Out of interest - and not trolling. I know that 'Creation' wasn't generally released. 'Agora' portrays unsympathetic Christians (come to that, I don't know if anyone was particularly likeable) and may be seen to be not fit for general consumption, so to speak.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory
Not well, I guess, since I had never heard of it before I ran across it on my cable channels one day.
shareI never heard of it until I saw it listed in Netflix.
shareIt's a straight-to-cable affair here in the States. Atheists and agnostics who have heard of the film are likely to be the only audience. Blogs are attacking it for its lack of genuine historicity. For me, it's not relevant to appreciating the work and the message. In fact, there are probably hundreds of movies in popular rotation that hold up faith as a virtue, so this film is a welcome addition.
I received The Passion of the Christ as a powerful work of art, even though it was probably fictionalized to a very high degree (especially if the official story of Jesus is fictionalized itself).
It was given absolutely no advertising and lasted exactly two weeks at an art house theater near where I live. Opening night there were maybe 5 people in the audience. In my eyes, I didn't think any group was singled out as being bad/evil. Pagans, Jews, and Christians were portrayed as a mixed lot, some good, some bad. Likewise, individual characters had good sides and bad sides. But when the right-wing media led by FauxNews tells everyone that this film is portraying Christians in a negative light, well then, that becomes fact for everyone who hasn't bothered to watch the film...
shareAs I said elsewhere, I didn't even know of its existance until an anthropology professor mentioned it. That said, I enjoyed the movie for its recreation of the Alexandria (I'm a sucker for seeing the ancient world brought to life). The skewing of truth/facts did help to make the movie flow/work better but, as religion is a sensitive subject, I could immediately see that it could be easily offend people. Some good did come from the bad (the skewing of facts), though, and it has encouraged me to learn more about this time in history.
shareI just happened to give it a second viewing on TV. Here, in Portugal, EU it was advertised and it featured in many movie theaters when it premiered here.
But I guess it is not Ben-Hur or Evan Almighty so I never expected such a movie to be well received overseas..
And by coming back to these forum - after seeing Agora again - I noticed something: take a good look at the posts of some people over here, arguing and insulting people, because of this movie. And some are around this movie board for over two years now! So I guess it did thicked quite a lot of "sensibilities"..
The marketing departments know how to measure the reception a movie might have in a given context (I don't agree with most of it, of course, but that is another subject) so it was probably decided that the reception in some countries would be poor hence little investment was made in that direction.
Out of curiosity, what were the examples of "Good Christian" characters in the film, in your mind? It reminds me of looking for "good Christian" characters in "Kingdom of Heaven" (in that film, the more Christian somebody is, the worse they are, so the "best" Christian characters are the ones who doubt or completely reject their own faith).
I'm not sure the portrayals of the three groups were equal by a long stretch.
The Jews used violence, yes, but ONLY in response to unprovoked violence against them by Christians.
Similarly, the pagans were violent and intolerant towards the Christians, but they did so in response to the continual provocation and occasional violence of the Christians towards them and their way of life.
The more "Christian" a character is in Agora, the more villainous and shallow they tend to be. And the "best" character happens to be an atheist.
It would be curious to see whether "anti-Christian" films outnumber "pro-Christian" films in America.
But it seems to me that the only exceptions to the rule in recent memory (that "anti-Christian" films either get good reviews AND make money or just make money, while "pro-Christian" films usually flop AND get bad reviews) are the Passion of the Christ (bad reviews, big money), Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe ("pro," good reviews & box office) and the Golden Compass ("anti," bad reviews, box office flop).
Now if you consider something like "the Matrix" series or "Lord of the Rings" to be "pro-Christian then my theory doesn't work, of course. But if people assert that the only reason Agora was a "small film" is because of some kind of Christian conspiracy I think have a hard case to prove.
Another bizarre and inconsistent theory held by such persons is the "controversy creates cash" argument, that somehow Christians protesting a film will make it popular (as if it would not be popular without such protests). This goes directly against the "Christians censor films that challenge their beliefs" claim, of course.
But critics LOVED Brokeback Mountain, and the Da Vinci Code made a fortune.
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/
Okay, I thought of one (I think).
Anybody remember that Christian slave girl (an extra with no lines),
who is in the "line up" of slaves when the pagan Theon is demanding to know if
any of them are Christian (because of the cross trinket he found),
and when he throws it on the ground she jumps on the cross and
holds it tenderly (implying that she was a secret Christian)?
This is the scene when Davus tries to protect her by lying and saying he's
a Christian. At least this scene is on the North American DVD I got
from the library.
I guess you could say that this is a "positive" character, because
she is just a slave who is secretly a Christian, an innocent.
But other than that, all of the other Christian characters are problematic.
Either they are "zealous" for their faith and therefore violent and evil
(the raggedy black clad Parabolani, a gang of street thugs, reminiscent of the "religious police" of the Taliban; bishop Cyril who is also driven by power),
"good" people who are corrupted by loyalty to their faith (Synesius, who
demands that Hypatia convert and when she doesn't, he abandons her, unlike
the real Synesius of history who was actually abandoned by HER for unknown reasons despite his repeated letters seeking her friendship), and hypocritical
or lukewarm "Christians" whose dilution of their faith is seen as virtuous
(Orestes, who stands up to bullies like Cyril who chastise and threaten him for not being Christian enough to help them persecute others like Hypatia or the Jews too if memory serves). The Parabolani, even when they are "helping"
are clearly depicted as doing so with an agenda (notice that Ammonius makes
Davus pay his mistress's money to help a beggar). Even look at the casual
way they toss dead bodies on a bonfire as if they are garbage (even though
they are doing a "good service" of disposing of the corpses of the poor).
