Paul, Apostle of Christ | March 28, 2018 | Sony

[That One Girl]

 

[TalismanRing]

[Morieris]

Here's a movie about Jesus' foe turned friend...I don't care but you know what, someone out there does, and good for them. 

[SLAM!]

"Sony goes biblical in hopes of box office riches."

 

That isn't why filmmakers should be 'going biblical'. If Sony plans on exploiting a biblical story for the sole purpose of making profit, then I can't root for this film to do so.

 

Nice idea for a feature film, though.

[WrathOfHan]

12 minutes ago, slambros said:

"Sony goes biblical in hopes of box office riches."

 

That isn't why filmmakers should be 'going biblical'. If Sony plans on exploiting a biblical story for the sole purpose of making profit, then I can't root for this film to do so.

 

Nice idea for a feature film, though.

You're reading way too much into this.

[SLAM!]

11 hours ago, WrathOfHan said:

You're reading way too much into this.

I hope you're right.

[dudalb]

Hollywood has been exploting religion to make a buck since the silent days. Amazed anyone did not know this.

Some people ignorance of basic reality never ceases to amaze me.

[SLAM!]

42 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Hollywood has been exploting religion to make a buck since the silent days. Amazed anyone did not know this.

Some people ignorance of basic reality never ceases to amaze me.

 

That does make sense, but I still think making a biblical film to give glory to God should be the first reason for making a film like this, or the film may run the risk of being insensitive (Darren Aronofsky's Noah). Hopefully an enthusiastic Christian writer or director will give it their absolute best like the people behind The Passion of the Christ did.

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, dudalb said:

Hollywood has been exploting religion to make a buck since the silent days. Amazed anyone did not know this.

Some people ignorance of basic reality never ceases to amaze me.

And Religion's been exploiting people for money way farther back than that so... 

 

17 minutes ago, slambros said:

 

That does make sense, but I still think making a biblical film to give glory to God should be the first reason for making a film like this, or the film may run the risk of being insensitive (Darren Aronofsky's Noah). Hopefully an enthusiastic Christian writer or director will give it their absolute best like the people behind The Passion of the Christ did.

Movies cost money - studios are in the movie business.  Making money for their business is their first priority.  Even over art and their business is art.   If they wanted to just give away money they'd donate to a charity.

 

Some of the best movies about religion and belief ever made were made by atheists and agnostics - for example -  A Man For All Seasons, The Flowers of St. Francis, The Mission, Of Gods and Men.  Some of the worst by devout believers - 2016's Ben Hur, anything with Kirk Cameron etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2017 by TalismanRing

[SLAM!]

57 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

And Religion's been exploiting people for money way farther back than that so... 

 

Movies cost money - studios are in the movie business.  Making money for their business is their first priority.  Even over art and their business is art.   If they wanted to just give away money they'd donate to a charity.

 

Some of the best movies about religion and belief ever made were made by atheists and agnostics - for example -  A Man For All Seasons, The Flowers of St. Francis, The Mission, Of Gods and Men.  Some of the worst by devout believers - 2016's Ben Hur, anything with Kirk Cameron etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

While it has been happening for a long time, that still doesn't excuse such practice from people's scrutiny, and it doesn't mean I can't be disappointed at the notion of the practice. 

 

I would rather have Christian films be made by people like Kirk Cameron- even without the quality, the heart is truly into it, and it usually shines through no matter how technically lacking the overall product is.

 

If you would like to see what a better film by a devout believer would look like, I challenge you to see the recent theatrical release All Saints. That is a very well made film!

[dudalb]

On ‎9‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 11:57 AM, TalismanRing said:

And Religion's been exploiting people for money way farther back than that so... 

 

Movies cost money - studios are in the movie business.  Making money for their business is their first priority.  Even over art and their business is art.   If they wanted to just give away money they'd donate to a charity.

 

Some of the best movies about religion and belief ever made were made by atheists and agnostics - for example -  A Man For All Seasons, The Flowers of St. Francis, The Mission, Of Gods and Men.  Some of the worst by devout believers - 2016's Ben Hur, anything with Kirk Cameron etc.

 

 

 

 

 

There is an old joke in Hollywood that it takes a Jew to make a good movie about  Christianity..."Quo Vadis"(1951) was directed by Mervyn Le Roy and the 1959 Ben Hur by William Wyler...both were Jewish.

So was Fred Zinneman ..who directed "A Man For All Seasons" and "The Nun's Story".

The    2016 Ben Hur seems to have originated at the studio, with a couple of Chistian producers brought in in order to "sell" the movie to the faith audience,and they hired a director not known for his religious viewpoint. So I am not sure you can say the 2016 Ben Hur was the product of devout believers...although whoever was responsible for that POS movie should do penance......

 

 

 

 

Edited September 22, 2017 by dudalb

[CoolioD1]

eh, i'm more of a Ringo guy.

