Last Movie You Watched

[SimonNZ]

I've seen The Keep twice, once on VHS and once on tv and both times it had the Tangerine Dream soundtrack. I wasn't aware it had been replaced.

Visually the film is very interesting. But very poor acting.

[Karl Henning]

I Am Legend (kind of again) I find I do not care for the zombie snuggle alternative ending.

[aligreto]

The Sound of Silence





OK, all of you listeners out there who have perfect pitch and who can tell the difference that ambient sound makes to the quality of our domestic lives need to see this film. It is very different from the norm and it is really interesting.
In this context, I know a guy who, pre Covid obviously, when booking for our National Symphony Orchestra concerts, would book three seats and would sit in the middle one because the sound of people's wrist watches affected him and interfered with his listening.  I would definitely not like to be in that category.

[steve ridgway]

In this context, I know a guy who, pre Covid obviously, when booking for our National Symphony Orchestra concerts, would book three seats and would sit in the middle one because the sound of people's wrist watches affected him and interfered with his listening.  I would definitely not like to be in that category.

Hmm he might be listening to the wrong sort of music.

[Florestan]

Has anyone watched this?



Is it a case of the movie being worse than the book, or the other way round? Worth watching, or a waste of time? TIA.

[Wanderer]

I haven't read the book, but I liked the film. Definitely worth watching.

[Florestan]

I haven't read the book, but I liked the film. Definitely worth watching.

Thanks, Tasos. I recently read the book and it's excellent, I highly recommend it to you.

[drogulus]

Has anyone watched this?

     No, but I have. If I prefer the cruelty of the Inquisitor to that of the invaders it's because it's naked. Both sides use the martyrdom of the peasants for their purposes.

     Scorsese seems to be making the point, and has the priest finally coming around. The peasants shouldn't be pawns to be sacrificed by either side.

[Florestan]

If I prefer the cruelty of the Inquisitor to that of the invaders

Invaders and their cruelty? Care to elaborate on this, please?

[drogulus]

Invaders and their cruelty? Care to elaborate on this, please?

     It's in the film. The Portuguese Jesuits assumed they had the right to expose Japanese peasants to hideous cruelty because having the correct religion excused them from the harm they brought with them. In time the priest protagonist realizes what he had done and resolves to be a secret Christian and not get anyone killed. That, I maintain, is progress.

     I think Scorsese had something like this in mind. It sure seems like he did, so it's not just me being my atheistic self, hating on the arrogance of the absolutists, though it's certainly that as well.

[Florestan]

The Portuguese Jesuits assumed they had the right to expose Japanese peasants to hideous cruelty because having the correct religion excused them from the harm they brought with them.

Truly you are from Mars and I am from Venus.

No, really, it shows big time you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what it means to be cruelly invaded --- but then again, how could you, an American, have any such idea? (be it said as a strict matter of fact, without any offence whatsoever).

[drogulus]

Truly you are from Mars and I am from Venus.

No, really, it shows big time you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what it means to be cruelly invaded --- but then again, how could you, an American, have any such idea? (be it said as a strict matter of fact, without any offence whatsoever).

      It was a small invasion. The Japanese were stronger than the indigenous people of the Americas, too. I guess I'm more of an invader through ancestry than an invaded, if that matters.

[Florestan]

      It was a small invasion.

It was no invasion at all.

[drogulus]

It was no invasion at all.

     Well, it's true Japan never suffered an Opium War or other depredations, even when the Americans uninvaded in the 1850's. But why is that? How did Japan succeed at keeping its sovereignty?

     Among the first trade items acquired from the Portuguese were guns. The Japanese copied them for use in their civil wars. It's tough to conquer a well armed people by throwing scriptures at them.

[SimonNZ]

Has anyone watched this?



Is it a case of the movie being worse than the book, or the other way round? Worth watching, or a waste of time? TIA.

Andrew Garfield is an astonishingly poor actor and I don't understand how he keeps getting work. His role should have been taken by Adam Driver who is underused in the film.

The torture scenes are voyeuristic rather than tragic.

Drink every time someone says "apostatize".

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Has anyone watched this?



Is it a case of the movie being worse than the book, or the other way round? Worth watching, or a waste of time? TIA.

Worth watching.

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

     It's in the film. The Portuguese Jesuits assumed they had the right to expose Japanese peasants to hideous cruelty because having the correct religion excused them from the harm they brought with them. In time the priest protagonist realizes what he had done and resolves to be a secret Christian and not get anyone killed. That, I maintain, is progress.

     I think Scorsese had something like this in mind. It sure seems like he did, so it's not just me being my atheistic self, hating on the arrogance of the absolutists, though it's certainly that as well.

Your description is distorted and inaccurate.

[drogulus]

Andrew Garfield is an astonishingly poor actor and I don't understand how he keeps getting work. His role should have been taken by Adam Driver who is underused in the film.

The torture scenes are voyeuristic rather than tragic.

Drink every time someone says "apostatize".

     I agree about Garfield and Driver. Beside the Inquisitor (yay!) I thought the most interesting character was the interpreter.

     

     

Your description is distorted and inaccurate.

     I accurately described my views. A Christian apologist wrote a review highlighting this speech by the Interpreter:

Think it over . . . You're the only Christian priest left in this country. Now you're captured and there's no one left to teach the peasants and spread your doctrine. Aren't you useless? . . . You heard what Chuan [Ferreira] said. He's translating books of astronomy and medicine; he's helping the sick; he's working for other people. Think of this too: as the old bonze keeps reminding Chuan, the path of mercy means simply that you abandon self. Nobody should worry about getting others into his religious sect. To help others is the way of the Buddha and the teaching of Christianity—in this point the two religions are the same. What matters is whether or not you walk the path of truth.

     The critic cites this as objectionable, saying:

The interpreter sets up a radically imbalanced set of scales for Rodrigues to use in weighing his decision. On the one side, he sets what he calls the "useless" nature of teaching as a "Christian priest" if nobody else will do it. On the other side, the interpreter rapidly treats all of the following as equivalent goods that would flow from submission to the persecuting regime, in a sleight-of-hand familiar to anyone regularly involved in public discussions of theology today.

     From a certain perspective this is the "accurate, undistorted" view.

     The Inquisitor doesn't elevate his brutality and cruelty above anything other than loyalty to the interests of his master. It's a nasty job he'd rather not do, but he's the kind of villain that's suited to doing it, and in the tradition of charming villains he makes it work for us.

     OK, I'm making the film sound a little better than it is, but in parts it really is interesting for the reasons I cite.

[Madiel]

I find it weird when people just assume you're supposed to approve of and agree with the characters in a work of fiction.

There was a fuss some years ago with people arguing the most recent version of Lolita was somehow endorsing pedophilia.

[Florestan]

Andrew Garfield is an astonishingly poor actor and I don't understand how he keeps getting work. His role should have been taken by Adam Driver who is underused in the film.

The torture scenes are voyeuristic rather than tragic.

Drink every time someone says "apostatize".

Sounds like Mel Gibson's The Passions of the Christ.