MovieChat Forums > National Treasure: Book of Secrets (2007) Discussion > SPOILERS***'Laboulaye lady'?***SPOIL...

SPOILERS'Laboulaye lady'?SPOILERS

posted 16 years ago by skin_job
8 replies | jump to latest

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but how can a cipher written before April 14, 1865(and supposedly for the purpose of helping the confederacy win the war) reference something that's part of a statue (the Statue of Liberty in the Jardin du Luxembourg in Paris) that wasn't designed and built until 1870 by Frédéric Bartholdi long after the civil war ended, and wasn't even conceived of by Laboulaye himself until after April 14, 1865...which in turn references "twin desks" that weren't built until 1880...which presumably is when the artifacts found inside those desks were placed there by Queen Victoria for the purpose of .....HELPING THE CONFEDERACY WIN THE CIVIL WAR BY FINDING THE LOST CITY OF GOLD???

Those writers should get twenty lashes with a wet quill pen.

My arse "Let's go"...they're filmin' MIDGETS!

[–] puirt-a-beul 15 years ago

! Great post, sj.

Guess it shows you can't ask too many questions about these movies ...

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] superstringy 15 years ago

You're exactly right. I don't see how stuff like this makes it to screen. If they had even a semi-historically accurate script I'd be happy, but this is just too ridiculous to fathom. Do a little homework next time, writers!

aNAGAh.

[–] unimportantmail 15 years ago

When they read the President's book, it says Laboulaye will hide clues at a later date. He did conceive of the statue in 1865. In 1870 the first model was made.

[–] skin_job 15 years ago

Read my post more carefully.

Objects in spoiler appear wittier than they actually are

[–] jack-upland 15 years ago

It's not really a case of writers not doing their historical homework, but a sadly typical case of a plot where the resolution of the mystery doesn't make sense. The various clues that are introduced in the course of the movie are internally inconsistent.

The most basic plot hole is that, unlike in the first movie, there is no real explanation as to who planted the clues and who knew of the location of the City of Gold. The strongest indication is that it was Queen Victoria, but how would she know, what is her connection with Laboulaye, and why is she planting clues in the US President's desk??? (It is also suggested in a passing remark that Laboulaye was a Mason, but this not followed through.) Moreover, though the President credits Ben Gates and co with discovering the City of Gold, it appears that Calvin Coolidge had found one half of the Olmec inscription and made the connection with Mt Rushmore - not only that, but recorded it in the Book of Secrets so that the information should have been available to every following President!

[–] jack-upland 15 years ago

PS The writers must have known about the chronological problem because they mention the date 1876 in the film twice. I think they also mention the date of the Lincoln assassination too.

[–] andi1459 15 years ago

Guys! It was time travel! Now we know the plot of the third movie.

J.R. Celski Love
Loriginals #23
Mythical Beast Randler of RhettandLinKast!

[–] giltemp1 14 years ago

Very, very good point. My only answer is the majority of the demographic was not quite the historian you are. And you must admit, it made for a good story...

SPOILERS***'Laboulaye lady'?***SPOILERS

SPOILERS'Laboulaye lady'?SPOILERS