I'm not too interested in seeing that but it got me thinking of a Jesus-movie I saw years ago (and really liked) at the arthouse theater that doesn't even exist any more. I looked it up (by subject) at Amazon and I believe it's "Jesus of Montreal". I'll have to rent it and see if it's the right movie. I remember it was very thought provoking and sad. Amazon reviewers say there are funny parts; I don't remember that.
Posted by Sharon at May 27, 2006 08:29 PMLiked your post about Bushie the Daddy and his recent apologetics. but, keep the reviewing of movies to others. booooring.
Posted by Wesley at May 27, 2006 09:08 PMJust typical ride-the-buzz-to-the-box-office Hollywood b.s. Once the book becomes a "controversial" major bestseller, they cant get the movie with the inevitable Hanks, Willis, or America's sweetheart made fast enough. Whether Brown directly ripped off Holy Blood, Holy Grail, there's no question in my mind that his book wouldnt have been written if the first one hadnt been written. But, that kind of indirect plagiarism is difficult to prove in court.
Posted by jondee at May 27, 2006 09:08 PMI hope all those protesting Christians feel better that the movie wasn't as offensive as it could have been.
Pessimist - I think maybe you're missing a fundamental point about the Christians who are offended by 'The DaVinci Code.' They're never going to feel better about anything. They'll always be persecuted. It's their divine right dammit and they're gonna be persecuted until they die, or the Rapture, whichever comes first.
The source of any perceived slight is irrevelant. If there's no slight, they'll manufacture one (e.g. the war on Christmas, the war on Easter, etc). These people will never be satisfied about anything.
There's some sort of self-identification with the persecution of Jesus going on. Feeling persecuted makes them somehow feel closer to God. It's weird.
As HL Mencken said Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.
Given that Holy Blood, Holy Grail is complete fiction, DaVinci Code is indeed guilty of stealing Holy Blood, Holy Grail's main idea. But as Holy Blood, Holy Grail was sold as non-fiction, there's no way anybody could win any kind of suit alleging copyright theft, as we've seen in that English trial.
Posted by Brian Bell at May 27, 2006 09:15 PMSharon: "Jesus of Montreal" was a great movie. Good call!
Posted by tempus at May 27, 2006 10:04 PMI live across the street from the NYC Opus Dei headquarters. Once they stop whipping themselves I will tell they you think it sucked.
Posted by Peter at May 28, 2006 01:24 AMThe movie couldn't be edited any worse than the bible was.
Posted by TIKI AL at May 28, 2006 03:57 AMExcuse me Jim Faith, but that is a bunch of crap.
Posted by Judith at May 28, 2006 06:09 AMI thought the movie was pretty good, though I read the book I can't remember it very well.
There were some critics/protesters, they stood by the exit watching us all leave - very odd but in character.
One comment I'd make is that the film "exposure" kept jumping around throughout the movie, often within a scene - it seemed amateurish and was distracting.
Posted by tom at May 28, 2006 06:34 AMA crippled queer, a bewigged French tart and Tom Gump made Da Vinci thoroughly enjoyable corporate fascist entertainment for the unwashed and ill-read masses. Opie ought to be shot. Dan Brown is an idiot. Why not spend all that money on Da Bush Coda? An eye-opener revealing just how fucked up the USA is?
Jesus of Montreal is a fine film. Yeah, but them old French Quebec folks go out and shoot Indians for fun.
Posted by Mal Feasance at May 28, 2006 07:33 AMJudith - why is my comment a bunch of crap? Please be specific.
Posted by Jim Faith at May 28, 2006 07:47 AM"They're never going to feel better about anything. They'll always be persecuted. It's their divine right dammit and they're gonna be persecuted until they die, or the Rapture, whichever comes first."
"There's some sort of self-identification with the persecution of Jesus going on. Feeling persecuted makes them somehow feel closer to God."
Where do you get this stuff? I hate generalizations, and the above statements are just that, generalizations with no basis for fact. If you believe that way, fine. However, I would suggest that you state that it is your belief before making this sort of an accusation. Obviously, you know nothing about Christians, but I can guarantee you they do not believe it is their "divine right" to be "persecuted until they die". "Feeling persecuted makes them somehow feel closer to God" is pure fantasy. This is the kind of stuff that makes for a good novel, maybe, but is not true in essence.
