Okay, these are movies I like, or like a whole lot, or think highly of. But not sure I'm quite ready to put my votes behind them as distinctively spiritual. Anybody make a case for any of these?

28 Days Later - lots of religious imagery at the outset, but does it add up to anything more than a "most people are really nasty, if push comes to shove" movie like virtually all other end-of-civilization-as-we-know-it movies?

American History X - guy has a change of heart, awakening of conscience. Maybe that's enough for me.

Apocalypse Now - Is "the horror, the horror" really enough to count as spiritual? One of my most overwhelming film experiences, but does that make it right for this list?

Blade Runner - Looks cool. Can't remember anything spiritual, but it's been a long time. "What's a human soul?" - I guess, but that feels feels more like philosophy than something that has a lot to do with my faith. What am I overlooking?

Close Encounters of the Third Kind - Is it a divine encounter? Nope, it's just space men.

Days of Heaven - Really mulling this one. Love it. It's always had a kind of Old Testament quality to it - relentless moral consequences, smallness of humans in the face of immense forces.

Do The Right Thing - The faith element missed me here.

Field Of Dreams - Okay, a huge favourite. But really, is Iowa heaven? Are these ghosts actually holy? I can see stuff here, but I also feel the weight of the author's anti-Christian strain, and I can't decide: do I take him at his word when he says Christian faith is bogus, you want REAL religion, check out baseball. Is he comparing a false impression of Christianity as religion with a sacred view of everyday life that is actually closer to the heart of Christianity? Or does he just share my idolatry?

Hannah and Her Sisters - Good portrait of a family, sure, but where's the God stuff?

Ice Storm, The - Yes, a clear-eyed picture of moral compromise and its consequences. But how is that particularly spiritual, moreso than a thousand other such films? (Again, I'm not arguing a point, I'm probing to come to terms with this. I feel like I sense something Christian behind the vision of the piece, and nosing around to find out more about the author suggests that that's maybe so. But... Where is it, in the film?)

Jean de Florette
Manon of the Springs
- These were much-recommended by Christians 20 years ago. I saw them, and couldn't understand why. Any help here?

Master & Commander - Cool sea battles. Tangible sense of life aboard ship. Nifty stuff about leadership, about friendship. But, spiritual? I'm really at sea on this one.

Memento - Cool, smart roller-coaster ride. Spiritual?

Punch-Drunk Love - Really liked this one a lot. Guy falls in love, strives to become a different guy. Wonderful theme, wonderfully realized. But how is that more spiritual than a hundred other such films? AS GOOD AS IT GETS comes first to mind, but nobody's nominating it. Do we just like PTA? Would we even be considering this one if it weren't for MAGNOLIA?

Like Judas said, "I only wanna know."

I agree with you for the most part, Ron, but...

QUOTE

28 Days Later - lots of religious imagery at the outset, but does it add up to anything more than a \"most people are really nasty, if push comes to shove\" movie like virtually all other end-of-civilization-as-we-know-it movies?

See my review here.

QUOTE

Blade Runner - Looks cool.  Can't remember anything spiritual, but it's been a long time.  \"What's a human soul?\" - I guess, but that feels feels more like philosophy than something that has a lot to do with my faith.  What am I overlooking?

Blade Runner asks "what's a human soul" by asking "What's a machine soul?"

QUOTE

Do The Right Thing - The faith element missed me here.

We're not making a "faith" list--we're making a "spiritual" list (although I'd rather ditch both to some extent). Therefore the interconnectedness of human beings and races is a very important issue.

QUOTE

Hannah and Her Sisters - Good portrait of a family, sure, but where's the God stuff?

Oh, go see this one again if you missed that.

QUOTE

Jean de Florette Manon of the Springs - These were much-recommended by Christians 20 years ago.  I saw them, and couldn't understand why.  Any help here?

Esp. Manon has to do with deceit, mystery, and hope. I would argue strongly in its favor.

