I suddenly realized that several articles I was reading in the space of 24 hours had a common theme: the refutation of current movies.

In Slate, editor Jack Shafer tackles George Clooney’s pick-and-choose history in Edward R. Movie – Good Night and Good Luck and bad history.

On Libertas, David Ross is reading The Da Vinci Code and, in anticipation of the Ron Howard adaptation featuring Tom Hanks, points readers to the book that refutes it, The Da Vinci Hoax. I have to wonder if the movie had to be made by Howard and Hanks, the all-American clean-cut nice guys, in order to hope to market the film. Not that the book isn’t a big hit. The problem is that WAY too many people seem to think that the book is something more than just a trashy thriller. In 2003, my wife Melinda, artist Robert Bavington and I relaxed after Wizard World Dallas by visiting a wax museum. Included in the many sections was a segment on the life of Jesus. As we looked at a dramatic scene of the crucifiction, two ladies wandering behind us whispered back and forth: “Oh, I was just reading The Da Vinci Code. Some pretty interesting stuff. I’m learning a lot.” I had to bite my lip to keep from interrupting them with, “It’s not a college textbook, it’s fiction!” Why is it that every kid in the world is perfectly capable of comprehending, despite their parents’ worries that they’re on the path to devil worship, that Harry Potter is just goofy fun, but adults grab The Da Vinci Code and think that the author has all this evidence about The Truth Of Christianity but decided to release it in the form of a mediocre adventure?

Not that you can’t enjoy the book, or the movie, for what it is. I had a ball watching “National Treasure” even though it’s pure malarkey.

Anyway, back to the discussion of refutations:

I wish I were able to attend the Liberty Film Festival, but even though my wife and I have that time off I can’t really justify a trip to California just to sit around watching movies for a weekend and flying back. (I can’t even justify doing that for Comicon!) One of the intriguing things about this second annual festival is that it features a preview of “Dead Meat”, a full-length documentary set to debut in 2006 as a refutation of the ideas put forth by Michael Moore’s next film, “Sicko”.

Moore’s film isn’t even out yet, but this film aims to answer him. What I like about this is that, unlike “replies” like FahrenHYPE 9/11, this movie is striking out to take the opposite tack of its own accord. If Moore abandoned “Sicko”, the movie “Dead Meat” would still have a purpose instead of simply being an argument with Moore. It’s a step up in the quality of responses to Moore’s success.