NationStates Jolt Archive

The article found at the following link reviews the new movie "The Exorcism of Emily Rose". In the review the author makes the case that this film, and others (he cites M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" as another example) are basically pushing the message that skepticism is folly and religiosity is the only path to victory/safety/heroism/whatever.

I'm not sure if I think the article's author has gone too far in his analysis of movies as religious propaganda, but as an atheist and a skeptic on matters supernatural I sometimes feel a bit offended by some of the messages in entertainment. What do you all think?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2125903/?nav=tap3

I think, dear, that if the rest of us can put up with bloodbaths and rampant sexualtiy, you should be able to put up with a little bit of God. Takes all kinds, remember?

as a catholic atheist im much more often offended by the way hollywood/television get relgion wrong. michael landon had a tv show where he died and went to heaven and became an angel.....NO, JUST NO!

having the supernatural exist is just a way to make the story more interesting whether its demonic possession, space aliens or psychics.

It‘s a privately run industry and it doesn’t hurt anybody. Let them make and show what they want. Many movies offend my sensibilities, so I just don’t go see them.
Also, horror movies have been doing the whole skepticism gets you killed thing for decades.

I think, dear, that if the rest of us can put up with bloodbaths and rampant sexualtiy, you should be able to put up with a little bit of God. Takes all kinds, remember?
On the whole I agree with you. It's just that when you go to see a movie like Reservoir Dogs, you expect shootings, blood, and foul language. I also beleive that if you go to see a movie about exorcism you should expect to see a message that "god exists and fights off demons". But Signs kinda snuck the god in. It was advertized as a movie about crop circles and monsters and snuck in a religious theme that dominated the movie. It's those that bother me a bit. Just a little. It's like a family movie suddenly showing Michael Madsen cutting a cop's ear off. Not that extreme, but i'm sure you get the picture.

While this may be true, we should also perhaps wonder if some movies are also (but conversely) anti-religious propaganda.

I'm not offended by propaganda per se. "Hero" was a kick-ass martial arts movie, if you could resist being brainwashed by the Beijing party-line sacrifice-all-for-the-state message. But I understand from the reviews I've read that "Emily Rose" is presented as a story told through a court case and, juxtaposing evidence against belief, it gives the win to belief. In other words, its message seems to be favoring a magical world view over a rational one. Now, I haven't seen the movie, but assuming that's true, and considering the way uber-believers the world over have been acting lately, I think I'll wait for the DVD. I really think I might be too scared to see such a movie in a theater full of strangers (and I don't mean scared by the movie).

Really, I think people are losing their ability to tell fantasy from reality, and that makes propaganda very dangerous indeed.

There is a small bit of religeous propaganda from Hollywood...

But Religion is not that bad...there is sometimes anti Muslim tones...painting the Muslim guy as a bad guy...but thats not too heavy...

Propaganda is extreme in many war related movies...The way the Germans, Japanese were painted...it was unreal...

The sad part...the pathetic side...of it is that the US public...and some of the World do see it as historic reality.

I dunno if I'd go so far as to say most movies are religious propaganda, but Hollywood knows which side its bread is buttered on. Their single biggest audience is the American audience, and the American audience is typically white, middle class, christian, and not really interested in seeing movies that challenge or mock its values. Which of course means that once you wade past the sex and violence, you generally find that most of the nice characters are good wholesome men and women with a proper respect for the Lord, and virtually no major protagonist is ever gonna be portrayed as coming from some obscure foreign religion, let alone be a professed agnostic/atheist. And of course, if they _are_ an atheist or agnostic, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll serve as a walking metaphor for the ability of unbelievable events to make even the most hardened skeptic doubt their beliefs.

For the most part, movie makers aren't occupied with spreading any particular beliefs, only to catering to the wants of a large consumer base. A movie strongly espousing muslim beliefs will do poorly in the USA, while a movie strongly espousing christian ones will do well. Contrast movies like "The Passion of the Christ" with a hypothetical movie called "The Trials of the Prophet" about Mohammed. The second just wouldn't sell.


EDIT: Curse you, Matey, and your 20-second-sooner post!

Contrast movies like "The Passion of the Christ" with a hypothetical movie called "The Trials of the Prophet" about Mohammed. The second just wouldn't sell.True...

BTW Passion was not a product of the Hollywood Stablishiment...They blocked the finance/production of that movie...the wanted nothing to do with it.

Mr Gibson had to Produce/Finance it himself.