QUOTE

Master & Commander - Cool sea battles.  Tangible sense of life aboard ship.  Nifty stuff about leadership, about friendship.  But, spiritual?  I'm really at sea on this one.

Yes, let's get this one off the list. IMHO it's also way, way too recent to even be consiered.

QUOTE

Memento - Cool, smart roller-coaster ride.  Spiritual?

Of course! Do our memories give us our identity or do we create our own? (apologies to mike_h) Etc. Etc.

QUOTE

QUOTE 28 Days Later... See my review here.

Broken link.

QUOTE

QUOTE Blade Runner - Looks cool.  Can't remember anything spiritual, but it's been a long time.  \"What's a human soul?\" - I guess, but that feels feels more like philosophy than something that has a lot to do with my faith.  What am I overlooking? Blade Runner asks "what's a human soul" by asking "What's a machine soul?"

Still sounds to me like a general Phil 101 question, one that doesn't seem to resonate for me with things that seem more essentially spiritual. I mean, the nature of a soul, that should be spiritual, yes? Don't know why it doesn't strike me that way. Maybe because it doesn't come up much in scripture? Don't know.

QUOTE

QUOTE Do The Right Thing - The faith element missed me here. We're not making a "faith" list--we're making a "spiritual" list...

Oh, I don't know about that distinction. It seems likely that the title of the list, and certainly of the discussion board it represents, includes the words "Arts & Faith." Faith and spiritual seem pretty closely related terms.

QUOTE

Therefore the interconnectedness of human beings and races is a very important issue.

Sure it's an important issue. The core of my question (on this film and most of the others in this thread) is, "There are lots and lots of films on this theme / issue. Why single out this particular film, for this particular list?" Again, bear in mind that I'm not arguing against its inclusion: I'm asking for specifics to help me remember or learn why folks around here are specifically drawn to this title, rather than, say, any of this director's other films?

QUOTE

QUOTE Hannah and Her Sisters - Good portrait of a family, sure, but where's the God stuff? Oh, go see this one again if you missed that.

Probably can't, by Friday. I'm hoping somebody can remind me of some specifics about the film that will make me say, "Oh yeah, there really is something about this one that fits our list, more that all those other family dysfunction films."

QUOTE

QUOTE Master & Commander - Cool sea battles.  Tangible sense of life aboard ship.  Nifty stuff about leadership, about friendship.  But, spiritual?  I'm really at sea on this one. Yes, let's get this one off the list. IMHO it's also way, way too recent to even be consiered.

I've no objection to recent, as long as we remember to give fair consideration to films a little less vivid in memory.

QUOTE

QUOTE Memento - Cool, smart roller-coaster ride.  Spiritual? Of course! Do our memories give us our identity or do we create our own? (apologies to mike_h) Etc. Etc.

Again, to me that just sounds like philosophy. Interesting, important, valuable, significant, sure. But spiritual? I'm still looking for the angle. The aspect of MEMENTO that comes closer to making it list-appropriate is the film's concern with guilt and culpability, intentionality, vengeance - all themes I find throughout the New Testament (indeed the whole Bible). Which does incline me to find them just that much more closely related to spiritual questions.

Okay, I've not been particularly fond of divorcing the element of "Spiritual" from the rest of life by having "Spiritual films" and "Non-spiritual films" but now we're claiming that philosophical is not spiritual?

What exactly IS spiritual? Ron, do you have a working definition?

Thank you--Paul certainly seemed to think Christianity was philosophical. And there are plenty of philosophers who wrote an awful lot about God.

[quote]Days of Heaven - Really mulling this one. Love it. It's always had a kind of Old Testament quality to it - relentless moral consequences, smallness of humans in the face of immense forces.[/quote]

I love it too. The OT quality you remember is probably because, basically, it's the story of Abram in Egypt (Gen. 12:10-13:1), without the happy ending...[/quote]
Ah! I think you've got it.

