This is why context with these quotes is so important. This is a scene from book 5, “Apollyon”. Rayford is in the midst of a decline in his walk with God. He is later rebuked by a fellow believer for his attitude, which is slowly deteriorating by this point in the series. Two books later, God himself gets Rayford’s attention and tries to snap him back to reality.
In Rayford’s defense, this scene also takes place after four books worth of clear, bone-chilling proof that God is real. There is some very human frustration in Ray that people aren’t getting it even when it’s obvious.
The Christians are portrayed in this series as realistically as the nonChristians. They are human and they have flaws.
I said that because, from earlier posts, it appears that the makers of the movie had an agenda to make a literal view of Revelation appear to reach certain conclusions.
As for whether I object to it … well people can do what they want. What I object to, however, is a movie that paints a picture that is just flat-out inaccurate. Especially if they portray it convincingly.
Perfect example is the just mentioned “Last Temptation” movie. Even if you don’t have a personal relationship with Jesus and consider the movie a slap in His face, just look at the grotesque historical inaccuracies! The movie doesn’t “make you think”, it makes you recoil at how horridly wrong they got the story!
Another more recent example is the ineptly lame “Noah’s Ark” TV special, in which they had Lot … LOT!! … hanging out with Noah (Lot wasn’t born until several hundred years after Noah).
I haven’t seen “The Rapture” so I can’t really comment on it. I may have to check it out. At any rate, let me make my point one more way:
Suppose a movie was made about the life of Hitler. Suppose it showed him as a great guy who was “misunderstood”, who didn’t really want to kill the Jews but was forced into it, and was just riddled with historical inaccuracies. THAT’S the kind of thing that bugs me.
I really don’t have much of a problem with movies that have an agenda. Some of my favorite cinema consists of the “Why We Fight” series from WW II. It’s an artifact, not only of the times, but of the people who made the movie. The same goes, really, for just about any movie, when viewed from the right distance in time.
I remember seeing some “Left-Behind”-like flicks a friend of mine loaned me when I was stationed in Korea. They were filmed in the late '60s and early '70s and looked it. The language, mode of dress, the whole look and feel of these movies screamed out “1969!” “1972!” I was surprised to note the ease with which one could pick which movie was filmed in which order. In their efforts to give their movies a “hip”, “mod”, and “with-it” look, the directors managed to turn these mediocre films into documentaries of their era. Even movies without an agenda promote the basic assumptions of the writers, director, and whomever has a say in what the movie says & how it’s produced. The best documentaries are the ones that weren’t intended to be one.
Unless you’re some silly, weak-willed boob, the Left Behind movie is unlikely to turn you into a mindless fundamentalist tool. If it does, the next movie you watch will turn you into something else, so don’t worry about it.
Now that I know the movie on tape’s the same as the one in the theaters, I think I’ll be viewing the tape. I can’t smoke in the theater, and I can’t get 'em to pause the movie while I go for a potty break. It’ll be nice to see a movie that attempts to have a plot, even if it is propaganda. I’ve seen too many movies with a basic premise and no plot* lately, and I don’t care if it comes across as a low-budget propagandist fantasy. At least they’re trying to communicate something besides “We wanted to make some money so here’s our movie.”
~~Baloo
*Dudley Doright is a particularly grievious example
I know exactly which movies you’re talking about! “A Thief in the Night”, “A Distant Thunder”, “Mark of the Beast”, and “The Prodigal Planet”. They are, for lack of a better comparison, the Christian equivalent of hokey Godzilla and Kung Fu movies. They are a blast to watch and laugh at the fashions and bad dialogue. They do have good messages but the plots are more entertaining for all the holes in them than for anything else. These are Christian B-movie classics!
I agree. Hopefully nothing would turn you into a “mindless fundamentalist tool”, whatever that is. However, if you are willing to consider the possibility of the existence of God, the movie will make you think.
Actually, they got the story almost bang on, since the story they made the movie out of was a novel called “The Last Temptation of Christ,” by Nick Kazantzakis. They were making a movie based on HIS version of Christ’s life - not Matthew’s, Mark’s, Luke’s, or John’s.
I’m laughing right now that someone thought of ‘The Cross and the Switchblade’ as a good movie. I suffered through most of it one night, it’s one of those movies that’s ALMOST ‘so bad it’s good’ but not quite, though there are quite a few funny scenes. There’s a really funny review of it here.
Alas, the poor little Christian movie that could didn’t even make the top 12 box office performers for the weekend. So much for that superb marketing plan.
But there have been movies that have tried to consider what made Hilter such a bad guy. Movies that look at Hitler as a human being and try to come up with a better explaination for him than “Well he was just evil that’s all”. You can accept or reject the movie’s (or book’s or whatever) conclusion but it’s still a valid subject of consideration, and as it involves speculation, does not neccesarily have to be absolutely historical accurate to be worhtwhile.
