This is more a question than a statement of opinion. I am just curious as to what the unreligious people made of this movie?
It does seem to have a pro-faith message but does it actually? I mean they wouldn't have been in the trouble they are in the first place were it not for faith.
What does everyone think? Is this not so straight-cut as it first may seem?
Glad you asked. As an atheist myself, I'll try to give you an answer (if you're still interested since the question is somewhat dated!)
I just saw the movie, and I liked it. Well not the best movie ever, sure, but it made my day. Funny thing I had to decide to watch it on Chirstmas eve, by the way.
The quote from Pascal is somewhat ironic to me ("Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction"), but in a way the movie shows that men also achieve great non-egocentric things from religious conviction. It left me pondering.
It does happen that atheists fully give themselves to a cause. This is because being an atheist doesn't mean giving up on every belief there could be. It merely means: I have a belief, and this belief is that there is no such thing as god. It doesn't mean that I believe in nothing.
To reply more directly: I *believe* the right thing to do was to stay.
Titus
Yep, this is a good response. I'd agree with all of that, except the last but about whether or not it was right to stay - on that point I would say that I can't answer that, it was a personal decision, a matter of faith and principle which as I don't share the faith they have, I can't really form an opinion on whether they made a good choice.
The only other things that I would add is that it is quite possible for me as an atheist to empathise with the situation they were in and the choice they faced without for one second accepting the basis from which they approached it. I saw this as a really compelling account of a situation (which I only realised after the film's end was a true story) that involved people with a religious conviction, but was neither pro faith nor negative towards it.
Not being a religious sort didn't reduce my ability to appreciate this film. In terms of the central decision on the film though it does lead me to be critical of the individuals involved.
To refuse military protection but accept a scenario where they had to provide medical support to combatants on the other side of dubious moral character seems to me an inconsistent moral approach.
For some to decide to stay out of solidarity, but hide when the militia visits their monastery while their colleagues are abducted seems hypocritical and arguably demonstrates a lack of "faith" or solidarity.
Finally, to stay at the monastery at a time when militants are especially targetting foreigners (while sparing some natives) seems to me ill-advised at best and contrary to their mission at worst. By staying they were potentially bringing the conflict to the doorstep of potentially ordinary village of limited military value that might otherwise have been ignored. This is hypothetical but they were potentially endangering the very people they were meant to be saving due to a lack of flexibility. In summary, I think faith clouded their judgement and predictably resulted in an outcome that benefitted no-one in the medium to long term and denied this earth the toil and benevolence of men willing to carry out selfless acts of kindness. I can't imagine that their deity would approve of that.
I don't quite agree with you.
To refuse military protection but accept a scenario where they had to provide medical support to combatants on the other side of dubious moral character seems to me an inconsistent moral approach.
For some to decide to stay out of solidarity, but hide when the militia visits their monastery while their colleagues are abducted seems hypocritical and arguably demonstrates a lack of "faith" or solidarity.
Finally, to stay at the monastery at a time when militants are especially targetting foreigners (while sparing some natives) seems to me ill-advised at best and contrary to their mission at worst. By staying they were potentially bringing the conflict to the doorstep of potentially ordinary village of limited military value that might otherwise have been ignored.
In my view, this just showed, that they subscribed to the very humanitarian ethos, that everyone, regardless of character, status or wealth, deserves basic medical assistance when in need.
... and France is predominently an atheistic country.Not sure about that. Some surveys have suggested as such, but plenty still indicate that the country is predominately Roman Catholic.
A question the movie raises is: Wasn't religion at the end just worsening an already intricate situation? If it weren't for religion, things could have gone differently.
As an atheist, I think this film transcends religious belief because it is primarily about religious practise. Anyone, religious or not, can relate to the emotions the characters are going through, just as anyone can aspire to living a life of discipline, simplicity, and perhaps ultimately sacrifice. I found it deeply moving because of its humanism, and I found the conviction of its characters inspiring.
The Films of Stanley Kubrick: www.fosk.weebly.com