[quote]...because there's no God in the film's universe, just random chance (represented, I guess, by the child narrator).
...I guess we should take it off. [/quote]
No God in the film's universe? Hmmm... Not sure that I would agree. Not sure that I'd disagree. Just not sure.

Maybe this would have been a good candidate for the MoMA film series on "The Hidden God" - Is God involved in the events of this story? Seen, or unseen, by the characters? By the audience?

And, God or no... Does the "plague" in this film come by random chance? Doesn't feel that way to me, watching the film: it seems all tied in with the events going on among these humans. But I'd have to watch it again to get a better idea of where that sense comes from - or whether it still seems there at all for me.

The child narrator is one of the things I most love about this film. She's so amazing. I guess I never saw her as representing something in particular. She seems more to provide a viewpoint for the film, a child's eyes through which we watch the events unfold. Sometimes she sees something more clearly, speaks something more truly, than we would be able to, because of her naivete. Sometimes she misinterprets a thing, and the interest is in the irony between what she understands and how we perceive it as adults. But I wouldn't be surprised if there's more to her than I've noticed so far. It's such a rich and nuanced film.

I'd argue for Days Of Heaven, but definitely not the others ones. At all. Except for the two I haven't seen.

Seriously though, PDL, Memento, 28 Days Later??? Spiritual? Come on...

: Apocalypse Now - Is "the horror, the horror" really enough to count as
: spiritual? One of my most overwhelming film experiences, but does that
: make it right for this list?

No. Do not vote for this film.

: Field Of Dreams - Okay, a huge favourite. But really, is Iowa heaven?
: Are these ghosts actually holy? I can see stuff here, but I also feel the
: weight of the author's anti-Christian strain, and I can't decide: do I take
: him at his word when he says Christian faith is bogus, you want REAL
: religion, check out baseball.

Yes. Do not vote for this film.

: Hannah and Her Sisters - Good portrait of a family, sure, but where's
: the God stuff?

That would be in the Woody Allen subplot, with the brain tumor, with the musings about the meaning of life, with the trying out different religions to see what fits, with the big final soliloquy to Dianne Wiest. Also, lesserly, the Caine/Hershey subplot, like C&M, is about the lack of tellurian punishment (even self-punishment) for immorality. Please vote for this film.

: Memento - Cool, smart roller-coaster ride. Spiritual?

I have not yet decided if you should vote for this film.

: Punch-Drunk Love...Would we even be considering this one if it weren't
: for MAGNOLIA?

No. Do not vote for this film. Even though I very much like it.

Also, please someone explain:

American Beauty
Life is worth living because paper bags float in the wind? I suppose that's the spiritual aspect.

Close-Up
Hey, I voted for The Wind Will Carry Us, and I certainly would have voted for A Taste of Cherry (someone please Part 6 AToC), but Close-Up seems to me one of Kiarostami's least explicitly spiritual films.

Gladiator
See Ron on Master and Commander.

In The Mood For Love
ItMfL rocks, but I do not know what is more spiritual about this film than about The Bridges of Madison County.

The Last Days of Disco
It has been a long time since I saw Disco, which I liked (if it's my least favorite of Whit's three films), but I don't recall anything remotely spiritual. I'm no doubt forgetting something, however.

Metropolis
It's been a long time since I etc.

O Brother Where Art Thou
John Goodman's Bible salesman, perhaps? The Man Who Wasn't There would have had a stronger case for this list, I'd argue.

Dale

[quote]Okay, I've not been particularly fond of divorcing the element of "Spiritual" from the rest of life by having "Spiritual films" and "Non-spiritual films" but now we're claiming that philosophical is not spiritual?

What exactly IS spiritual? Ron, do you have a working definition?[/quote]

Nope. And if I did, I wouldn't want to be arbitrating that definition for everybody else here. I'm as much probing for other people to take a run at that question as anything.

I'm certainly no sacred/secular separationist. Truly, anything in life can be holy. Indeed, for me, that's kind of the whole point of my own Christian life.

And don't mistake me as saying there's some sort of "spiritual"/"non-spiritual" dichotomy: that a film is either Spiritual or Non-Spiritual. Not at all.

But one thing we've said from the outset of this list-making thing, we're not just looking for The 100 Greatest Films Of All Time, nor are we intent on making a list of Our 100 Rave Faves. We're looking for films that have some particular resonance for this board, which after all has a not-inappropriate "Arts & Faith" moniker.

After mulling the question for the many weeks we spent before actually defining and launching the list, it occurred to me that the annual PFCC awards include a category that is distinctive to this group. Everybody else's list has best actor, best cinematography, all that: the one that the critics at this board has designated which is unique (as far as I know) is the one for "Spiritually Significant" film. Now I'm not part of the Promontory Film Critics Circle, so I don't know how they have defined that, but a look at the kinds of films they nominate and select gives one an idea. If everything is equally spiritual, or equally spiritually significant, why isn't the best film of the year also the most spiritually significant film of the year? Answer that question, you'll have a handle on what distinguishes the films we're hunting for on this Top 100 Spiritually Significant Films list.

Back to the specific points in question here, I definitely concede that my qualm about "philosophy" is entirely my own qualm, and I'm not trying to justify it or impose it on anybody else. But I can't see that just because philosophers gravitate to certain topics, that those topics are necessarily "spiritual" - or at least, that they are necessarily "spiritually significant." Surely some philosophical discussions are moreso, some less?

A few stabs at what marks a film as having a strong spiritual component. For me personally, the more Jesus was concerned with a particular theme or issue or pursuit, the more likely I am to say it's a distinctively "spiritual" thing. To a lesser degree, but still the case: if it's a major theme in the Bible in general, it's more likely to strike me as "spiritual." A film that includes a recognition that there's something in the universe beyond what our five senses directly convey to us is at least a little bit "spiritual": the more that "something beyond" rings true with the "something beyond" that I recognize as True, the more likely I am to value the "spiritual" aspects of that film.

To be clear, "spiritually significant" films aren't the only kind of film I like, nor are they only one that God is present in, or can speak through. Far from it. God can speak through a donkey or a rock or whatever he chooses, and God is present - in one way or another - everywhere. But on the other hand, aren't there films that seem far more full of, or far more preoccupied with, something divine?

All for now.

[quote]O Brother Where Art Thou
John Goodman's Bible salesman, perhaps? The Man Who Wasn't There would have had a stronger case for this list, I'd argue.[/quote] Oh I don't know. I mean, these guys are on a journey toward their salvation, as the prophet tells them at the beginning. While Pete and Delmar get baptized ASAP, it's really the Clooney character that is central here. After spending the entire movie explaining everything scientifically and discounting any kind of spiriutal talk, he eventually falls to his knees in prayer in the face of death and an overtly devilish policeman. This film strikes me as being filled with spiritual imagery, and wouldn't want to discount it because of that.

[quote]Quote:
Ron wrote:
:Master & Commander - Cool sea battles. Tangible sense of life aboard
:ship. Nifty stuff about leadership, about friendship. But, spiritual?
:I'm really at sea on this one.

Yes, let's get this one off the list. IMHO it's also way, way too recent to even be consiered.

I've no objection to recent, as long as we remember to give fair consideration to films a little less vivid in memory. [/quote]

I respectfully disagree that M&C lacks spiritual content. Are you forgetting Stephen Maturin and the sequences on the Galapagos? The discussions of God's role in creation (and/or evolution)? Check out Overstreet's review:

http://promontoryartists.org/lookingcloser...ndcommander.htm

"O Brother, Where Art Thou?" -- I agree with John; I think this film is filled with spiritual imagery and content (and what a rich soundtrack, too).

"28 Days Later" -- I was moved in my spirit by this film. Its portrayal of man's depravity and innately violent tendencies (a la Romans 3:10ff) should satisfy any Calvinist. And again, the music: any film with music from Faure's 'Requiem' is worth extra consideration.

