The (Now-Overrated) ILX Top 100 Films of the 2000s Poll Results

pan's labyrinth had some pretty obvious pagan imagery in it...deserves to be destroyed imo

how is it a shaky reading - because there's not a flashing sign saying "Nazareth" or something so obvious a retard would see it? The mind-numbing literalism of some of folks' posts here is just really incredible. Are you serious or are you trolling?

― sarahel, Friday, February 12, 2010 7:32 AM (36 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

sarahel is any birth in lowly circumstances a reference to jesus' birth (and, look, i would actually be ok with you saying yes, it is!)

it's Jungian. all low births point to the same image. lucky for us, that image also points somewhere more distant into myth+symbol so it's not really Christian.

im saying--its fine to argue that all low births are christs birth--but then its NOT HEAVY-HANDED

ok, but how about the part when the baby grows up and gives the "sermon on the mount" -- that was kinda heavy-handed right?

ok, i retract using the word "hate" earlier. I did enjoy it. I'll basically just stick with Sarahel's last post.

it would also be great if we had more examples of 'heavy-handed religious references'

other than 'the baby was born in lowly circumstances'

can't believe the black girl didn't consider having an abortion

(typing this i realize some1 must have done this one upthread but fuck it)

the ship they are heading towards was called Tomorrow for god's sake. i'd think that would be the subject of heavy-handed accusations

(btw, i wrote god's sake in my post. that's a religion reference iirc)

yeah but you know the black girl was secretly an oppressed middle class working hero so it okay for her to assert her power xp

The baby is obviously going to grow up into a John Galt figure

maybe katherine heigl and seth rogen actually DIDN'T have sex? huh?

and that beardo guy is p biblical rite?

can't believe the black girl didn't consider having an abortion

(typing this i realize some1 must have done this one upthread but fuck it)

― V-E-R-Y (history mayne), Friday, February 12, 2010 12:41 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah Eric or Edward did it.

in what way is clive owen like joseph, the black girl like mary?

Uh - Clive Owen is the male companion that travels with the mother of the miracle child, and the black girl gives birth to the miracle child?

oddly enough, the first child to have been born in decades is a sign of hope and part of the film's political point is that s/he is low-born.

Sure - but that doesn't mean that it isn't also an obvious reference to the birth of Jesus.

have fun expunging all christanity from western culture!

Wow, you just aren't paying attention at all, are you? Did I say anything to that effect? No. For someone working towards an advanced degree, your reading comprehension is pretty shitty, dude.

Alright, I'll watch it tomorrow and see if there was any basis for me originally walking away from it the first time feeling like there was more than just a couple happenstance references to xianity.

xp- i think the expunging comment was in response to my originally half-assed anti-xianish comments.

even if the thing had tons of Christian references i don't see the problem. religion has a really important literary tradition. it'd feel more bullshit to me if a film dealing with the themes of Children of Men didn't deal with religion -- at the very least on a symbolic level.

hey sarahel just one more time--how exactly is the imagery and reference 'heavy-handed'?

can you give me some examples of religious reference that is not 'heavy-handed'?

If you actually had the bad taste to include Garden State on your ballot, at least have the balls to defend that choice.

xp max - Mordy makes a good point when he says that the lowly birth of the savior/hero figure is a common trope in myth and predates Christianity, but considering the prevalence of Christianity in Western Culture, esp. in America, its historical influence of it and its imagery, it's hard for me not to see it as a Christian reference. That doesn't mean that it's solely a Christian reference, or that it's propaganda, or that I think the script should be changed to "expunge" anything that could be viewed as a Christian reference.

Clive Owen is the male companion that travels with the mother of the miracle child

guided by an angel?

obvious reference to the birth of Jesus.

apart from the stable and... the story itself, how is it "obvious"? could have been a LOT obvious-er.

xp it's a fun film and i don't hate it? i quote the, "i haven't lied all week / really? / no" line often enough. i don't passionately love it enough to defend it, but i never got into the backlash thing and i don't see it as the Evil Zach Braff Shins Indie Twee whatever archetype it supposedly has become. it's fun, i love Natalie Portman, and i don't even hate Zach Braff. i thought the first few seasons of Scrubs were fun.

it could have been a lot more obvious, sure - it could have been a Mel Gibson movie.

xp max - Mordy makes a good point when he says that the lowly birth of the savior/hero figure is a common trope in myth and predates Christianity, but considering the prevalence of Christianity in Western Culture, esp. in America, its historical influence of it and its imagery, it's hard for me not to see it as a Christian reference. That doesn't mean that it's solely a Christian reference, or that it's propaganda, or that I think the script should be changed to "expunge" anything that could be viewed as a Christian reference.

― sarahel, Friday, February 12, 2010 7:51 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

youre not answering my question--i dont have a problem with reading the lowly birth as a reference to jesus--what i dont see is how its "heavy-handed"

birth scene at the beginning of 'parfum' is a reference to jesus

it seems to me that sarahel has hang-ups about religion, which is totally cool, but should just admit that instead of pretending like those personal hang-ups can lead to an insightful reading of the film

most of ilx has hangups about religion?

clearly not that much of a hang-up since CoM came in 2nd place in the poll

it's heavy-handed because it's such a big deal. It's heavy-handed because of all the trials and tribulations it takes them to get there. It's heavy-handed in the awe the other people have for the child. Yes, it is perfectly logical in the context of the narrative, but to me, that's an overly simplistic way to look at it.

