>>618385
>He kept rejecting Christ over and over the years, we should be angry/disgusted with him.
Well, it makes his character more human I guess, but it leaves much to be desired regarding the message. I like movies that you can reason about later and discuss. But here I feel like the viewer has very little to reason about. If every conclusion is equally as viable as the next one - what's the point?
>>618408
>Fr. James Martin
I can't help but feel like he himself didn't know what to make of it. He even notes that another jesuit thinks the central question of the movie is "Can we trust that God works through a persons conscience?"
The deeper you delve into the movie, the more questions come up - and it leaves you with no devices to answer any of them.
>Confusing as it seems to some Christian viewers, Christ requests this contradictory act from his priest. It makes little sense to anyone, least of all to Father Rodrigues, who has assiduously resisted it for himself. Yet he does it. Because Jesus has asked him to.
Well, how does the viewer know it's Christ that's talking to him? Answer is: He doesn't. There's no way of drawing that as the most logical conclusion in the context of the movie. The priest is even shown as being mentally unstable in at least two cases.
>>618486
>As I have said, I have never watched the movie, but I think most anons here are missing the essential point.
But you are seeing similiarities between this movie, which you've never seen, and another movie? Not saying it disqualifies you from discussion, but there's little ground to stand on.
>These films work as a transmission of their feelings rather than a propaganda for or against the christian faith, […] a medium for transmission of emotions and not a learning tool.
This is not art class though. It's surely a nice set of moving pictures - they can stand on their own. But the message, if there is one, is wholly inconclusive.
>For those who compare this to Passion of the Christ, it's not very feasible to compare them both.
I didn't compare the movies, I compared their depiction of suffering.
>It's okay to be boring, art isn't supposed to be enjoyable because it's not entertainment.
For me the movie fails on both fronts. It's a movie after all, not some kind of performance art.
>It's not the point of the scene to tell you that Christ condones apostasy or not.
Look above to read what I replied to the other poster. There's a scene where the missionary literally is spoken to by what he perceives as Jesus.
You should take the time to watch the movie and tell me if you come to the same conclusion you have now afterwards.