I bet you’ve been asking yourself (as I have from time to time), “Whatever happened to Mira Sorvino?” She was an excellent actor, nabbing an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in Woody Allen’s “Mighty Aphrodite”; and her performance in “Summer of Sam” wasn’t to be sneezed at, either.
Well, the news is sad. Sorvino’s one of the leads in an upcoming movie about (wait for it), the power of Jesus! Watch the trailer below, go to the website for “Do You Believe?“, have a look around, and then, ye mighty, despair. The movie teams Sorvino with has-beens like Cybill Shepherd and Lee Majors, and seems to be another of those religious flicks aimed at those who, unsatisfied with remakes of Spider Man, long for action flicks that show them that God is real. This one resembles the execrable “God is Not Dead” movie, but on steroids.
In fact, the two movies were made by the same people. Perhaps we’re looking at a new generation of religious blockbusters: movies that do more than dramatize Biblical stories like “The Ten Commandments” or “The Greatest Story Ever Told”, but, set in modern times, try to buttress the faith of religionists who are desperately seeking reassurance. I can’t help but see these movies as evidence that faith is slowly waning in America.
Here’s the summary:
A dozen different souls—all moving in different directions, all longing for something more. As their lives unexpectedly intersect, they each are about to discover there is power in the Cross of Christ … even if they don’t believe it. Yet.
When a local pastor is shaken to the core by the visible faith of an old street-corner preacher, he is reminded that true belief always requires action. His response ignites a faith-fueled journey that powerfully impacts everyone it touches in ways that only God could orchestrate.
This stirring new film from the creators of God’s Not Dead arrives in theaters March 20, 2015. More than a movie, it’s a question we all must answer in our lifetimes: DO YOU BELIEVE?
No, thank you.
Here’s the poster:
And the two minute-video, which you must watch. Lots of car crashes and action scenes! And Jesus, too!
h/t: Alberto
In other godly movie news, Egypt has banned the new Exodus for “historical inaccuracies.”
Shouldn’t it be hysterical innacuracies???
I couldn’t get past casting Batman as Moses.
Hoarse voice: I’m Bibleman.
Ha! Good one!
well, it’s better than seeing Willy Ames in tights as that.
Batman’s a pretty decent actor tho if you’ve seen some of his other films.
Whereas the British Museum has simply published a leaflet correcting the inaccuracies in Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb>/i> …
/@
* HTML tag fail…
I had heard the banning was b/c it depicted the Jews as the builder of the pyramids (so it is a Zionist movie), and for other details like showing Moses with a sword, etc.
Egypt has banned a number of movies. I wonder if they will ban Do You Believe?
They must have been built by the Jews, I mean the big pyramids were build very soon after Noah, so there wouldn’t have been anyone else around – would there. (Amazing that in a hundred years or so one family can be fertile enough to generate the workers needed to build a pyramid…)
The pyramids were built in 10,000 BC, using woolly mammoths. This was documented in a 2008 movie.
What about Eric von Daniken’s ancient astronauts?
Who do you think trained the mammoths?
So if not the Jews, who? And, whoever they were, no doubt they were free and independent employees who could walk away from the pyramids any time they took a notion, eh?
My understanding is that most of the people involved in building the pyramid were Egyptian farms who were recruited to work during the months when the Nile flooded and they couldn’t farm anyway. They saw building the pyramids as a noble duty to help prepare their divine ruler for his rightful place in the afterlife.
There were never a huge number of Hebrews in Egypt and those that were were mostly merchants or free craftsmen, not slaves.
Very good to learn.
I gather that there were still slaves in Egypt. (Not) Many? Of what nationalities? What did the Egyptians have them do?
Keep in mind that I’m not terribly well versed on the low end of ancient Egypt’s social structure but I believe that there were a wide variety of labor type occupations that would be considered slavery by our definition of the word. Since it’s pretty far outside my area of expertise I’m going to refrain from saying more myself.
Mostly Nubians, also known as Kush.
were there even any Jews in Egypt at the time the Pyramids were built? Or is this one of those Neanderthals-riding-dinosaurs things that the Xtians like to foist on us?
Well, the most of the pyramids were already standing before the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews had split off from the other tribes of their region. According to that always 100% accurate font of information Wikipedia, they were supposed to have originated around the 18th Century BCE and Wikipedia’s timeline for the Egyptian pyramid lists only two pyramids as having a later construction date than that.
You know, I’m not sure if I should be hoping that you’re joking, or that you’re not joking.
Just a second while I do important stuff, like sample dispatch notes and ordering a new laptop battery … oh, rude words about blocked SSL and credit cards.
Silly films. It seems form Auntie Beeb that yes, Egypt has banned this film. