Question about the priest in the end - spoiler obviously - En kongelig affære (2012) Discussion

[–] paulfg42 11 years ago

Probably. What was not made clear was whether Struensee signed the confession.

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

I thought that was clear, he did in my opinion. I was sure about it the minute he said he thought about God a lot recently. I guess tortur for days can break you easily.

I always assumed though that the priest was honest. It just occured to me during the last watching that he maybe knew more than he told Struensee. Would be rather evil to trick him like this.

If the idea is to stay alive, I'm driving.

reply

[–] fatpie42 11 years ago

Why wouldn't he think about God? Like most Enlightenment thinkers he was probably a deist; just not a Christian. He was thinking about God a lot because he was facing death.

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

Why wouldn't he think about God? Like most Enlightenment thinkers he was probably a deist; just not a Christian. He was thinking about God a lot because he was facing death.

Your last statement was what I meant.

Throughout the film Struensee had a problem with God or rather with religion or the priests.

If the idea is to stay alive, I'm driving.

reply

[–] chuck-526 11 years ago

In the carriage the film shows the priest fingering his crucifix, Struensee noticing it, and Struensee becoming very upset. The film makes a big deal of this: there are some closeups, several rapid cuts, and quite a bit of film time spent.

My interpretation was that what I was supposed to "get" was the priest knew the amnesty wouldn't come in time, and his fingering the crucifix somehow signaled that. I never did _really_ "get" it though ...apparently I'm not sufficiently familiar with priests' behavior. I got the general impression, but have no idea how the details were supposed to fit together.

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

The priest knew what was coming when they rode in the carriage that I'm sure of. My question was if he knew from the beginning when he came to see Johann in prison.
In my opinion they did a great job in showing the audience that the king wasn't coming. The scene of Christian with Guldburg of course and the behaviour of the priest and Johann was also quite telling. Amazing acting.

If the idea is to stay alive, I'm driving.

reply

[–] ibbi 11 years ago

^Yes, I think it was pretty clearly signified in the scene in the carriage. Didn't have to be stated outright. One of the best scenes in the film.

___
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcedxzS7hz1qja3x0o1_400.gif

reply

[–] chuck-526 11 years ago

Thanks for the replies so far, but let me hijack this thread a bit to re-ask my own question (since the replies to the OP's questions seem to be 1] dunno, and 2] yes):

How did the priest's behavior convey to Struensee the fact that the amnesty wouldn't come in time? Was the priest's fingering of his crucifix significant, and if so how?

reply

[–] kaybeats 11 years ago

The way that he was touching the crucifix presented an image of guilt, like he was praying in his head to atone for the misrepresentation he gave Struensee that King would be there to space his life.

It's like when you know you've done something wrong and you don't want to tell the person - you don't meet their eye, you feel and may look uncomfortable, the way the priest tried to overcome this is by resorting to the one thing that gives him comfort. God.

----------------
We are the angry mob...

reply

[–] fedilio 11 years ago

It was a combination of several details, the way he touched his crucifix, the guilt in his eyes when he looked at Strunsee and the way he quickly looked away, all those little things made it quite clear that he had been lying and that Strunsee was actually going to die.

reply

[–] beltrane 11 years ago

am i the only one who saw that the 'priest' had a ring mark on one of his fingers? like he was not a priest but a married man who was pretending? Strunsee saw it and realized he had been manipulated and was going to die.

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

The ring mark could be something of the actor, not the character.

Secondly, in Denmark there's the Church of Denmark which is Evangelical Lutheran. He is allowed to be married, isn't he?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Denmark

OK found something. The priest was Balthasar Münter - he introduces himself if I'm not mistaken.
Münter was evangelical and married to Magdalena Ernestina Sophia Friederika.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balthasar_M%C3%BCnter

Struensee's own father was a priest BTW.

If the idea is to stay alive, I'm driving.

reply

[–] beltrane 11 years ago

i didnt knew they could get married, so you are right and the ring mark wasnt the factor for Struensee realizing something was wrong, so i guess it was the fact that the Priest was worried.

reply

[–] MovieLover5869 11 years ago

I believe it was clearly obvious when the priest went to visit Johann in jail that he knew Johann was going to be beheaded. The movie doesn't really show the priest speaking to anyone telling him the king is coming or not, so I took it as him knowing all along. Especially since the priest began to fuss with his cross and look anxious when Johann and Brandt began to speak about how the king was going to pardon them and how it must be for dramatics that he pardon them right before an execution. I believe that was why the priest seemed so nervous because he knew the king was never going to come from the beginning.

I also think that Johann did sign whatever document denouncing his ideas to get out of jail. If not, how else do you think he got out? I think the film makers would have shown if he had not. If Johann did sign something, who knows if what he told the priest was sincere. He could have just been indulging him and the court just so he could get out of jail. Also, it could be argued that the priest lied to Johann just to get his confession so that Guldberg and Juliana could publish it and show the people of Denmark that Johann really was nothing more than a philanderer and tyrant.

That's just my opinion and I thought the movie portrayed the last scene beautifully. I loved how Johann realized that he and Brandt were not going to make it and he kept it to himself for Brandt's sake. Such a wonderful, but truly sad scene.

"Because she doesn't love you!... Him... Hi-him, she doesn't love... she doesn't love him"

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

Especially since the priest began to fuss with his cross and look anxious when Johann and Brandt began to speak about how the king was going to pardon them and how it must be for dramatics that he pardon them right before an executio

Yeah, that's pretty obvious. My question was if he knew when he visited Johann in jail.

Will Graham: ‘I don’t find you that interesting.’
Hannibal Lecter: ‘You will.’

reply

[–] MovieLover5869 11 years ago

Yes, I thought my response answered this. I think the priest did know when he visited Johann in jail that he knew he was not going to be pardoned. He spoke to no one before they got into the carriage, and he got nervous before they even reached the location of where Johann and Brandt were going to be beheaded. It seems like he was completely set up from the beginning.

"Because she doesn't love you!... Him... Hi-him, she doesn't love... she doesn't love him"

reply

[–] Lucy9596 11 years ago

You always talk about the carriage. I can see the priest knew by then. What about the jail? There's no proof he knew. No nervousness, nothing. I guess we just don't know. Thanks for the response.

Will Graham: ‘I don’t find you that interesting.’
Hannibal Lecter: ‘You will.’

reply

[–] MysticGoddess327 8 years ago

You keep very irritatingly focusing on something that clearly no one could possibly know the answer to. I don't think either answer will be good enough for you.

Use some common sense. It's obvious in the carriage that the priest knew all was not well. If he knew in the jail cell, he would have been just as fidgety. He doesn't seem to be a very good liar.

reply

[–] MysticGoddess327 8 years ago

How is it clearly obvious that the priest knew at the jail cell? We never saw anyone order him to get a confession, so your assumption that we never saw him give anyone the confession means complicity in the deception is wrong.

I doubt very much the confession and the execution were the same day. The priest kept saying the Council decided this, and the Council will do that, so I think it likely that he went to get the confession in good faith. When he returned and gave it to the Council, he found out the Council was going to keep the King in the dark or otherwise prevent him from giving the expected pardon. Remember how the Council treated Rantzau when he realized they used him after the execution? The priest was upset and felt guilty at the part he played and decided to keep the truth from the prisoners, which culminated in the scene in the carriage.

reply