship 

message: I think the Characters section should be merged into the plot section. Or at least, most of the info. Lots42 16:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Suggestion 

message: What was the beef with Linda Fiorentino ?? Did she pull a Lily Tomlin on set or what?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.18.82 (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it matters, which I do not think it does, any diva info should go on Linda's article. Of course, considering libel restrictions.... Lots42 (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is one thing that I would like to know... 

message: The plot summary was an overlong blow-by-blow account of the film, and rather difficult to read.  I've replaced it with a briefer summary from this earlier revision of the article. --Tony Sidaway 05:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot

message: The characters section is completely redundant and should be deleted. Lots42 (talk) 13:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters 

message: "...launches a campaign for a new form of Catholicism called "Catholicism Wow!", as well as discontinuing the crucifixion in favor of a more upbeat "Buddy Christ"...".
I think two words in this sentence should be changed, 'new form of Catholicism' to 'new revival of Catholicism' as they were simply trying to invigorate people's interest in the religion and not forming a new faith. The other is 'discontinuing the crucifixion' to 'discontinuing the crucifix'. Crucifixion is the act of crucifying someone (discontinued long ago, and I don't believe ever performed by the Catholic Church), and the Crucifix is the symbol they were retiring.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.39.134 (talk) 05:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Carlin/Cardinal Glick description 

message: The cast section info is almost as long as the plot section info. Redundancy is nobody's friend. Lots42 (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded.  Jabberwockgee (talk) 17:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Thirded, and it's my understanding that the cast section is supposed to describe behind-the-scenes information regarding why that actor was chosen, etc., not merely provide plot-related info. Doniago (talk) 18:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast section 

message: Reference your change on the Dogma page.  JDJ was not god.  God came to Earth, per what the characters say, because he likes to play skee ball.  That was one incarnation of god, him in a human male body, essentially...taking over a human body so that god could play skee ball.  The Alanis Morisette character at the end of the movie is a second, separate, god character, completely unrelated to the first.  To list them as the same character, is incorrect, as even the credits at the end of the movie split the two up.  The way it's listed now it makes it appear like Darth Vader, where James Earl Jones and David Prowse did in fact play the same character.  The ones here, need to be separated, or explained in greater detail to avoid confusion. 99.169.250.133 (talk) 06:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: God did not "take over" a human body...or at least there's no evidence to support it, that I'm aware of. Now if you'd like to say something like "An avatar of God" or "God's mortal incarnation", I'm fine with that. BTW, this would be more appropriate for discussion on the film page itself. Doniago (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, I'll copy and paste it over there.  The way I understood the movie, was that the angels, the metatron, Azrael, and God all took a human form.  I believe the metatron actually say something about god in human form during the movie.  Either way, there were two separate versions of "God" shown in the film.  "Taking over," similar to what used to happen in the TV show "Joan of Arcadia" wasn't what I meant, essentially I meant that God was taking a human form, whether that was a body of an already existing person, or a wholly new person, is unknown.  I stand by my edit of separating the two, as I mentioned in my previous post, putting them together makes it appear like they were playing the same character, when there were in fact, two wholly separate characters. 99.169.250.133 (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast - Bud Cort/Alanis Morisette Discussion 

message: The language in the leading section leaves the impression that this movie deals with the actual Catholic dogma. This is not true: angel's scheme would not work in real Catholic belief system for half a dozen reasons (that I can think of), and it's probably made deliberately absurd by Smith. Thoughts? Sustymenko (talk) 03:35, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you got some good references, sure, add it in. It would be noteable if this film doesn't deal with actual Catholic dogma. Lots42 (talk) 09:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, here is a decent overview: http://www.decentfilms.com/articles/dogma-article.html . I'm afraid this link is not RS enough and it definitely has a POV. Generally, most of the time in Dogma when anyone says anything "theological", it's inaccurate. The film shows that Kevin Smith can and probably does know better, but either doesn't care or keeps things absurd on purpose. This is not a criticism - I enjoyed the movie a lot. It's just, as the disclaimer goes, "the work of comedic fiction, not to be taken seriously".  Maybe I can keep it factual: "Note that in real Catholic theology, plenary indulgence doesn't mean forgiveness of sins. Moreover, B&L would not be in an appropriate condition to lawfully receive one" - and the authoritative reference for this would be Cathechism of the Catholic Church, Section 2, Article 4, subarticle X "Indulgence". Sustymenko (talk) 22:05, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just put Sustymenko's suggestion into a reference in the plot section, after the sentence "They can have their sins forgiven ..." In the leading section, I just changed the phrase "through a loophole" into "through an alleged loophole". Geke (talk) 13:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Loophole in Catholic Dogma" 

message: I'd like to add one sentence, but the Wikipedia guidelines really discourage Trivia sections, so I'm asking for ideas where to put this:
Morisette, who plays God in this film, had a son on December 25th 2010.
Geke (talk) 20:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: How is that in any way relevant to the film? DonIago (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dogma (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820073647/http://www.salon.com:80/ent/feature/1999/11/09/catholics/index.html to http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/1999/11/09/catholics/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120406194218/http://www2.citypaper.com/film/review.asp?rid=5941 to http://www.citypaper.com/film/review.asp?rid=5941
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dogma (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.viewaskew.com/theboard/viewtopic.php?t=41221
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/1999/11/09/catholics/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070110182540/http://www.fbi945movies.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=132290 to http://www.fbi945movies.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=132290
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:45, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Idk where to put this, but somebody posted a video on facebook of a q and a that Kevin does, and he confirmed that they finally reached a deal to release it again 159.250.40.187 (talk) 03:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have enough info about the video to create a proper citation? If not, it might be best to see if a secondary source picks this up. DonIago (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rights issues