Personally, I don't give a damn about The DaVinci Code. It is a piece of fiction and should be read as such. However, SOME Christians took exception to the DaVinci Code because of what they feel was a story designed to mislead people about something that they believe in and value. Worse yet, for those who do not believe, it further misleads them in the history of Christ. Brown weaves facts in with a fictional story, and attacks the very foundation of the Christian beliefs. Since some people are incapable of sifting the truth from fiction, some Christians have found themselves having to defend the very basis of their faith.
Posted by Judith at May 28, 2006 08:56 AMIt's always baffling what will be the next literary fad. Who would have thought this particular novel about Christological speculation and fairly unimaginative hypothesis about the historical Jesus would be one of the biggest selling novels of all time? Speculation about a Jesus-Magdalene "relationship" (no offense intended) has been written about for centuries and been the subject of prior novels, such as Last Temptation.
It is amusing to see the "conservatives" lambaste DaVinci on the grounds it demonstrates once again the profound "liberalism" of popular culture and Hollywood's long standing battle-to-the-death with "traditional values". Yeah, and the fact DaVinci was one of the most enormous international bestselling novels of the past twenty years just had nothing to do with the fact Hollywood thought this might be a film that would interest people!
Far from showing Hollywood's ingrained hatred of "traditional values", all DaVinci does is demonstrate Hollywood's fealty to traditional values of MARKET CAPITALISM!
Posted by euzoius at May 28, 2006 11:30 AMObviously, you know nothing about Christians
I was born, raised and baptized in the Southern Baptist Church. For a significant part of my formative years, I was in Sunday School, Training Union and Church twice on Sunday; and on Wednesday night Bible Study. My Mother, one of the strongest influences in my life, was a devout Fundamentalist Christian until she passed away in 2001. My extended family of 20-25 remain bush-loving, Republicans in the 30% of our population who believe bush is a 'moral man,' in spite of his actions.
I would suggest that you state that it is your belief before making this sort of an accusation
You're right. I should have started my comment with IMO. However, I wasn't making any kind of 'accusation.' I was making a personal observation based on 50 years of interaction with family, friends and others in the fundamentalist community.
the above statements are just that, generalizations
Again, you're right. My personal observations were targeted at what I believe to be a vocal minority of Christians - the dobson, robertson, falwell wing - who have co-opted faith to further their own cults of personality (I know less about Escriva). Much of my frustration comes from the undue influence exerted by these, IMO, false prophets.
they do not believe it is their "divine right" to be "persecuted until they die".
I should have put the [/snark] tag after 'divine right.' It was a poor choice of words. However, I would argue that an identification with persecution is a manipulative technique used by the group I mentioned above. It's a fairly standard motivational technique, similar to sports coaches that try and cast their teams in an "us against the world" context.
Let me ask you - What motivates the seemingly incoherent rants of a streetcorner preacher?
What motivates someone to wear a cilice for 2 hours a day (why not 8 hours or why not 15 minutes)? From an Opus Dei newsletter
"Christians are called to emulate Jesus’ great love and, among other things, join him in his redemptive suffering. Thus Christians are called to “die to themselves.”"
IMO, these actions aren't required. They're done because 'the individual' performing the actions thinks they're doing some 'good.'
Also IMO, the people performing these acts miss the point. Jesus said (and I'm too lazy to look for the direct quote) "if your committment is sincere and you believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you'll be saved."
IMO, why don't these people quit 'performing' and start acting like Christians? We'll know them by their actions.
It is a piece of fiction and should be read as such. However, SOME Christians took exception to the DaVinci Code because of what they feel was a story designed to mislead people about something that they believe in and value
Agreed. Let me ask you however, when you say SOME Christians, do you believe Dan Brown wrote the book specifically to 'attack' or to undermine Christianity? Did you feel the same way about Martin Scorsese's 'Last Temptation of Christ?' IMO, the author's intent is not a malicious attack, but creative interpretation intended to stimulate discussion (and to make money).
some Christians have found themselves having to defend the very basis of their faith
Sad but true. Faith is a gift that one can accept or reject. It's in the realm of the irrational and can't be proven or disproven. Consequently, IMO, faith need not be defended. It simply is a part of one's life.
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to respond as I respect your opinion.
"They're never going to feel better about anything. They'll always be persecuted...
Yup. The big meme has always been the persecution of christians. It's sold that way in bible study classes, and it's sold that way during sermons. American christians are the absolute worst at claiming they've been persecuted or are going to be persecuted at some time in the future. It's the worst group of tentative sado-masochists I've had the ill-pleasure of knowing anything about.