QUOTE

\"28 Days Later\" -- I was moved in my spirit by this film.  Its portrayal of man's depravity and innately violent tendencies (a la Romans 3:10ff) should satisfy any Calvinist.  And again, the music:  any film with music from Faure's 'Requiem' is worth extra consideration.

Really? I must see this film. I'm not naturally drawn to this type of film. And we are agreed on Faure'

QUOTE

QUOTE \"28 Days Later\" -- I was moved in my spirit by this film.  Its portrayal of man's depravity and innately violent tendencies (a la Romans 3:10ff) should satisfy any Calvinist.  And again, the music:  any film with music from Faure's 'Requiem' is worth extra consideration. Really? I must see this film. I'm not naturally drawn to this type of film. And we are agreed on Faure'

Not to mention Abide with Me (even though that song has an extra meaning in England). My review is here BTW.

QUOTE

Not to mention Abide with Me (even though that song has an extra meaning in England). ...

Say more?

QUOTE

QUOTE Not to mention Abide with Me (even though that song has an extra meaning in England). ... Say more?

Alvy, Matt Page, Mr. Lawhead, derek or someone else could probably explain it better, but I think one of their 'football' teams (Manchester United?) plays that hymn after every game, almost like the national anthem.

Yes, here's a link that mentions it.

QUOTE

Days of Heaven - Really mulling this one. Love it. It's always had a kind of Old Testament quality to it - relentless moral consequences, smallness of humans in the face of immense forces.

I love it too. The OT quality you remember is probably because, basically, it's the story of Abram in Egypt (Gen. 12:10-13:1), without the happy ending...

{Then we're missing part of Beth's erudite post because Ron The Sorcerer's Apprentice Administrator hit the wrong button etc, then we pick up with...}
...because there's no God in the film's universe, just random chance (represented, I guess, by the child narrator).

{Then more missing, then...}

...I guess we should take it off.

[i]*

{Then, returning to find her post hopelessly messed up, Beth commented...}
Um--what happened to my post? I didn't write any of this stuff, except the quotes within the larger quoted post, yet it appears to have been posted by me. Is someone else, perhaps unintentionally, using my account?

It's a weird feeling, let me tell you.

Thanks

BethR--yes, really.

Insofar as Gladiator goes, I agree with something Colson wrote about it:

QUOTE

Although most discussion of the film emphasizes the spectacle and bold imagery, Gladiator unmistakably celebrates virtue over vice, selflessness over selfishness, and loyalty over ambition. Yes, it is also very violent -- be warned -- but the film provides its own critique of the violence it portrays. Commodus reinstates the gladiatorial games abolished by his father. Instead of ruling for the good of Rome, he uses the spectacle of the games, and he appeals to the basest impulses of the people to distract them from his own tyranny. Maximus, on the other hand, yearns for peace, but fights in the arena because he hopes to win his freedom and serve the ideal of Marcus Aurelius. He believes that how he lives has significance, not only for this life, but for the life hereafter. And because he lives with a view to eternity, he will not betray his principles. This noble warrior does not exhibit strength and honor only on the battlefield. When he refuses to kill a defeated opponent, his mercy makes a mockery of the cruelty of the emperor. Even as a slave, Maximus displays the virtue that makes him, not just a great soldier, but a good man. Now, you may find this film too violent for your tastes or for family viewing. But I'm thrilled that crowds are flocking to it. It's not often that Americans are given such a clear contrast between moral goodness and evil, and given such a high view of virtue. In the process, they're foretelling, in a sense, \"The Greatest Story Ever Told,\" because they are reminding all of us that the way we live does have eternal consequences.

This movie inspired me specifically because he consistently gauged his actions on eternal consequences--even when he could have re-consummated his relationship with Aurelius' daughter, he abstained due to his desire to remain pure and true to his wife, that he might see her in the hereafter--in a moment that could have easily swung the other way...

