On another forum, someone posted a link to a trailer for Mel Gibson's The Passion. (Anyone heard of it?)

I viewed the trailer, but deliberately watched rather dispassionately, preferring to wait to see the final film and just where Gibson takes it (I had in mind the discussion the other day about emotional manipulation and sentimentalism).

Then someone made the following comment:

QUOTE

Wow. If you can look at that and not be moved...

Although the comment wasn't aimed at me, since I hadn't yet said anything, it felt like a bit of a slap in the face, like somehow I was sub-Christian if I didn't allow the trailer to "move" me. (As I said, I deliberately kept my distance while watching the trailer.) Anyway, I slipped into cynical mode:

QUOTE

If you can look at that and not be moved, then... ...well done for not being taken in by the slow motion effect and a stirring score?   Does the best answer win a prize?  :D Oops. [Snaps out of cynical-mode.] I must admit, I look forward to seeing Gibson's film. Sounds like we may have to wait till Easter 2004. If anyone wants to know how the story ends, they can PM me.

This provoked the following response:

QUOTE

My goodness, [Alvy]. You really do take cynicism to new highs (lows?)  :roll: Yes, the slow-mo and score do add to the drama, and yes, they are there for effect. That's what movie-making is about. But what grips me about the scenes is that they visually give me just a tiny inkling of the incredible sacrifice Christ made for my salvation. If you can look at that, and think about that, and not be moved, then your cynicism isn't something to be smug about. It's one step away from having a heart made out of stone.

I replied:

QUOTE

I was more cynical about your remark than about the film itself. I am just very wary of the potential of films to manipulate emotions, and I deliberately viewed the trailer dispassionately because of that, preferring to wait until I can see the final film and what exactly Gibson does with the story of Jesus. Your remark, then, felt like a bit of a slap in the face (and your second remark, that I am \"one step away from having a heart made of stone\" compounded it). I'm sorry my response was a little harsh--I was just trying to redress the balance.

Am I an insensitive turd or do I have a point? :?

Alvy wrote:
: On another forum, someone posted a link to a trailer for Mel Gibson's
: The Passion. (Anyone heard of it?)

Har har.

http://promontoryarts.com/viewtopic.php?t=100
http://promontoryarts.com/viewtopic.php?t=240

: . . . (I had in mind the discussion the other day about emotional
: manipulation and sentimentalism).
: . . . Although the comment wasn't aimed at me, since I hadn't yet said
: anything, it felt like a bit of a slap in the face, like somehow I was
: sub-Christian if I didn't allow the trailer to "move" me.

Well, people will look at you funny if you say you weren't "moved" by a lot of things, but yeah, throw religion into the mix, and suddenly you HAVE to be "moved", or there's something wrong with you. Kind of like all the discussion around patriotism and flag-waving.

: I am just very wary of the potential of films to manipulate emotions . . .

And not just films -- how about religious services? I got tired of the whole Vineyard-esque 'worship leader' thing a long time ago -- one thing I like about the Orthodox services I've been attending is that, yes, there is an element of "manipulation" there (as at least one member of the key members of the choir has been quite up-front about), but it is NOT subject to the whims of whoever happens to be playing the guitar that night; it is not the sort of "manipulation" that is designed to make me feel warm and fuzzy about God, but rather, grounded in centuries of tradition, it is designed to move me a little more out of my comfort zone and into deeper levels of contemplation. That's the idea, at any rate.

: Am I an insensitive turd or do I have a point? :?

Does it have to be either/or?

So I'm an insensitive turd with a point. Makes all the difference, eh?

I see the parallel between sentimentalism in film and in worship quite clearly: One of the main reasons I grew weary of charismatic worship, and finally left that kind of Christianity altogether, was that it was increasingly centred around emotions, yet attached to very little substance.

QUOTE

: I am just very wary of the potential of films to manipulate emotions . . .

well, just about any film with a score uses manipulation. i guess dogme films are the only type that can escape it.

QUOTE

And not just films -- how about religious services?  I got tired of the whole Vineyard-esque 'worship leader' thing a long time ago -- one thing I like about the Orthodox services I've been attending is that, yes, there is an element of \"manipulation\" there (as at least one member of the key members of the choir has been quite up-front about), but it is NOT subject to the whims of whoever happens to be playing the guitar that night; it is not the sort of \"manipulation\" that is designed to make me feel warm and fuzzy about God, but rather, grounded in centuries of tradition, it is designed to move me a little more out of my comfort zone and into deeper levels of contemplation.  That's the idea, at any rate.

i actually like films that make me emotional, even if they do it thru manipulation, as long as there is still substance in the movie. actually whenever i see critics using words like "melodramatic" or "manipulative" in a negative way to describe a movie, i make an extra effort to see it.
i guess that's why i like going to my church, a vineyard.

You are NOT a turd, at least in this instance, 8) or insensitive at all. One cannot account for someone elses emotional reaction to stimuli. Witness the debate over Val Kilmer in the Kevin Costner thread, for example. Deliberately shutting off while watching a clip is also perfectly defensible and I can understand why you might want to do that. What is on shakier ground is the jumping to spiritual ecstacy on evidence of press releases, news accounts of reactions, and a short film clip of anything. SOMEBODY must have swooned over Gigli before it was released. For me, I don't know yet if this film is going to work. I haven't seen it yet. I say, hang in there and do what you have to do to give a fair accounting of what you choose to see.

All's well that ends well. I just received this touching apology:

QUOTE

[Alvy,] I'm sorry. Please forgive me. I allowed you to represent the people, and what seems to be the prevailing tone on this forum, of blase cynicism that really does come across as cold and heartless.   I can understand why many people guard themselves against their emotions being manipulated. But I believe there's also a danger in that. You can go too far, and put up such walls of cynicism that you don't allow your heart to be touched...and that is just sad. [Alvy], I actually don't think you personally have a heart of stone; in fact, you are probably my favorite person on this entire board. I'm sorry I \"slapped\" you like that.

Cool. It still concerns me, though, that folks can get so hot to trot over fragments! And those fragments are pumped up by news accounts of private sneak previews too. I am becoming suspicious of the blind buildup for this film. Release it already.

Spoon wrote:
: well, just about any film with a score uses manipulation. i guess dogme
: films are the only type that can escape it.

Absolutely NOT. Dogme films may avoid one TYPE of manipulation, but to say that they escape manipulation would not be accurate.

I know how you feel about cynicism! I'm getting a bit tired of the whole "plight of starving children." Why can't they just go to McDonald's?! Geez!

QUOTE

I know how you feel about cynicism!  I'm getting a bit tired of the whole \"plight of starving children.\"  Why can't they just go to McDonald's?! Geez!

Oh! THAT'S just great. Now we'll have OBESE starving children. Have you no shame?

QUOTE

QUOTE I know how you feel about cynicism!  I'm getting a bit tired of the whole \"plight of starving children.\"  Why can't they just go to McDonald's?! Geez! Oh! THAT'S just great. Now we'll have OBESE starving children. Have you no shame?

Obese? What? They don't have playlands?

You know, they never had those playrooms with three feet deep piles of nerfballs when I was a kid, but then, Dad never took me to McDonald's. And they wonder why I'm a crank. :evil:

D'oh! When do I get this !@#$%&!! "newbie" thing off?