...

It's heavy-handed in the awe the other people have for the child. Yes, it is perfectly logical in the context of the narrative, but to me, that's an overly simplistic way to look at it.

it's the first child to be borned in like 17 years?

that's kind of a big deal!

why is this a simplistic way of looking at it?

I think if history mayne posted solely in "."s and "-"s he'd be a much more enjoyable poster.

it's ok, i felt the same way when sarahel was explaining to me why Almost Famous is sexist. the opinions don't seem to bear any resemblance to the actual films i saw

You can't just dismiss the demands of the narrative like that. If there's no miracle baby, no trials and tribulations, there's no movie. Of course it's a big deal - it's the main driver of the plot.

btw, OT, i saw Synecdoche, New York yesterday (while on mind-altering substances) due to the recommendations of this thread. i ended up having serious nightmares from it and its wormed deeply into my brain. if i had seen it earlier it would've definitely been on my list.

xpost. I felt the same about the reading of TWBB as some kind of pomo orgy of wink-wink film references.

again, when you're making a movie about the future of the human race, there's practically nothing you can conceive that won't be far-reaching symbolism.

it's heavy-handed because it's such a big deal. It's heavy-handed because of all the trials and tribulations it takes them to get there. It's heavy-handed in the awe the other people have for the child. Yes, it is perfectly logical in the context of the narrative, but to me, that's an overly simplistic way to look at it.

― sarahel, Friday, February 12, 2010 7:58 AM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

sorry, what? the fact that the baby is born in lowly circumstances is heavy-handed... because the babys birth is a big deal? youre not saying why the dirty apartments apparent reference to the manger is heavy-handed, youre just saying that there are some other tenuous parallels to the christ story

You can't just dismiss the demands of the narrative like that. If there's no miracle baby, no trials and tribulations, there's no movie. Of course it's a big deal - it's the main driver of the plot.

I'm not dismissing the demands of the narrative. But to say, there aren't connotations and references to other things outside of the narrative is a pretty simplistic way of looking at a narrative. I dunno, maybe it's "crazy" or "idiosyncratic" to see a movie or read a story and have it remind you of other things, other stories, other movies. But that's just the way I watch and read things.

As far as having "hang ups" about religion - sure I have "hang ups" - I live in America, I grew up around a lot of conservative Christians. I wasn't raised Christian and I don't believe in a lot of the things the people I grew up around did. I saw the miracle child's birth as a Christian reference, and as History Mayne pointed out upthread, there are a whole lot of Christian references in Western culture. Some of them are more interesting to me than others. Some of them are utilized in more compelling ways than others.

All fine, but maybe you shouldn't have said "heavy-handed", which is considerably stronger than saying, y'know, it reminds you of stuff. It made me think of the manger too, but not in a remotely overstated way.

youre not saying why the dirty apartments apparent reference to the manger is heavy-handed, youre just saying that there are some other tenuous parallels to the christ story

It felt heavy-handed to me probably due to the fact that it was the climax of the film and where all the suspense led up to, maybe if it were some trivial plot point, it might have felt less so.

I had the same problem with the TWBB argument. Sure, Citizen Kane is a famous lonely megalomaniac archetype, and you can see that in there, but it doesn't mean the whole film is ho ho Citizen Kane, do you see?

jesus etc a somewhat more ubiquitous fiction than charlie kane

All fine, but maybe you shouldn't have said "heavy-handed", which is considerably stronger than saying, y'know, it reminds you of stuff. It made me think of the manger too, but not in a remotely overstated way.

― gotanynewsstory? (Dorianlynskey), Friday, February 12, 2010 8:09 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^^ this is what im saying

i agree that:

• there are references to the christ story

• those references amount to propaganda or parable
• those references are heavy-handed

as a a secular jew i picked up on what i tht were p obv and intentional echoes of the christ story - not just the stable, or the mother but i thought some of the soldiers hunting them was on some king herod shit - but really had no problem w/that. i mean it doesnt even really have anything to do w/christianity its just appropriation but i think those echoes are p necessary in putting the story on a lvl where the birth scene is possible - it signals to the audience that the movie is in some working on the lvl of myth. it gives the birth scene (which is amazing and the reason why the movie is my #1) its power and its context

I had the same problem with the TWBB argument. Sure, Citizen Kane is a famous lonely megalomaniac archetype, and you can see that in there, but it doesn't mean the whole film is ho ho Citizen Kane, do you see?

I didn't intend to imply that the whole film "is" or "is not" anything - I was merely posting about how I viewed it, and just like when Mordy and I were discussing Almost Famous, I thoroughly understand and expect that different people will see films different ways and pay attention to different things or see different things in them. Maybe it's because quite a few people on these threads are so vehement in their assertions that they are right and other people are wrong if they disagree with them that you are assuming that the things I said are meant as a "correct" reading of the film. Maybe I should have been more explicit in putting "I think" or "I saw it as" in my posts, as opposed to just implying it. I dunno.

I think the way that the editing seemed jumpy and the movie seemed to skip around a lot made me think of it as more "po-mo wink wink" than something with slower pacing.

xp max/dorian - fine, heavy-handed wasn't the best choice of words.

Fair enough