QUOTE

Field Of Dreams - Okay, a huge favourite. But really, is Iowa heaven? Are these ghosts actually holy? I can see stuff here, but I also feel the weight of the author's anti-Christian strain, and I can't decide: do I take him at his word when he says Christian faith is bogus, you want REAL religion, check out baseball. Is he comparing a false impression of Christianity as religion with a sacred view of everyday life that is actually closer to the heart of Christianity? Or does he just share my idolatry?

For me this is one of the most spiritual films on the list. But I guess I'd see its spirituality as more allegorically Christian than directly. I suppose ultimately its a movie about faith, taking risks for God, and finding healing and coming to terms with the past. I don't actually remember the anti-Christian line in itself, so I can't really comment other than to say it clearly didn't dissuade me from seeing the film's spirituality. Maybe its just cos I'm a charismatic, maybe its cos I wept like a baby when I first watched it, or maybe its cos it was one of the films in a period when my hearing God in the movies moved to a whole new level, but I guess that for me the faith assigned to various characters in Hebrews 11 & 12 seems very close to Costner's responses to the voices he hears.

I'm hoping this is one of the films that comes out near the top.

Matt

: PDL

Well its the unconditional love / grace thjing for me that does it, and the way it protrays that as healing Barry, and as Amanda Caldwell says its basically a movie about redemption.


: Gladiator

Well I did pause before voting for it, but I think its significant that the movie has a strong afterlife focus. It may not be Christian, but it is spiritual. I can't remember who said it, but basically there's no way a fil with such an overt afterlife aspect to it would have been made 10, 20 or 30 years ago.


Matt

And American History X:

There are definitive moral and spiritual issues raised by the film, as well as questions of societal conditioning versus inherency. Three of the characters in this film all come to terms with God in some way (Derek [Norton], Sweeney and the guy in jail who Derek talks to whom I can't remember his name at the moment) and all of them for the positive. Though there isn't out-and-out mention of Christ, the primary 'life changer' in the story does mention that he used to hate God, but no longer does--he has made his peace with Him--and this while visiting the imprisoned Derek in hopes of softening his heart.

For me, this is not only a redemptive film, but reflective of how much a positive parental influence is needed, and how easily hatred and ignorance can destroy lives if tolerated without being addressed--but how, once addressed, they can indeed be overcome. And in this film, I kept running into the underlying sense that God--and not mere 'spirituality,' but the Presence of God--is accessible and integral to changing a personal paradigm for the better.

QUOTE

Um--what happened to my post?  I didn't write any of this stuff, except the  quotes within the larger quoted post, yet it appears to have been posted by me.  Is someone else, perhaps unintentionally, using my account?....

SORRY, Beth! My goof-up. See, I got made the administrator of this forum, and I don't really know my way around the bells and whistles just yet. So when I went to reply to your post, I accidentally hit "Edit" instead! Mea culpa - I'm afraid I edited out part of your post, and my response now looks like your original comments. Sheesh. What a goof.

I'll figure out what to do to try and restore some sense to your post. And will be much more careful about those darn administrator buttons!

QUOTE

QUOTE Days of Heaven - Really mulling this one. Love it. It's always had a kind of Old Testament quality to it - relentless moral consequences, smallness of humans in the face of immense forces. I love it too. The OT quality you remember is probably because, basically, it's the story of Abram in Egypt (Gen. 12:10-13:1), without the happy ending...

Ah! I think you've got it.

QUOTE

...because there's no God in the film's universe, just random chance (represented, I guess, by the child narrator). ...I guess we should take it off.

No God in the film's universe? Hmmm... Not sure that I would agree. Not sure that I'd disagree. Just not sure.

Maybe this would have been a good candidate for the MoMA film series on "The Hidden God" - Is God involved in the events of this story? Seen, or unseen, by the characters? By the audience?

And, God or no... Does the "plague" in this film come by random chance? Doesn't feel that way to me, watching the film: it seems all tied in with the events going on among these humans. But I'd have to watch it again to get a better idea of where that sense comes from - or whether it still seems there at all for me.

