If you’re curious, my video on Scarface as a Christian movie is linked in the box of this video. Also don't judge me on the Einstein portraits in the background, they belonged to a previous housemate.
Agreed on Risen. I was surprised how enjoyable the movie was. For me it was a prime example what a good, Christian flick could be. Without being too preachy or focusing on theological nuances yet still overtly Christian and entertaining at the same time. The cinematography was excellent, acting was good and, might be wrong, but I think the story was told in such an interesting way that even non-Christians or non-believers can still enjoy it.I haven’t seen Risen mentioned yet. Saw it on Roku a few months back. Was pleasantly surprised, even with the inaccuracies.
There is a scene in there when the lead character is pretty stunned. I related to that scene in terms of my own conversion moment (His eyes were opened).
It's not much of a rise, is it? Sure Al Pacino grows in power and wealth but what is the cost? His wife leaves him. His siblings fear him. His son hates him and he dies all alone after a life full of regret and seeking repentance but not being able to let go of his sinful ways and to top it off, he doesn't recieve an easy-out death like in a Jimmy Cagney movie but a living death. You call that glory? I call that tragic. What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?
In the second film, a Jew mobster puts Brando and Pacino to shame with his depth of dishonesty. That Pacino is Catholic further adds to the irony and tragedy of his character.
Have you ever actually watched these films?
Regarding Apocalypto, it was an excellent film, but the critiques of its historicity are somewhat valid. The accounts of human sacrifice and cannibalism are more associated with the Aztec culture, not the Maya. Further, the Maya Empire had ceased to exist by the time of European arrival; it was the Aztecs who ruled Mesoamerica. If he had simply used Aztec culture rather than Maya (which still exists in local communities, just not in empire form), it would have negated much of the criticism. But I still loved the movie, even as a Mesoamerica scholar.
Those critiques of Apocalypto's historicity are not valid, they are politically motivated by the industry, which absolutely hates Gibson. I have addressed these two major lies in this post:
1- that the Mayas weren't around by the time the Spanish arrived
2-that the Mayas didn't practice human sacrifice on a large scale in the manner depicted in the movie
Human sacrifice in Maya culture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sculpture in the Great Ballcourt at Chichen Itza depicting sacrifice by decapitation. The figure at left holds the severed head of the figure at right, who spouts blood in the form of serpents from his neck
During the pre-Columbian era, human sacrifice in Maya culture was the ritual offering of nourishment to the gods. Blood was viewed as a potent source of nourishment for the Maya deities, and the sacrifice of a living creature was a powerful blood offering. By extension, the sacrifice of a human life was the ultimate offering of blood to the gods, and the most important Maya rituals culminated in human sacrifice. Generally only high status prisoners of war were sacrificed, with lower status captives being used for labour.
Human sacrifice among the Maya is evident from at least the Classic period (c. AD 250–900) right through to the final stages of the Spanish conquest in the 17th century. Human sacrifice is depicted in Classic Maya art, is mentioned in Classic period hieroglyphic texts and has been verified archaeologically by analysis of skeletal remains from the Classic and Postclassic (c. AD 900–1524) periods. Additionally, human sacrifice is described in a number of late Maya and early Spanish colonial texts, including the Madrid Codex, the Kʼicheʼ epic Popol Vuh, the Kʼicheʼ Título de Totonicapán, the Kʼicheʼ language Rabinal Achi, the Annals of the Kaqchikels, the Yucatec Songs of Dzitbalche and Diego de Landa's Relación de las cosas de Yucatán.
A number of methods were employed by the Maya, the most common being decapitation and heart extraction. Additional forms of sacrifice included ritually shooting the victim with arrows, hurling sacrifices into a deep sinkhole, entombing alive to accompany a noble burial, tying the sacrifice into a ball for a ritual reenactment of the Mesoamerican ballgame and disembowelment.
(((Critics))) hated this film because it was blacklisted actor-director Gibson's work, they were butthurt because it was objectively one of the best films from that decade, and one which showed the truth instead of the false noble savage narrative, as the pre-Columbian tribes were absolute savages who practiced human sacrifice on a large scale before the arrival of Christian Europeans.
Babette’s Feast (1987)
At once a rousing paean to artistic creation, a delicate evocation of divine grace, and the ultimate film about food, the Oscar-winning Babette’s Feast is a deeply beloved treasure of cinema. Directed by Gabriel Axel and adapted from a story by Isak Dinesen, it is the lovingly layered tale of a French housekeeper with a mysterious past who brings quiet revolution in the form of one exquisite meal to a circle of starkly pious villagers in late nineteenth-century Denmark. Babette’s Feast combines earthiness and reverence in an indescribably moving depiction of sensual pleasure that goes to your head like fine champagne.
1) I did not say there was no human sacrifice in Maya culture. Rather that the cannibalism and profundity in scale of human sacrifice were greater with the Aztecs. In fact, there is little to no evidence of cannibalism at all among the Maya, whereas the Spanish literally saw the Aztecs eating people. The scale and delusion of human sacrifice was so great that the masses offered themselves willingly thinking they were pleasing their demon gods (I suppose they were).
2) I literally said that the Maya still were around, but that the empire had ceased to exist long before. The Aztec Empire was the ruling empire at the time of European conquest and dominated the region.
I never mentioned anything about cannibalism, and it wasn't an important feature in Apocalypto, so you're using a strawman here. As to human sacrifice, you've claimed that "The accounts of human sacrifice are more associated with the Aztec culture, not the Maya", and I've proved you were wrong.
You probably just took the pseudohistorical denigrations of Gibson's work as truth, I have shown here 7 historic documents that prove that human sacrifice was an integral part of Mayan culture. Here's another study, the historic illustration and depiction in the text are exactly like the scenes depicted in Apocalypto, if anything the movie was less gory than described here:
View attachment 28993
View attachment 28994
Mayan kingdoms were still around when the Spaniards arrived, in fact it took Spain almost two centuries to defeat and conquer them completely:
"The Spanish conquest of the Maya was a prolonged affair; the Maya kingdoms resisted integration into the Spanish Empire with such tenacity that their defeat took almost two centuries. The Itza Maya and other lowland groups in the Petén Basin were first contacted by Hernán Cortés in 1525, but remained independent and hostile to the encroaching Spanish until 1697, when a concerted Spanish assault led by Martín de Urzúa y Arizmendi finally defeated the last independent Maya kingdom."
Funny how you say that when the scene right before that is Vito telling Michael how much he regrets how Michael followed him into a life of crime and how he wanted so much more for him.Vito Corleone was very successful, lived to old age in luxury and died of a heart attack in his family estate, not much to regret and not much soul searching there.
The tragedy of Michael is prevalent even in the first film. By Part 3, Coppola has to spell it out for those who still think his movie glorifies crime.As to his son, lot of the "midlife crisis Michael" you describe was in Part3, which was kind of a redheaded stepchild sequel that came out decades after the first two parts.
Overall, the character is portrayed as a tragic figure who lost himself and his family, the worldly triumphs were a relatively minor side effect of selling his soul.Overall, the character is portrayed as a badass macho Italian stud who kicked ass and won, the soul searching aspects were a relatively minor side effect of his triumph as a mobster.