Saw this movie for the first time last night, and would like to have a discussion about it

Saw this movie for the first time last night, and would like to have a discussion about it.

I really enjoyed the move.
The cinematography was beautiful, and although its depictions of the suffering of Christians in Japan were absolutely brutal, it always maintained a certain distance from the suffering, which I felt was important in relating the viewer to Andrew Garfield's character. I also thought the reveal of Gafrield's character being more similar to Peter or Judas was well done.

What did you all think of Jesus speaking, and subsequently, the painting of Jesus fading to darkness? I was actually in awe. Having the silence interrupted was beautiful.

the movie doesn't show how the kirishitans were converted to their mangled version of Christianity the same way as the japanese government attempted to get them to apostatize.

the movie takes place less than a century after the catholic church stopped torturing people into converting

The movie follows people who've failed to learn or even understand the most basic aspects of japanese culture and are attempting to convert the japanese to the european faith.

The church's motivations in sending people to convert the populations of foreign countries is entirely political, as once a christian comes into power in a foreign nation, that nation becomes a glorified vassal of the church. The targeted country's only recourse to this is to either accept their eventual loss of autonomy and identity or murder their own citizens.

oh yea, the reason people were forcibly converted to "Christianity" in japan is because the jesuits were effectively trading advanced weaponry (the arquebus) to lords who converted their subjects. Lords went for this because, at the time, japan was in a state of civil war between around a dozen factions.

I think i covered everything.

I'm aware of all of this- do you feel it detracts from the ultimate message or any of the themes of the movie?

Beautiful movie

Nobody expects subtlety from a movie about religion senpai. It's a fine flick

>want to talk about Silence
>weebs storm in to defend Nippon's honor against the evil catholic church

literally every thread

Incredibly underrated, I simply cannot understand why this wasn't more successful.

The studio hated it and pulled it from theatres after brief showings

Copy/pasting from the forbes review of this movie, but this section from it helped put into words some of my feelings about the climactic scene with the fumie

>Is God's plan revealed to us through the suffering of others? Is our faith meaningless until it is tested, and perhaps most meaningful when it is broken by the very nature of mankind that defines divinity? When we attain oneness with God must surely be the moment in which we can comprehend some fraction, some semblance, of his suffering for us -- to be Christlike is to be fully human, fully condemned, to feel fully abandoned by those you love most and in whom you place your faith, just as it was for Christ himself, isn't it?
>And without divinity, what mortal could possibly survive such a test of faith, and who among us could maintain hope after see the suffering of all the world as we feel abandoned and unloved? In breaking, in trampling Christ beneath our feet in despair, we call out, "Why have you forsaken me?" And in that moment, it is finished. We have crossed the threshold, embraced for a moment the swelling heart of someone who so loves the world they will suffer and die for it just in hopes it will satiate humanity's hunger for cruelty and injustice.
>We sacrifice ourselves in a final desperate plea for it to stop, crying out in a sense of abandonment, and the only question is whether we do this to stop our own pain or as an act of such pure love we condemn our own souls to free the souls of others languishing in hellish torment.

absolutely

I liked it, even though the ending, with the last few seconds in particular was dumb.

I love how all of that is nothing but nonsense circle speak that would appease your average church going, WWE fan pleb from the bible belt but make no sense to anyone who bothered to actually read it for what it is.

The missionaries were very successful and I'm sure Japan could have become a majority Catholic country, had not the sneaky English and Dutch spread lies about the church to the Japanese lords. They were mad as hell about how Portugal had a trading monopoly with Japan.

Certainly one of Scorcese's finest.

Most impressive was that it didn't appear at all like a Scorcese film. He effaces himself completely. Which has the effect also of speaking to his mastery of the craft of filmmaking.

That's interesting, none of what you were speaking about felt particularly distracting to me.

I don't feel that's a fair characterization of the quote. It outlines the internal questions Garfield's character was facing throughout the film.
Would you say the same to be true for the film as a whole?

What fucked Christianity in Japan was the feud between the Jesuits and the Franciscans. with the Jesuits claiming that the Franciscans were agents and provocateurs of the Spanish empire while the Jesuits were accused to being false Christians due to their relative wealth due to their relations with Portuguese traders. When a Spanish ship got wrecked on Japan and was seized, the captain of that ship tried to threaten the Shogun with retaliation from the Spanish Empire at which point the Shogun was having no one christfaggotry, especially considering the Ikko Ikki rebellion was still a rather recent event and no one wanted another religious uprising, especially one that might have foreign backing behind it

or what really happened is the japanese government recognized the catholic church as a ruling, power seeking entity

because it was, is, always will be, etc.

if you're trying to say the movie is about faith, then putting the movie it it's historical context makes it more about ignorance and fighting to maintain that ignorance.