Likewise, “Last Temptation oof Christ” is not a “Jesus was a bad guy” movie. It speculates on the source of his goodness, and wrestles with the question of what it means to say someone is wholly God and wholly man- a question Christians have be contemplating since there have been Christians.
That’s probably because this is what LaHaye actually believes. If you want some insight into the mind of a madman, check out his latest (allegedly non-fiction) book, Mind Siege. I discussed the book a bit in the MPSIMS thread about this movie (RTFirefly started it, and it’s been pretty MPSIMSish, rather than argument or religious discussion, which is probably why it’s stayed over there). Basically, LaHaye is nuts. He thinks the evil humanists are hiding behind every bush and that they are involved in a huge one-world socialist conspiracy to wipe out Christianity.
FoG: “God’s Army” is a movie about the experiences of an LDS missionary. Now, what I’ve seen from your postings on this board, there’s no way you’d watch the movie and appreciate it for its portrayal of what missionaries of many faith go through. You’d get all bogged down in things external to the movie; i.e., the LDS theology.
I think I’m safe in saying that you’re already bogged down in things external to the LB movie.
[hijack]
FoG my friend, I cannot leave your mischaracterization of The Last Temptation of Christ without response. While it was in fact Kazantzakis’s interpretation of Jesus’s temptation, it’s by no means heretical.
You need to remember that in orthodox doctrine Jesus is truly God and truly man – only thus can He make the Atonement that brings God and man back together. He was “tempted in every way as we are, but did not sin.”
Examine the account of the Agony in the Garden. He chose to go through with the Crucifixion – it would have been the easiest thing in the world for Him to slip away, head over into non-Roman territory, and set up life as a carpenter along with Mary Magdalene – and she would no doubt have followed Him there just as she did to the Cross and the Tomb. The geography of the Jerusalem area at that point would have made it easy for Him to have done that, and something made Him sweat blood in choosing to do what He did.
You demean His choosing to do His Father’s Will, and effectively wipe out the point of those two quotes to the person wrestling with sin, if you make Him over into an actor playing out a script. He chose to do His Father’s will. And Kazantzakis knows this – and pictured his impression of what must have been going through His mind in that last and greatest temptation.
You demean His choosing to do His Father’s Will, and effectively wipe out the point of those two quotes to the person wrestling with sin, if you make Him over into an actor playing out a script. He chose to do His Father’s will. And Kazantzakis knows this – and pictured his impression of what must have been going through His mind in that last and greatest temptation.**
Thank you, Polycarp for stating this so eloquently! I watch Last Temptation (twice! The opportunity to see a longhaired, bearded Willem DaFoe running around in a loin cloth was fun!) and was struck by the final sacrifrice that he made after receiving the “vision” or “dream” just before his death during the cruxifiction. His willingness to make the sacrifice that is THE point on which Christian theology turns is significant.
As for the Left Behind movie, I think I’ll pass or only rent the video. Rather than being a movie which explores how the Book of Revelation might play out in the modern world, it sounds altogether too preachy and another attempt to convert people to Christianity by scaring them.
No, it wouldn’t be true, since there is objective evidence Hitler was not a good guy. On the other hand, there’s no objective evidence around the details of Jesus’s life. From a FACTUAL standpoint, the novel is no more or less an authority on Jesus’s days on earth than the Gospels.
**
Got any idea how I might find copies of these on video, assuming they’re available at all? I just love cheesy stuff like this. I was a big fan of both Elvira, Mistress of the Dark and MST3K …
What a massive disappointment. In their zeal to send a message, the producers apparently decided to go with a poorly written screenplay, cast weak actors, and basically made the story of the rapture, and the endtimes… boring!
I really detest that I wasted an hour and a half of my life on this drivel. Basic rule of filmmaking, is to get the audience engaged in the characters, so that we might actually care about what happens to them. Sadly, all of these characters are cardboard cutouts, who only occasionally show promise as 2-dimensional beings.
Where was the complexity of the human condition? Why was an event which should have been riveting, reduced to a schlocky mess.
I dare say, I can’t see many non-believers flocking to this movie. Those who do, are in for a movie that lacks the depth of your typical comic book, circa 1955. And true believers, are apt to be disappointed that such an opportunity was wasted.
The Rapture and endtimes could, indeed should, provide fodder for a truly wonderful movie experience. Someday, perhaps, that movie will be made. But this one isn’t it…
Since there seems to be some question as to whether or not there has actually been any genuinely good Christian art for quite some time, I thought I’d throw this one out and see what kind of reaction it gets. The following website (http://www.postfun.com/pfp/features/98/feb/wolverton.html) features some apocalyptic drawings by {b}Basil Wolverton**, a cartoonist whom some consider a genius. His work has appeared in such places as the early Mad comic books and in religious tracts as well as a number of slick magazines such as Look.
I find many of the pictures featured on that web page quite fascinating and disturbing, much like Heironymous (sp?) Bosch. I just want to find out if anybody agrees with me that these sketches (which were colored by someone other than Wolverton)are “good” – or at least respectable – art.
