MovieChat Forums > Home (2009) Discussion > Mistakes

Mistakes

posted 15 years ago by someone31337
25 replies | jump to latest

Anyone else notice the HUGE mistakes in the movie?

Minute 23, the narrator states "The first towns grew up less than 600 years ago." Are these people stupid?

Ancient cities like ROME (italy), ATHENS (greece), SPARTA (greece), BABYLON (persia), LUXOR (egypt), KARNAK (egypt) plus THOUSANDS of others are all from THOUSANDS (more than 2000) years ago! With ACTUAL proof of existance in the form of WRITTEN WORK!

Europe is filled with towns and cities that have more than 1500 years of existance.

This proves this so-called documentary HAS NOT had any ACTUAL research done. It's just a stupid misinformed propaganda movie, aimed at gullible people too stupid to notice.

Stop praising this obvious *beep* work. If it's fiction, MAKE UP WHATEVER. But if you call it a DOCUMENTARY, at least make sure it's FACTUALLY CORRECT.

People are just drones.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mickey-vickroy 15 years ago

It is too said. That is where I had to turn the movie off. It was comedy at that point because the narrator had already referred to the Grand Canyon in Colorado...no, she didn't say the Colorado River, she said "Colorado's Grand Canyon." I noticed a couple other small mistakes as well. I thought I could deal with them, but when she said towns sprang up 600 years ago...I was done. How the *&%$ did this get past any editor? If those mistakes were eventually fixed, there is still no excuse for releasing a documentary as wildly inaccurate as Home.

[–] shino_de 15 years ago

The narrator says it almost exactly at the 23 minute mark, at least in the extended version. I just watched the bit in the youTube version and it is cut out. And she stats a few minutes later, that 10000 years ago the invention of aggro culture gave birth to cites. So i guess it was a mistake made and corrected.

The thing i didn't get is how it made it's way to the extended edition and how the hell did it get recorded. I mean any person with half a brain knows that it's *beep*
So i thought about it, watched it several times and discovered that few sentences back she mentions "... after 180000 nomadic years ...". Which in context means Humans exist for 200000 - after 180000 + 600 years ago = the movie stats the first towns grew up about 20600 ago years ago(which sounds about right for me).
It's poorly written and i guess it was cut from the normal version for that reason.

[–] yparedes 15 years ago

Yes its a mistake in the English extended version. It should have been 6000 years as stated in other language versions

[–] shellorz 15 years ago

I don't know which version you've watched. I've watched the original one (in French) and at 00:23, Yann Arthus-Bertrand says "les premières villes sont apparues voilà moins de 6000 ans" so "the first cities appeared less than 6000 years from now" (which is relatively correct give or take a few centuries and depending on what you call a "city")

Yann Arthus is a really meticulous man. He wouldn't let such a blunder through.

Right after its broadcasting in France there was a TV debate with him. He's not the biggest expert in this field but he's the best as far as aerial photos and videos are concerned.

[–] tqz 15 years ago

Also, around minute 39, it is said that 500 million people live in the world's desert lands, more than the combined population of Europe. That is incorrect: the population of Europe is 730 million.

[–] ericpecher 15 years ago

It all depends on what you refere when talking about Europe...
In fact, the European Union has 499 765 000 inhabitants.
This excludes Norway, Switzerland, the Balkanic countries, Russia, Belorussia, Ukraine and Turkey.

So, the comment in the movie should have mentionned European Union instead of Europe maybe ?

[–] oxygenus 15 years ago

The European Union has nothing to do with geographical localization and repartization into continents.
Europe refers to the Europe continent, while the European Union is a political/super state, or something like that.
Going from "Europe" to "European Union" to make an argument about the population size mentioned in the documentary, is a logical flaw you shouldn't repeat.

[–] shellorz 15 years ago

weirdly enough most French, when talking about Europe, think about European Union (and so did Arthus-Bertrand). It's the same issue as when you refer to americans and people only think of people of the US. Brazilians are indeed americans...

Believe me, I'm french and most of the French don't think Ukraine or Turkey is part and parcel of Europe. The European "continent" is a too vague notion. Where does it stop Eastwards ? Supposedly the Ural mountains. But really we don't consider people over there (in Russia) as Europeans...

To me pop. of Europe is between 450 and 500 millions.

[–] mickey123mouse123 15 years ago

That was one of the most stupid things I've heard.

Europe is Europe. It is entirely based on geographical borders, NOT political.

Europe is NOT the same thing as EU.

Ukraine and a small part of Turkey is indeed a part of Europe. Don't you have schools in France??? OMG, what DO they teach the French???

Europe has a population of more than 0,7 billion, that's it.

Maybe we should exclude France from Europe for plain stupidity *LOL*, ...if what you say is correct about French people.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ericpecher 15 years ago

Micky123mous123,

your reaction is absolutely hilarious and disproportionnal. :-)
I'm from Belgium (next to France you know) and we too consider the term 'Europe' more on the political borders than on the geographical term if not clearly mentionned.

That's weirdness but that's what most EU people first have in mind when talking about Europe.

Exactly as Americans are talking about America (meaning the US) and not the American continent - silly enough but so true.

So this should have been more clearly stated in the movie - sure - but it's something european people (from EU) tend to do more and more.

[–] pip-69 15 years ago

The term Europe relates to the lands within the continent of Europe.

Not being an EU member does not exclude you from being European.

Morocco(which I will tell you is in Africa, as Geography doesn't seem to be your strong point), applied for EU membership in 1987, it was refused. But they now hold "elavated" status in relations with the EU. It is entirely possible and most probable that at some point in the next 10 years Morocco will become an EU member nation.

How can ANYONE argue that the term Europe could apply to an African country?

Europe is the physical lands of Europe. The EU is a political and economic agreement.