Then of course the main Christian character, Davus, is a hypocrite. He pretends to be a Christian to protect a fellow slave (who happens to be a pretty girl).
He joins up to belong to something, and gain his freedom after falling for the
wiles of Ammonius. He engages in brutality with the other zealots and is
driven by his lust for his former mistress. We're never given the impression
that his "faith" is ever genuine (unless it's the "faith" in violence).
The overwhelming impact of the Christian characters is that they're a
bad lot, and they are portrayed (during some of the riot/battle scenes) as insects ravaging the country side
spreading disaster. We're meant to feel sympathy for the pagans as progressive,
fighting a defensive war against these unreasoning barbarians. The Jews are portrayed
too as people who were minding their own business until they were attacked.
So I'd say overall, while the "innocent slave girl" is a nice moment of
balance, it's too little to turn the overall impression of the film
which is that Christianity is a dangerous cult that attracts the worst
scum of the earth, and we'd all be better off without them (even if it
is a symbolic reference to Islam or fundamentalism in general, a message
which most viewers miss anyway).
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/ (not mine, but I like it)
I just love that scene with the Christian slave girl, despite how it makes the otherwise likable Theon come across as a big jerk. Because like you said, there seems to be no other sympathetic Christian character (except for maybe Davus, who seems to just be a confused young man caught up in things beyond his control) in this entire story. And yes, it would have been so nice to have seen more people like that slave girl. Or if only one character had just pointed out some positive things about Christianity, like how Jesus and his apostles had cared about the poor people. Or something...
I will not deny that the Christian faith has been used for bad purposes. But I want to believe that there have always been good people from every religion, and it was like this movie almost wanted us to hate all Christians. At least it had a couple of Pagans (including Hypatia's beloved father) show off some negative sides during the first half of the movie, which makes it a bit more balanced in the end. But still...
While Christians were definitely portrayed as the antagonists in this film, I think it does a good job of showing that Christians are not infallible. Christians often like to paint this picture that they're this passive, non-aggressive, peace loving people (Ghandi-like) when in reality many wars and acts of violence have been waged in the name of Christianity.
While this film is not historically accurate, there is no denying that at one point, Christians defended their beliefs in the fashion portrayed in this movie. Things like bearing arms, stoning, aggressive persuasion, and the general sort of ideal where they expected others to believe what they believe or face the consequences.
The part where the passage by Timothy 2:12 was quoted saying that women do not have authority to teach or have power over men, and must remain silent, etc. was very powerful, because it showed how the bible was abused in ancient times in order to prove a point or for some powerful christian figure to get their way. Keep in mind there was no media in ancient times, there was no television or newspapers, everything was spread through word of mouth, and often only one singular popular opinion was tolerated (generally whichever opinion the monarch/religious power believed in) so for some such powerful figure to quote a passage like this from the bible at a public forum could have tremendous effect. I'm not saying this SPECIFIC case is historically accurate but that the general concept was used and abused to great effect.
Overall I really enjoyed this movie for showing a truthful darker side to something that people in modern society do not consider. Historical inaccuracies aside, it was certainly an eye-opener.
Nice attempt at misinformation, mate.
While this film is not historically accurate....
....there is no denying that at one point, Christians defended their beliefs in the fashion portrayed in this movie.
The part where the passage by Timothy 2:12 was quoted saying that women do not have authority to teach or have power over men, and must remain silent, etc. was very powerful, because it showed how the bible was abused in ancient times in order to prove a point or for some powerful christian figure to get their way
2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
[deleted]
Oh, you poor, persecuted Christians.
It would be curious to see whether "anti-Christian" films outnumber "pro-Christian" films in America (...) the Golden Compass (...) Now if you consider something like "the Matrix" series or "Lord of the Rings" to be "pro-Christian then my theory doesn't work, of course (...) But critics LOVED Brokeback Mountain
This goes directly against the "Christians censor films that challenge their beliefs" claim, of course.
Oh, you poor, persecuted Christians.
So, you're saying that film censorship in the US has got nothing to do with religious values?
Similarly, the pagans were violent and intolerant towards the Christians, but they did so in response to the continual provocation and occasional violence of the Christians towards them and their way of life.
Most people I know (even ones who are interested in this sort of thing) hadn't heard of it until it hit cable.
I imagine that's probably pretty common. It was a limited release foreign produced film, that anyone outside the arthouse crowd (and aside from net nerds like us) would miss.
Agora was an arty, philosophical film with a political-ideological message. The topic is ancient history and science. The Darwin film would have had much more mainstream appeal (especially considering Paul Bettany played almost the exact same role in "Master and Commander" a decidedly mainstream film).
I just resist the idea that some have put forward that the movie wasn't more successful because of some Christian conspiracy to suppress it. If that's all it was, it should have been a big hit in secular Europe, right? I don't know what kind of numbers it did in its native Spain, but that might be interesting to compare.
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/
Easy answer romojo, Theocracy?
shareI've never even heard of it until I saw it on Netflix. Rachael Weisz is a big name and Alejandro Amenábar is a very underrated director, plus I like historical movies, so I watched it. It's a great film and revealed to me a female hero in
Hypatia I wouldn't have known. It's a shame this work didn't get the press it deserves. People should learn more about great hero like her.