It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

"It's just a movie."

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:09 PM
"It's just a movie." It's one of the most annoying sentences in the world to me. Can someone explain the logic of it?

It's an example of lazy, unintelligent thinking. It's simply the genetic fallacy:

The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea is either accepted or rejected because of its source, rather than its merit.
Even from bad things, good may come; we therefore ought not to reject an idea just because of where it comes from, as ad hominem arguments do.

However, it's a really, really poor application of the genetic fallacy. All films have some kind of script. So, saying "It's just a movie" is a misnomer. A film was an outline before it became a script. Then the script was written often with multiple rewrites by multiple writers. A film is ultimately handed over to creative people such as directors and producers to create the finished product.

The fact is, films are art. Film is a very complicated art form that requires tons of creative decisions and input sometimes by hundreds of people.

Before a typical film becomes "Just a movie" it first is "Just a book" because a typical film script of 120+ pages is actually a book and film scripts are often published as books. With all of the rewrites most scripts get with input of sometimes hundreds of creative people, the typical film script of a completed film is probably a lot more polished than your average published book.

Why am I comparing books to films? Because I've never heard anyone claim "It's just a book" when discussing the merits of theories presented in a book. I wonder why? Could that be because so many people base their entire lives on books such as the Bible and the Quran?

We can't be saying "It's just a book" in that case, can we?

Well, take a beloved religious film such as "The Passion of the Christ"... Is that "Just a movie"? A lot of Christians would say it's much more than a movie. Why? Because they consider it be an accurate portrayal of their favorite book. Why is that considered a valid argument by many in the "It's just a movie" crowd?

If a film is based on a book is it still "Just a movie"? Clearly not. However, I've never read or heard the sentence "It's just a movie based on a book." Why is that? If you're going to be consistent with your use of the genetic fallacy you have to stick to attacking the source of the material. And the film itself is almost never the true source (it can be but that's relatively rare).

Why would one form of art (such as books) be assumed to automatically contain more truth or validity than another form of art (such as films)? Does that make sense to anyone?

In conclusion, the statement "It's just a movie" isn't just a logically fallacious statement. It's a lie. A movie always begins with another source whether it's a book or a script (which is a type of book) or some other similar material.

I have no idea why people want to lie and distort reality by claiming "It's just a movie." What they gain by doing that is beyond me.
edit on 14-10-2015 by Profusion because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:36 PM
The matrix was just a movie....
12 angry men was art....

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:43 PM
For the most part, a movie is indeed just a movie. Not unlike how a painting is just a painting. The adage "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" applies. Not all movies are works of art, just like how not all paintings or statues are knock-your-socks-off amaze-balls. Similarly, not all music is ear candy, and not all novels are feats of the mind.

Eye of the beholder. Simple concept.

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:44 PM
And why do people want to lie and distort reality by taking a "Movie Script" (or book or that matter) and totally create a real theory from an idea that was most likely hatched on somebody's back porch after a few beers ? Let look at books and movies for just a moment. Lots of books are written for educational purposes and theory is outlined and presented.

Movies with very few exceptions are created solely as entertainment, many draw ideas from science and technology yes but very often distort it to fit whatever idea is being portrayed, heck, even non-fictional movies based on real events and people often distort, change, and make up from out of the blue total non sense to add "entertainment" value.

When people take a movie, oh let us say the Matrix Trilogy and create theory and ideas that we live in an artificial world or the Matrix itself then its not based on reality, on science, not even on their own Theories but someone else's ideas and someone else's creativity for an entertainment purpose, not reality. Its a fun idea and I am ready to entertain that we very well could live in some artificial world but not with some dude named Neo watching a screen with code on it.

Life does not imitate movies, movies imitate life and reflect how we live. Are there hidden codes in movies, most likely there are as so and so wants to put a piece of himself inside it so he can point at it and say I did that, kinda like Hitchcock and Stephen King making an appearance in the work they directed and wrote. Are secrets being told about our world from a secret society living inside Hollywood? I suppose it is true as again it is fun to believe in this sorta of thing but no evidence has ever shown to prove it in reality, they (those in Hollywood) are simply out to make a buck.

There are certainly times when life imitates movies as I see it all the time when people dress like movie characters and we buy cars because Bond drove it but again I have yet to see anything as far as a movie giving away secrets about Alien life or some secret Nazi shadow government attempting to over throw the world.

It would be counter productive for someone who is keeping a secret to reveal the idea in a movie and counter productive for someone who wished to expose a secret to hide it in some movie script that may or may not be seen by anybody. I suppose I could write a script about someone trying to do it and maybe it would take the box office by storm but it wouldn't mean it had actually occurred and therefore be ONLY A MOVIE.

And I would argue that "ideas" themselves are art. The very light bulb that goes off in your head to create and complete a sentence in the script of a movie is art, heck the human body is art and we are surrounded by art in this world and movies are way down on my list of art but there are many I have enjoyed (12 Angry Men is a fine example) and some that the light bulb itself should have been broken before the idea could even have been hatched so if an idea is just an idea, a movie is still only a movie I don't care how many people slaved over it and rewrote it, it is still just a movie, but an idea which started with one light bulb and one person is the art.
edit on 10/14/2015 by DJMSN because: addition

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 10:53 PM
a reply to: Profusion

You must keep repeating, "It's only a movie, only a movie ..." Otherwise, you might faint.

posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 02:12 AM
Your rant is pretty dumb op.
When people say "it's just a film" it's usually when violence is depicted or bad science etc.
It means that the people being hacked and slashed by the supernatural stalker aren't really in danger, it's just a film.
When some plot hole laden, bad science movie is being over analysed, folks will say its just a movie.

That is where the saying comes from.
Plenty of people do ridicule books in the same way, have you not read any religious threads at ATS?

posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 03:28 AM
a reply to: Profusion

i always figured "its just a movie" is another way of saying "allow for artistic license/liberty"

new topics

top topics


log in