Comparing it to the terms used in "the Americas" is just plain stupid. We call Amercians, American because they are from the United States of AMERICA. We do not call the various Europeans, European. We call them English, Scottish, French, German etc.

The EU is all just typical French bollocks. Have nothing to be proud about in there own country and history so continue Napoleans failed work and create a European Superstate through politics and money. Screw the EU, europe has fought for century's to stop it happening, and now the French and the Germans sneak it in through the back door because they couldn't do it through force of arms.

Sorry but I really do not like the French mentality. Arrogance without respect. At least Germans show respect for other nations. The french are just a country of garlic eating, surrender monkey's out to grab as many scraps from the table as possible.

I for one would rather have the Dollar than the Euro. They may not be perfect but at least you know the AMERICANS aren't going to stab you in the back because you weighed a carrot in pounds and ounces.

[–] ericpecher 15 years ago

PIP-69, you're clearly melting various kind of anti-euro and anti-french hatered (with very interesting and funny points about garlic) that has nothing to do with the main concern on what European think the term 'Europe' and 'European people' apply to.

I know my geo, I know this sounds odd or even stupid but stating people ARE stupid or geographicaly uneducated because of this kind of naming oddness (happening in many part of the world) is laughable.
Reminds me of the Asia/India concept - saying that Indians weren't Asian (but are on the Asian Continent !) because they didn't look Chinese... very interesting points there too.

And no, Morocco has no chance at all to be part of the EU now or later - maybe in a few decades when EU changes its name to become something like 'United Nations of Euro-frica'... haha ! :-)

The conditions to enter the EU are very restrictive and require acceptance of all current members - which would be almost impossible for Morocco.

And NO we don't need or want US Dollars, thank you.
US could be very well stabbing in the back as well.
(See what they did in almost every third-world countries on the 6 last decades - I'm not saying they did worst than European countries but they were all the same)

[–] flobotnum 15 years ago

Well - Geography doesn't seem to be your strong point either. Geographically there is no "continent" Europe - it's a part - or subcontinent, if you want - of Eurasia. Europe is just a concept of political and cultural distinction. And the borders are in fact a matter of (political) debate and were constantly redrawn in history. For instance: you would instantly count Great Britain to Europe - but geographically it isn't even part of Eurasia.

And whether the editors of the movie's script count in the inhabitants of the Ukraina or not is completely besides the point - they wanted to make a point about the efficient and responsible usage of water. So please stop being a nitpicker.

The rest of your statements aren't even worth a response - it's just disgusting. Ericpecher just provided a very plausible explanation for the "500 Million Europeans" mentioned in the movie. He didn't do anything to you!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Manifestor 15 years ago

wolfram apha:

europe's population 591 million. stfu

and if there are mistakes, i dont get u people. instead of putting all ur effort in that pathetic knowitall attitude better channelize ur energies and contribute SOMETHING GOOD to humanity. *beep* retards

[–] letsmisbehave 15 years ago

I love, I love Glenn Close... All she says is true...

[–] Tish418 15 years ago

Who's wolfram apha?

Europe's population is well over 591 million.
Also, if you use proper English people might take you more seriously

-We've survived yet again-
-We've lost yet again-

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] marcos_ho 13 years ago

Actually, I agree with the previous French guy. I live in France too and we always talk about the Europe of the 27 (countries). Although I was born in another European country, I do not think of Turkey or the newly added ex-soviet countries as part of Europe because when I was learning geography, they didn't even exist. I know Russia is supposed to be both in Europe and Asia but I still do not think of it when I think of Europe.

[–] hugofranca-922-317788 13 years ago

I completely lost hope in mankind years ago specially because of people just like you. Instead of focusing on the important message of the documentary you were watching it trying to catch the errors, like a sucking leech waiting for the meat to come. You are the very essence of the whole rottenness in the world, the symbol of a failure as a human being, worms that deem yourselves qualified to "review" for your inability to create anything. I'll make sure to spit on your maggot filled corpse.

[–] medman1982 12 years ago

Couldn't agree more. However even If we include people like him (the OP) only a handful of us will ever see this documentary. The only people who will ever watch these (consequent upon their desire or quest for documentaries of this type) are already (at least at a certain significant level) aware of the problem.
I don't know why documentaries like this never make it to the popular media (at least state owned). I know many of you will say channels won't be able find airtime sponsors for these because most people are not into these kind of documentaries. But I think we haven't given them (the general audience) enough chance.
Just my point of view though.

my voting history
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=45098238

[–] emailaddress-600-852845 10 years ago

Yeah let's not focus on facts, let's just spread propaganda mindlessly like a chicken little crying that the sky is falling, claiming others are leeches while you sit in a dwelling you didn't build, wear clothing you didn't make out of plant fibers you gathered, type on a computer you didn't develop, using electricity you have just wasted commenting on a movie.

You are filled with hatred trying to blame the rest of the world for personal shortcomings. That hatred has no rational goal of trying to "create anything", rather it is only destructive. Hate always is.

How ironic you post intending to convey an intention to support LIFE, yet end your post with talking about spitting on a corpse. If you want to make convincing arguments then you need to apply a little logic and consistency to your posts and life.

[–] aliasbrush 9 years ago

Anyone else notice the HUGE mistakes in the movie?

You mean: Did anyone else notice the HUGE mistakes in the movie? Well, there's obviously no point in reading the rest of your drivel, since every single sentence you wrote contains similar errors.

Now, I bet you're thinking that I'm being pedantic. Actually, I'm using the exact same argument to dismiss your post as you used to dismiss the entire message of this film.

Everyone makes mistakes, and my guess is that the first one you listed was simply a typo in the script. Please show me one documentary over an hour long that doesn't contain any errors, let alone a project of this magnitude.