Is this an atheist film?
-
catalina_caesar — 18 years ago(July 05, 2007 10:21 PM)
Well, no, that's not what I meant. I was referring to the dilemma of the Cardinal. He had to choose political expediency (preserving the existence of the Jesuit order in Europe) over the lives of his priests at the Mission and the flock they pastored.
It's only hubris if I fail -
monum — 18 years ago(July 17, 2007 04:05 PM)
What made you think that? That was not the choice the Cardinal had to make. It was the choice between a far off mission field or the church in Europe. He chose the the limb instead of the body. Nothing to do with money, but perseverence.
I agree that church has made (and still makes) mistakes as it comes to power and money. But I think Father Gabriel embodies the true message in this movie: no compromise, no violence, just love.
In my opinion the Cardinal made a bad choice. Talking about limb and body. In the bible Paul writes about the suffering of a limb which causes the whole body to suffer. No doctor, no operation but the whole body facing consequences.
Jesus talked about the good shepherd leaving his flock searching for that 1 lost sheep. I think the Cardinal should have joined with Gabriel and the rest.
by the way, I find the movie cover posted on IMDB a bit misleading. It depicts Robert the Niro with a sword. But that's not the mission. On the DVD I have it depicts the missionary falling from the waterfall tied to a cross. That is what this movie is about: sacrifice of love. Not in a violent way, but a peaceful way. -
terramax02 — 18 years ago(November 04, 2007 01:01 PM)
Monum, i didn't just mean profit as in financial. I mean, that, when push comes to shove, religion isn't about the individual, but about the masses. As you said yourself, a few hundred were killed to save a few thousands.
-
jeff-1649 — 18 years ago(January 24, 2008 09:24 PM)
I'm turning the thread slightly to examine it from a different perspective. The movie is about accepting death, choosing to die only once, and then making courageous moral choices in the "darkness" of faith vs. the expediency of compromising, then dying the 1000 deaths of a coward. By "darkness" of faith I mean that the characters make their decisions amidst doubts, with no assurance of God's rescue. They're betting everything. That's gospel. That's the choice we all face, whether you believe in God or not.
-
anticaria — 18 years ago(March 21, 2008 07:44 PM)
<<<<<
yet that's exactly what the original poster intended. the message of this film is ultimately much simpler.. for the film merely is an ode to human empathy, devotion, and sacrifice for the plight of those less fortunate and considering that this film's most 'beautiful' characters, other than the amerindian natives themselves, are catholic priests, it is ludicrous beyond belief to attempt to paint this as an indictment on the catholic church or organized religion.. for ultimately, no religion is totally perfect.. re: they all ultimetely rely on the quality of the human heart to have meaning. in other words, the fault lies with human frailty, not with the religious message.
this beautiful film inspires the soul to new heights of sensitivity, empathy, and awareness. -
davidmw — 18 years ago(July 30, 2007 11:00 PM)
As a Christian when I saw this in '86 in the theater and now as a minister, the layers in this movie are complex.
Understand that Reagan was working against congress and arming "freedom fighters" against the government of Nicaragua. This was probably the most blatant act of our nation in trying to rid Latin America of "Communists." Liberation Theology was at it's zenith, perhaps fading, as the death of Oscar Romero in 1980 still hung like a cloud over the region.
Jeremy Irons, Father Gabriel, portrays one dominant thread of christian teaching and tradition: God is love. At it's best, it sacrifices itself, himself, in love for others.
De Niro, Mendoza, represents another thread, God calls us to fight for justice, to battle it with all our strength and courage.
This movie had the ability to speak out of history, address the current politics in the USA, boldly argue two passionate positions within the faith community and dared to challenge various communities within the church with a question: what does your faith really mean?
I hope this helps.
Peace, David -
kelly-anne — 18 years ago(September 27, 2007 01:53 PM)
As an historian, I can tell you that what I take from the film has really very little to do with religion per se, but rather any body politic competing against another for firm footing or the upper hand, with innocents harmed in the process. If you study Latin American history with any depth, you will find that while religion often presents as the institutional "face" of numerous situations, the reality of the situation really has little to do with religion at all.
That being said, there are so many valuable layers in this film that it would be a sad disservice to attempt to reduce it to terms of atheism versus organized religion.