The child narrator is one of the things I most love about this film. She's so amazing. I guess I never saw her as representing something in particular. She seems more to provide a viewpoint for the film, a child's eyes through which we watch the events unfold. Sometimes she sees something more clearly, speaks something more truly, than we would be able to, because of her naivete. Sometimes she misinterprets a thing, and the interest is in the irony between what she understands and how we perceive it as adults. But I wouldn't be surprised if there's more to her than I've noticed so far. It's such a rich and nuanced film.

Jason Bortz wrote:
: Gladiator . . . inspired me specifically because he consistently gauged his
: actions on eternal consequences--even when he could have re-
: consummated his relationship with Aurelius' daughter, he abstained due
: to his desire to remain pure and true to his wife, that he might see her in
: the hereafter--in a moment that could have easily swung the other way...

Ah, you mean kinda like how Braveheart did, eh?

Not quite. I didn't get the sense from Braveheart that Wallace's journey was intensely and primarily personal in the way I did from Gladiator.

I'll write more on this when I'm not at work; for me there are similarities--and also vast differences--between the two pieces...

QUOTE

QUOTE Um--what happened to my post?  I didn't write any of this stuff, except the  quotes within the larger quoted post, yet it appears to have been posted by me.  Is someone else, perhaps unintentionally, using my account?.... SORRY, Beth! My goof-up. See, I got made the administrator of this forum, and I don't really know my way around the bells and whistles just yet. So when I went to reply to your post, I accidentally hit "Edit" instead! Mea culpa - I'm afraid I edited out part of your post, and my response now looks like your original comments. Sheesh. What a goof. I'll figure out what to do to try and restore some sense to your post. And will be much more careful about those darn administrator buttons!

Thanks for the explanation, Ron, and the restored post! I feel much better now It's the kind of thing that could happen to anyone.

You know, it's not as if I would have really objected to having your ideas attributed to me, 'cause they were fine ideas. They just weren't mine!

OK--all done with that!

Wow, I agree with Colson for a change. Thanks for the comments on 'Gladiator,' Jason.

QUOTE

Wow, I agree with Colson for a change.  Thanks for the comments on 'Gladiator,' Jason.

I don't because of the way it was filmed. I--cynically perhaps--think Scott was deliberately putting us in the seats in the colliseum, making a statement about the hoi polloi of moviegoers.

When I saw it in the theater, many folks were enjoying the violent spectacle just as the Roman crowds would have.

You can't fault Rome for the violence of its entertainment and then use that same violence in an entertaining manner. Well, you can--but that's hypocrisy.

Considering Scott's Hannibal, I don't think he is capabile of criticizing the violence of a society.

Jason Bortz wrote:
: Not quite. I didn't get the sense from Braveheart that Wallace's journey
: was intensely and primarily personal in the way I did from Gladiator.

I was referring more to the fact that Russell Crowe's character stayed true to his dead wife whereas Mel Gibson's character didn't. Though I guess one could always say Mel knocked up the Princess of Wales FOR SCOTLAND!!! So it's not, like, a PERSONAL infidelity.

Alan wrote:
: You can't fault Rome for the violence of its entertainment and then use that
: same violence in an entertaining manner. Well, you can--but that's hypocrisy.

Or irony.

QUOTE

I don't because of the way it was filmed. I--cynically perhaps--think Scott was deliberately putting us in the seats in the colliseum, making a statement about the hoi polloi of moviegoers. When I saw it in the theater, many folks were enjoying the violent spectacle just as the Roman crowds would have. You can't fault Rome for the violence of its entertainment and then use that same violence in an entertaining manner. Well, you can--but that's hypocrisy.

Wow, that was exactly my wife's reaction to the film immediately afterward, and I have to say in retrospect, mine as well. Initially, I was more blasé about the whole thing. Yes it was a grand spectacle, there were some spiritual elements, and maybe even the clear dividing line between good and evil (ala Colson), but my wife's and Alan's point really resonate with me now. I just find it difficult to get really excited about a film in which I am supposed to be (and apparently the bulk of the audience is) entertained by that which is supposed to be so morally repulsive not only in our minds, but even in the world of the film (at least from the point of view of the protagonist). And that makes the supposed dividing line between good and evil compromised to my mind.

