Faith and Film

[dreamdead]

This semester I'm teaching a Faith and Film class at a local uni. I realized that this topic could be of interest to folks, so I've decided to record students' responses to the material. We're already on week four of the films (Rohmer's), so I'll provide a catch-up overview of students's responses to the first three weeks in the next day or so.

Any suggestions on how to approach the last four texts would be welcomed, as I'll have less outside material to grab from...

Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life (1946)
Carl Dreyer’s Ordet (1955)
Pier Paolo Pasolini’s The Gospel According to Matthew (1964)
Eric Rohmer’s My Night at Maud’s (1969)
Andrei Tarkovsky’s The Sacrifice (1986)
Krzysztof Kieślowski’s The Decalogue (1988) - episode to be shown
Harold Ramis’s Groundhog Day (1993)
Lee Chang-dong’s Secret Sunshine (2007)
Joel and Ethan Coen’s A Serious Man (2009)
Jeff Nichols’s Take Shelter (2011)
Terrence Malick’s Tree of Life (2011)
Don Hertzfeldt trilogy (2006, 2008, 2011)

[Ezee E]

Nice. Looking forward to this.

Is Last Temptation of Christ not on this list for a reason? Seems like a great one.

[Qrazy]

Nice. Looking forward to this.

Is Last Temptation of Christ not on this list for a reason? Seems like a great one.

Prob cause it's a terrible film. ;)

Bergman's The Virgin Spring should be on the list though.

[number8]

Is Last Temptation of Christ not on this list for a reason? Seems like a great one.

From the list, it looks like dreamdead's goal is to discuss films that show the ordinary main character's relationship with their faith. You can argue that Last Temptation is exactly about that, but most people would not be able to overlook the fact that he's, you know, Jesus.

[Ezee E]

Prob cause it's a terrible film. ;)

Bergman's The Virgin Spring should be on the list though.

LIES.

And there needs to be at least ONE Bergman movie on there. Virgin Spring is certainly a great choice.

[number8]

Last House on the Left > Virgin Spring.

[Ezee E]

From the list, it looks like dreamdead's goal is to discuss films that show the ordinary main character's relationship with their faith. You can argue that Last Temptation is exactly about that, but most people would not be able to overlook the fact that he's, you know, Jesus.


It's a great counter to Gospel According to St. Matthew though.

[Ezee E]

Last House on the Left > Virgin Spring.

Nooooo... But it would certainly be a surprise to the students!

[dreamdead]

Nice. Looking forward to this.

Is Last Temptation of Christ not on this list for a reason? Seems like a great one.

I didn't consider it that heavily; as number8 notes, I was more interested in representing how people respond to faith. I wanted Scorsese somewhere, but couldn't quite situate it within the rest of the texts. Of the Jesus films I've seen (Pasolini, Scorsese, and Gibson) I find Pasolini's to be the most transgressive and interesting to discuss, so I chose that one despite the interest in discussing the Last Temptation protests. Marxist Christ. That's way more radical than Scorsese's closing 20 minutes.



Bergman's The Virgin Spring should be on the list though.

This is probably true. I kept waffling between keeping Pasolini or Winter Light, but this one might have been even better as an echo of Dreyer's ending. Will have to keep it in mind if I get another chance to teach the course in the future.


From the list, it looks like dreamdead's goal is to discuss films that show the ordinary main character's relationship with their faith. You can argue that Last Temptation is exactly about that, but most people would not be able to overlook the fact that he's, you know, Jesus.

Yeah, much more interested in ordinary people's responses to faith, and more interested in seeing how contemporary films reflect theological matters (and what theological issues they are most concerned with, i.e. Job). I abandoned stuff like Babette's Feast so that we could delve into the last decade or so of content. I'm most disappointed with lacking any coverage of Buddhism in film--I initially looked at Syndromes and a Century, but there's not enough there to warrant studying it. Later I realized that Infernal Affairs could have been approachable and interesting, but had already turned in the syllabus... And Ikiru also didn't make the cut, though I fought hard to place it--it seems more humanist, and I thought Hertzfeldt could be more intriguing in terms of form.


It's a great counter to Gospel According to St. Matthew though.

'Tis true. But then you'd have to further deal with the utter lack of students knowing what to do with Pasolini's film. I find the film invigorating and challenging to contemplate, but we had our weakest discussion by far on that one. I think I needed to foreground how Pasolini used his own Marxist inclinations to highlight Jesus's similar embrace of a rather Marxist rhetoric--without any twisting of the text--but we didn't really get very far there. I expect that student comments will largely suggest dropping that one on the next go-around.