Posted by phidipides at May 28, 2006 11:37 AM"Debris does not stay in one place in a fast-running creek. Let your grudges wash out into the sea. Your souls eye watches a spring-green branch moving, while the others cling to the old stories." Rumi
Posted by jondee at May 28, 2006 12:58 PMJim:
You mention two key factors. One, your Mother, a strong influence in your life was a "devout Fundamentalist Christian. Your family is also part of the Fundamentalists Community. Therefore, your personal observations are probably correct, and those who call themselves by the names of Dobson, Robertson and Falwell are indeed "false Prophets."
I was raised in the Methodist Church, and I can tell you that using "identification with persecution" was not a standard "manipulative technique" used, nor have I ever heard of it being used, except as you have stated, in the Fundamentalist Church.
Yes, Christians are called to follow the teachings of Jesus, and "die to themselves." However, "die to themselves" has nothing to do with suffering, as I am sure you are aware. "Redemptive suffering" is something out of the Fundamentalist Church. I have never been exposed to this so-called suffering.
Opus Dei is a wacko cult that should be banded. I have friends who's sister in now in the Opus Dei cult, along with her husband and three children. Now, they love to suffer. I will agree with that.
Once again, the mainstream church is being lumped in with other churches that believe or practice a very different kind of religion. For example take this exchange:
"Falwell concluded that God became sufficiently angry at America that he engineered the terrorist attack, presumably to send Americans a message."
"Jerry Falwell initially said that the American Civil Liberties Union has "to take a lot of blame for" the tragedy. Pat Robertson agreed. Falwell then continued: "And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the Pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way -all of them who have tried to secularize America -I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.' " Robertson responded: "Well, I totally concur."
This exchange is downright wrong, and has nothing to do with the real teachings of Jesus. Yet, while most Christians do not agree with this line of thought, others take this as representing what all Christians think.
No, I do not believe that Dan Brown wrote his book to specifically attack or undermine Christianity (although that has been the aftermath). I think he knew it would be controversial, and controvery spells M O N E Y.
Sorry for the too long of a post.
Posted by Judith at May 28, 2006 01:22 PM
"worst group of tentative sado-masochists"
Phidipides, shame on you.
Posted by Judith at May 28, 2006 01:23 PMThere are many people in this crazy, mixed up world who think we are in the last days. They believe the authors of the "Left Behind" are truly fortelling things to come. These people now have the ears of our government.
To suddenly have a movie hit the screen projecting Jesus to be someone other than what these millions believe in, or what they are trying to force on us as a national religion, suddenly throws a monkey wrench into their plans.
Posted by pol at May 28, 2006 01:41 PMAnyone think it was just a coincidence that (my) Left Behind with its Rooskie Anti-Christ who just happened to live in Baghdad, was being mass-marketed - and prominantly displayed in every friendly neighborhood Walmart - during the post 9/11 invasion run-up? The mayberry machievellis know what they're doing. Those are the deeply sick fucks that have always given Christianity a bad name.
Posted by jondee at May 28, 2006 02:09 PMI started reading Deception Point by Brown. He convinced me to write a book, because on the worse day I ever had, I could write better than that peice of crap. I had to ditch it after the third chapter.
Never did get to the revealing of the big'secret' because I was beyond caring.
Posted by SnarkyShark at May 28, 2006 02:24 PMJudith - The religious right has set Christianity back 200 years and good Christians like you unfortunately, suffer alot of the backlash from it. The best you can do is stand on your principals and not take it too personally.
Posted by jondee at May 28, 2006 02:38 PMJondee, you are absolutely right. I do take it too personally. I hate being lumped in with the war and hate mongering, right-wing wacko group. I shall try better in the future.
Jim, after all is said and done, we agree on more than we disagree. I apologize for saying that your words were full of "crap." My friends tell me that my worse fault is not being very diplomatic. They are right.
Have a nice evening all.
Posted by Judith at May 28, 2006 03:06 PMPhidipides, shame on you.
(Big Grin!) You caught me...
Posted by phidipides at May 28, 2006 07:53 PMJudith - no apology is necessary, we're just talkin' ...
Posted by Jim Faith at May 28, 2006 08:34 PMPhidipides, ha ha.
Posted by Judith at May 29, 2006 04:52 AM