What are your thoughts on the director's decision to limit the historical context the movie is placed in?
Do you think that was an intentional decision, or an oversight?

The movie is an adaptation of a Japanese book, so while a Japanese person would be familiar with the historical context and time period the novel was set it, your western christfags think that it is all about them and the "chruch" reviews of this movie reflect that

neither, as a lot of effort is made to keep the movie in historical context. For instance literally every line from the inquisitor is dripping with reference/relevance to contemporary events.

But since there aren't any text blurbs about the warring lords period of Japanese history, the Spanish inquisition, forced conversion to Christianity for warring lords to get guns, t/l notes on how neeson's character is an idiot who blamed his (and other's) inability to explain transcendent concepts to the japanese on the japanese rather than lack of fluency in japanese, etc, people can easily ignore the historical context and spew bullshit like "ETZ ALL ABOUT FAIF"

The film primarily took place through the vantage point of a priest on a mission. I think it was a deliberate decision by the director to put the audience in a similar point of view.
We only learned of Japan as the priests did.

and the priests never learned of japan

They addressed this in the movie. Did you watch it?

Yes, I am aware the movie goes into how the priests never actually learned anything about japan before trying to convert people.

I guess I'm missing the point you're trying to make

What do you think this movie was about if not a man grappling with his faith?

for starters, it would only be a grapple with faith if a cornerstone of catholic theology was religious conversion occurs via osmosis and requires no knowledge or understanding of foreign cultures/languages from the priests.

Since conversion via osmosis isn't a cornerstone of catholic theology, the movie is not about faith.

The movie is actually about people entering a country they don't understand, exerting no effort to understand it, getting manipulated by local officials to support their wars, creating a suicide-by-proxy cult that only vaguely resembles Christianity, and then once foreign support is no longer needed, being subject to the same treatment the original christian converts were subjected to in order to get them to convert, then blaming japan for their failures, and only when a great many people are tortured and killed because of them, are they prepared to even act like they're accepting any sort of responsibility for their actions.

Essentially, the movie is about a man pushing another man off a cliff and writing a long book grappling with his faith.

Wow, that's what you got out of the movie? Interesting takeaway.

step on me

go ahead

considering that's basically the history of the kirishitans, I wouldn't just call it a "takeaway."

> MUH JESUS
What a shot movie. For realism they should have had the priests molest some boys. Seriously glorifying religion is buse; we should put out more movies glorifying Atheist beliefs like reason, logic, medicine etc

>jesus is a submissive footfag

no. NO!

Oh, I was talking about the movie though.

the movie does a pretty decent job of maintaining historical context, but, like said, because the context isn't established in text blurbs, people ignore it and spew twaddle about faith.

I think faith is a central theme to the movie. I'm not trying to be obtuse, I genuinely am curious how you not only came away with the idea that faith had nothing to do with the movie, but also that this
was what the movie was about

>Christfags thinking everything is about them

Reminder that the Japanese converts believed they were worshiping the "sun" of god, which just made them a strange Shinto cult

Yes, they spoke about that in the movie. I still don't understand how you came away with what you did after watching the movie.

Why was this ignored by awards? This is pure kino. How the hell did garbage like HACKsaw ridge get awards and not this?

it's not about pedophile priests like Spotlight

For starters, your gay and a looser. Jot that down.

turboweeb

But HACKsaw ridge glorifies religion even more and that got awads. Can't be about the theme. Feels like this movie was lobbied out of existence by a force we don't understand.

because the studios decided that pushing for black movies was more important

>I've read up on this topic and BY GOD I will shove my knowledge into every thread remotely associated with that topic
Yeah real nice lecture, it's almost as if I actually clicked on a wikipedia link. Now fuck off.

Which part of "HACKsaw ridge got awards" do I need to repeat?

it wasn't about catholicism

One of the best best films I've ever seen

I kinda explained how it wasn't actually about faith. More than once, in fact.

no, the only thing you've explained is how much of an obtuse moron you are
which you continue to prove with every post

stop posting any time

Hacksaw only won for editing. Not that big of an accomplishment. Why the fuck is Andrew Garfield suddenly hollywood's go-to-guy when you need a christian?