[Mysterious Dude]

I think it would be interesting to compare the endings of Ordet and The Sacrifice, since they both involve God answering a prayer, but Tarkovsky's God is a little more cruel.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I would've included The Rapture personally, but that's just me. Fine list.

I honestly can't think of too much - no knowledge of critical theory or deconstruction regarding the last batch of films. There are the obvious tacks to take, comparing A Serious Man to Job. Honestly, you probably know better ways to approach the materials, given that this subject is your bailiwick.

Very excited to read as this comes in.

[Russ]

I would've included The Rapture personally, but that's just me.
Yeah, I was coming in to post the same thing, was curious if dreamdead ever considered it, esp. with the focus on the main character's relationship with their faith.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, much more interested in ordinary people's responses to faith, and more interested in seeing how contemporary films reflect theological matters (and what theological issues they are most concerned with, i.e. Job). I abandoned stuff like Babette's Feast so that we could delve into the last decade or so of content. I'm most disappointed with lacking any coverage of Buddhism in film--I initially looked at Syndromes and a Century, but there's not enough there to warrant studying it. Later I realized that Infernal Affairs could have been approachable and interesting, but had already turned in the syllabus... And Ikiru also didn't make the cut, though I fought hard to place it--it seems more humanist, and I thought Hertzfeldt could be more intriguing in terms of form.



re: Buddhism

Check out Conrad Rooks adaptation of Hesse's Siddhartha.

[Skitch]

Prob cause it's a terrible film. ;)

SLAP.

But anyway, show 'em Bad Lieutenant.

[Raiders]

For the Coen film, I think I would approach is from a perspective of the relevance of faith in modern times. The opening encounter with the dybbuk reveals an "original sin" perhaps, but then does it? Is Larry a descendant of this family, being punished for this misdeed as his family may ultimately be at the end of the film as potentially God brings his judgment? I love the opening line about receiving everything with simplicity... it is a double-edged sword. Obviously the quote means do not question everything from God but accept his grace and divinity, but I think we can equally assume the Coens are stating that the universe is more-or-less Schrodinger's cat and that you cannot explain everything and shit does just happen and to "accept the mystery" and to do so with some grace, manmade grace. Contemporary religion can offer no better comfort, and like the cat, it is only as relevant as a particular point of view. It is a film that presents more questions than answers, more irony than real thought. Neither rigid mathematics nor un-scientific religious parables and platitudes can really capture life. And when that call comes in and that tornado hits, is it bad luck? Is it because you sinned, or your ancestors sinned? Who knows. Math can't solve it and Hashem owes us no answers.

[dreamdead]

Thanks for the response, Raiders. Looking forward to digging into the Coen's film.

I considered The Rapture and generally like it well enough—always been interested in why Qrazy doesn’t dig it—but figured that there’s already enough films that undercut their own religiosity and didn’t want to have a class backlogged with films solely concerned with suggesting a hypocritical religion. There’s more interesting avenues to explore to me, even if I also didn’t love the otherwise honorific Tender Mercies, which Robert Duvall rocks.

It's a Wonderful Life

So we started with Capra's film and quite logically covered how it sets up these clear divides between good and evil--George and Mr Potter, ethnic community-mindedness and unbridled capitalism, Mary and Violet. However, we soon shifted into a study on how Harry Bailey and Sam Wainwright exist as incomplete ideals for George--unable to perform fully engaged commitment to the cause of the city. Harry would rather be married and centered on moneymaking through his marriage, and even his sacrifices in the war cannot enable him to help George. Sam, meanwhile, is able to donate money to George at the end, yet despite the Hee-haw vocalization, doesn't actually stretch himself in any way through this aid. Floating George the money costs him little, and so the moral dilemma is what do these characters sacrifice when they're not able to help George in any clear and personal way...?

We also worked to complicate the easy Bedford Falls/Pottersville split as I introduced this short piece (http://www.salon.com/2001/12/22/pottersville/). The way in which Pottersville is depicted as evil solely by virtue of some of the storefronts got students to begin questioning some of It's a Wonderful Life's cultural ideology. Are stores like Bamboo Room and Indian Club disparaged because they introduce new and scary ethnic minorities into a largely European town, or are they legitimately threats to the moral character? Does Violet actually exist as a femme fatale figure, or is she sacrificed--since she wanted to dance with George at the ball and was impeded by George noticing Mary--purely because Mary radiates in soft focus for the whole film?