[dudalb]

On ‎9‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 0:59 PM, slambros said:

 

While it has been happening for a long time, that still doesn't excuse such practice from people's scrutiny, and it doesn't mean I can't be disappointed at the notion of the practice. 

 

I would rather have Christian films be made by people like Kirk Cameron- even without the quality, the heart is truly into it, and it usually shines through no matter how technically lacking the overall product is.

 

If you would like to see what a better film by a devout believer would look like, I challenge you to see the recent theatrical release All Saints. That is a very well made film!

I have watched a couple of Kirk Cameron's films, and they are pure crap.

I hate to tell you this, but a great  many people don't buy into religion, and a lot of those who do are not Christians. 

And the idea of a "Christian America" terrifies me. See "The Handmaiden's Tale" for details.

 

Edited September 22, 2017 by dudalb

[SLAM!]

5 hours ago, dudalb said:

I have watched a couple of Kirk Cameron's films, and they are pure crap.

I hate to tell you this, but a great  many people don't buy into religion, and a lot of those who do are not Christians. 

And the idea of a "Christian America" terrifies me. See "The Handmaiden's Tale" for details.

 

 

I don't buy into religion either. There's a lot of people that think basic religion us the way, but that's not a good way of looking at it. Christianity is so much more. And plenty of Christians like watching faith-based films.

 

I also don't see how The Handmaid's Tale is about a Christian America after reading Google's description. Please explain why you think that, because I know Jesus would never treat women that shamefully.

[Hiccup23]

The should create an actual quality epic Bible Extended Universe. Start from Creation and go to Revelations. It could a ton of money if casted, written, marketed, and directed correctly. 

[dudalb]

17 hours ago, slambros said:

 

I don't buy into religion either. There's a lot of people that think basic religion us the way, but that's not a good way of looking at it. Christianity is so much more. And plenty of Christians like watching faith-based films.

 

I also don't see how The Handmaid's Tale is about a Christian America after reading Google's description. Please explain why you think that, because I know Jesus would never treat women that shamefully.

So Christianity is not a religion.........LOL.

And funny, almost everybody else gets that A Handmaiden's Tale is about a Fundementalist From of CHristinity taking power in America.

[dudalb]

15 hours ago, Hiccup23 said:

The should create an actual quality epic Bible Extended Universe. Start from Creation and go to Revelations. It could a ton of money if casted, written, marketed, and directed correctly. 

Is everything a freaking Comic Book Franchise to some people?

I am ,as you might have picked up, not big on religion, but even I think that talking about the Bible in terms of a "Extended Universe" is just plain silly.

[TalismanRing]

11 minutes ago, dudalb said:

So Christianity is not a religion.........LOL.

And funny, almost everybody else gets that A Handmaiden's Tale is about a Fundementalist From of CHristinity taking power in America.

How fitting that A Handmaiden's Tale is being referenced in an Apostle Paul film discussion. 

 

[Orestes]

Not a Christian myself, but I've long viewed Paul as the first 'antichrist,' or person who worked in the spirit of the antichrist, and nowhere near the last. I highly doubt that's the road this movie will explore, though.

Edited September 23, 2017 by Orestes

[SLAM!]

2 hours ago, dudalb said:

So Christianity is not a religion.........LOL.

And funny, almost everybody else gets that A Handmaiden's Tale is about a Fundementalist From of CHristinity taking power in America.

 

The reason why Christianity is much more than a religion is this: while other religions are big rulebooks trying to tell people they can 'get themselves to Heaven', the great news of the Gospel is that Jesus has already paid the debt of sin for us; it's not about following rules, but having a relationship with the one who died for us.

 

2 hours ago, Orestes said:

Not a Christian myself, but I've long viewed Paul as the first 'antichrist,' or person who worked in the spirit of the antichrist, and nowhere near the last. I highly doubt that's the road this movie will explore, though.

 

Respectfully speaking, I do not believe that Paul is any sort of antichrist. The Bible says that he received forgiveness for his sins and he followed God's direction, giving glory to God, evangelizing, spreading the Gospel, and being an instrumental help in the development of the Church. He also wrote many of the books of the Bible. And he was arrested for standing beside God many times. The Bible also shows him trusting in God.

 

Paul would have had such spirit if God had not liberated him from the name of Saul and the act of killing His people. Because anyone that claims to speak the truth but does not confess that Jesus is the Son of God has the spirit you speak of that is not of God (1 John 4 : 2-3). So if Paul were an antichrist, I don't believe he would have gone out if his way to repent from his sinful nature and live a Godly life that put him in crosshairs of the people of the world who were against God at the time. I don't believe Paul would have mustered up the strength it takes to truthfully speak of Jesus the way he does in the book of Romans and elsewhere.

 

Sorry for going on a rant but I felt that it needed to be said.