I just didn't think GLADIATOR was a very good movie. Pure mellerdrammer, a bombastic potboiler that was a real fun ride but nothing more. I don't object that others liked it more than I did, but I'm still confounded that people consider it substantial in any way.

I understand the RAIDERS claim to significance much better - both Peter and Jeff have put that forward very cogently. And STAR WARS - well, as much as all that "Force" stuff seems less profound to me than to its many advocates, I certainly recognize that it's an essential element of the films, and remember that those movies sparked an immense amount of discussion (and publication) about spiritual things in their day (and on the internet ever since). But GLADIATOR? Nah. Not convinced yet.

QUOTE

Wow, that was exactly my wife's reaction to the film immediately afterward, and I have to say in retrospect, mine as well. Initially, I was more blasé about the whole thing. Yes it was a grand spectacle, there were some spiritual elements, and maybe even the clear dividing line between good and evil (ala Colson), but my wife's and Alan's point really resonate with me now. I just find it difficult to get really excited about a film in which I am supposed to be (and apparently the bulk of the audience is) entertained by that which is supposed to be so morally repulsive not only in our minds, but even in the world of the film (at least from the point of view of the protagonist). And that makes the supposed dividing line between good and evil compromised to my mind.

I was actually so upset after watching it that I went home and wrote a poem about the experience. I also didn't like the incredibly private idea of heaven we see throughout the film. It felt like an SUV commercial or something. What if you have a crummy life now? Is heaven crummy? A private heaven is an irrelevant heaven.

I remember noting during my viewing that some folks were more upset when the tiger was killed than by the slaughter of all the people on the screen.

[quote][quote]Wow, that was exactly my wife's reaction to the film immediately afterward, and I have to say in retrospect, mine as well. Initially, I was more blasé about the whole thing. Yes it was a grand spectacle, there were some spiritual elements, and maybe even the clear dividing line between good and evil (ala Colson), but my wife's and Alan's point really resonate with me now. I just find it difficult to get really excited about a film in which I am supposed to be (and apparently the bulk of the audience is) entertained by that which is supposed to be so morally repulsive not only in our minds, but even in the world of the film (at least from the point of view of the protagonist). And that makes the supposed dividing line between good and evil compromised to my mind.[/quote]
I was actually so upset after watching it that I went home and wrote a poem about the experience. I also didn't like the incredibly private idea of heaven we see throughout the film. It felt like an SUV commercial or something. What if you have a crummy life now? Is heaven crummy? A private heaven is an irrelevant heaven.

I remember noting during my viewing that some folks were more upset when the tiger was killed than by the slaughter of all the people on the screen.[/quote]

All of these things, I'd venture--particularly the way the film somewhat encourages a disproportionate response to the death of a tiger vs. the deaths of humans--point to the film's foundations being sentimental rather than truly spiritual.

I didn't have a problem with the violence at the time, but later I began to feel uncomfortable with it, and I think when I wrote an article comparing Gladiator to The Fall of the Roman Empire I began to realise how differently the two handled the violence / comodus issues there.

[quote]I was actually so upset after watching it that I went home and wrote a poem about the experience. I also didn't like the incredibly private idea of heaven we see throughout the film.[/quote]
But I don't agree that this is a private heaven. I mean for a start we see his wife an child are there, and I can't remember anything to suggest that they are on his own. In fact I'd say that judging by the fact that Maximus's heaven seems to be very close to his earthly home I'd say the implication is that its not a private heaven. I don't know about you but an afterlife that is an improved (new) version of earth seems to me not too disimilar with the way I see the bible describing heaven coming to earth and renewing it and realesing it from its bondage.

Hence why I voted for the film I guess.

Matt