We were able to largely elicit interesting material from these questions, and the complexities of the film seemed to open up for the students. Why can only George stand up to Mr. Potter? What's the role of women in Pottersville--only old maids and prostitutes? While the film certainly subscribes to the value of a faith, it also asserts that unbridled capitalism like Mr. Potter lingers and will suffer no penalty for his indiscretions, and even asserts that Clarence's commitment to helping George is predicated on his receiving a reward--that it's not solely out of fealty or altruistic aid.

[Watashi]

WALL-E

Wall-E is literally Jesus Christ.

[Russ]

Please accept my apologies in advance.
http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff324/astrojester/wall1_zps2dae0a34.jpghttp://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff324/astrojester/wall2_zpsf3609cbe.jpghttp://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff324/astrojester/wall3_zpsbdd8cfe8.jpghttp://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff324/astrojester/wall4_zps0a8a14d4.jpghttp://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff324/astrojester/wall5_zpsa4687c0c.jpg

[Ezee E]

Thanks for the response, Raiders. Looking forward to digging into the Coen's film.

I considered The Rapture and generally like it well enough—always been interested in why Qrazy doesn’t dig it—but figured that there’s already enough films that undercut their own religiosity and didn’t want to have a class backlogged with films solely concerned with suggesting a hypocritical religion. There’s more interesting avenues to explore to me, even if I also didn’t love the otherwise honorific Tender Mercies, which Robert Duvall rocks.

It's a Wonderful Life

So we started with Capra's film and quite logically covered how it sets up these clear divides between good and evil--George and Mr Potter, ethnic community-mindedness and unbridled capitalism, Mary and Violet. However, we soon shifted into a study on how Harry Bailey and Sam Wainwright exist as incomplete ideals for George--unable to perform fully engaged commitment to the cause of the city. Harry would rather be married and centered on moneymaking through his marriage, and even his sacrifices in the war cannot enable him to help George. Sam, meanwhile, is able to donate money to George at the end, yet despite the Hee-haw vocalization, doesn't actually stretch himself in any way through this aid. Floating George the money costs him little, and so the moral dilemma is what do these characters sacrifice when they're not able to help George in any clear and personal way...?

We also worked to complicate the easy Bedford Falls/Pottersville split as I introduced this short piece (http://www.salon.com/2001/12/22/pottersville/). The way in which Pottersville is depicted as evil solely by virtue of some of the storefronts got students to begin questioning some of It's a Wonderful Life's cultural ideology. Are stores like Bamboo Room and Indian Club disparaged because they introduce new and scary ethnic minorities into a largely European town, or are they legitimately threats to the moral character? Does Violet actually exist as a femme fatale figure, or is she sacrificed--since she wanted to dance with George at the ball and was impeded by George noticing Mary--purely because Mary radiates in soft focus for the whole film?

We were able to largely elicit interesting material from these questions, and the complexities of the film seemed to open up for the students. Why can only George stand up to Mr. Potter? What's the role of women in Pottersville--only old maids and prostitutes? While the film certainly subscribes to the value of a faith, it also asserts that unbridled capitalism like Mr. Potter lingers and will suffer no penalty for his indiscretions, and even asserts that Clarence's commitment to helping George is predicated on his receiving a reward--that it's not solely out of fealty or altruistic aid.

I wonder what the people of Bedford Falls think of Miley Cyrus.

[dreamdead]

So with Dreyer's Ordet as our second film, we quickly escalated the challenge of the class. This one led to interesting responses from the students, as they rallied around the main theme of the film, the possibility of miracles, but had a hard time reconciling themselves to Johannes's portrayal of a healer. Yet we went back and studied Johannes's sermons in the film--especially his first exchange with the new priest--and found that he remained prophetic throughout. Likewise, Dreyer himself is critical of those who accept the notion of faith but then outright dismiss the idea of modern miracles. Dreyer apparently removed any alternative explanation of Inger's resurrection, where the original play that Dreyer adapted--though by a Danish priest--left in ambiguity about whether or not Inger died or had a temporary stopped heart. One student did remark on how little emotion Maren displays upon learning of her mother's death, suggesting how much faith she has, and questioning why no one puts a damper on her appeals to Johannes.

