Best viewed using IE in 1024 x 768

I have a major problem with "Signs"
01.19.03 @ 18:47
Diaryring of the Day:
Now Playing: Nothing, just listening to me type away

Well, I have something to write about. Well, nothing important but it really bothered me. I watched Signs last night. It's a really good movie and all, but there is something wrong with it. Mel Gibson's character Graham to put it bluntly. The acting was great, plot amusing, details totally wrong. Here's what was wrong, Graham is apparently a priest, a Catholic priest, by the way that he was dressed in the flashbacks. No biggie, right? Well actually it is because he's widowed with kids. Maybe I'm wrong and priests in Pennsylvania can be married, but the last time I checked they can't. Also, I do believe only Catholic priests wear the collar, I believe deacons don't really wear the garb. I may be wrong in that aspect, but then the movie should have said so. But the movie did not and Graham was referred to as 'Father' which only furthers the Catholic priest thing. Maybe the director is in his own little dream world or something, but can we please get the facts straight. If there is something in the movie that can tell me otherwise, will someone please alert me to it, because this really bothers me. Knowing how much effort goes into every little detail of a movie this is a disgrace to me that the director and the rest of those who worked on the film would overlook this, seeing as how it is a big part of the damned movie.

Other than that, there isn't much. I haven't done much today and I feel great. Well, I'm going to go and actually do something productive, like read Oedipus Rex for my Drama class. Laterz!

<<< || >>>

< # Online Diaries ? >