The reaction that I found most illuminating was how one student stated that he could do little but laugh when the film ended. When I asked what precipitated that reaction, he stated that Dreyer gave us so little resolution that he didn't know what to do with the text. And that's where we spent a lot of time--trying to study why Dreyer leaves that sequence so open. Is there anything to say after that display of faith? Does the film need to say anything? By and large, the class found it powerful, though one student still wrote how any sort of healing outside of the Gospels is sketchy, which bewildered me. Nonetheless, the rest of the class time went well, and we were able to explore how the film masks its interest in miracles by framing itself as a pastoral comedy for the first act.

Even though Inger essentially repeats Capra's Mary in goodness, the film is more stringent about negating that sense of goodness and exploring how we'll then make meaning. Also, we examined how critics make mention of Johannes's letter, where he inscribes Biblical verses to authors outside himself, revealing that he has finally moved beyond professing himself as the sole arbiter of healing.

Overall, this one was a success... Two good weeks in a row. That experience was to be short-lived with Pasolini on the way, though.

[dreamdead]

Been neglecting this thread. Brief thoughts--students found little of interest in Pasolini's The Gospel According to Matthew. I realized after the fact that I needed to better establish how Pasolini is interested in the Marxist and economic critique of class relations in Jesus's proclamations by highlighting how those sequences are still drawing from the Biblical source. In doing so, we could have better examined how Pasolini is true to the Bible, just with a different emphasis and intentionality. As it stands, we covered how the film adapts about 55% percent of Matthew, but the film hews toward the class critiques and sidesteps many (though not all) of Jesus's miracles--in that sense, students found the film difficult to incorporate into their sense of Jesus, though they did a fine job critiquing how Pasolini adds psychological depth to the proceeding when he weeps openly after learning of John the Baptist's beheading (there is no analogue to public weeping in Matthew's account). Giving students direct comparisons there helped negotiate why Pasolini makes alterations and what he privileges in underscoring Jesus's humanity. Their main flaw, then, was figuring out whether the Marxist angle of Pasolini hews at all with Matthew's account. If I do the class again, we'll cover that far more.

After that, Rohmer's My Night at Maud's was gangbusters. Firstly, its depth and content reminded me once more why he's my favorite filmmaker--further, it was interesting how heavily male students found favor in Maud over Francoise. They alighted on Maud's ability to carry philosophical discussions as "proof" of her being a better match. Likewise, when I pointed out the coda of the film, where Maud ascends the hill while Jean-Louis and Francise descend the hill, we examined how the attendant symbolism of each progression plays into our reading of the character's ultimate perception. It was an interesting experiment, though there was, of course, resistance to that layer of reading. That said, all found Maud far more stringent in her (non)faith than Jean-Louis's arbitrary sense of loyalty. We looked at how invested he is in the three church sequences that feature throughout the film, and in all his eye either wanders or he seems fearful of the decrees that the priest speaks. The priest, meanwhile, in anchored right in the perfect center of the shot, buttressed by pillars the bespeak his faith. This film is the clear winner of the first half of the semester, as it let students study issues of sexuality, faith, and morality, and they found its filmic language (including the clear intentionality of Jean-Louis stepping into a halo during one discussion with Maud even as he decries how he's no saint) fascinating to unpack.

Unsurprisingly, students resisted the foreign films, but after Dreyer and Pasolini, they latched onto Rohmer's romanticism and gender struggles. All of that, naturally, fell by the side once we got into Tarkovsky's The Sacrifice...

[Pop Trash]

The Grey could be a good one. Unfortunately I've noticed other people have a hard time viewing the wolves in a more diffuse metaphorical way.

[dreamdead]

The Grey could be a good one. Unfortunately I've noticed other people have a hard time viewing the wolves in a more diffuse metaphorical way.

I certainly do see the wolves and the whole situation as metaphor, so that's not a problem. However, does the film really make sense in a faith and film crossover? I can see it being useful in an Existentialism and Film-type class, but I don't recall any proponent of spirituality that contrasted against the overall pessimism being expressed...

[Pop Trash]

I certainly do see the wolves and the whole situation as metaphor, so that's not a problem. However, does the film really make sense in a faith and film crossover? I can see it being useful in an Existentialism and Film-type class, but I don't recall any proponent of spirituality that contrasted against the overall pessimism being expressed...

Couldn't lack of faith be part of "faith and film?"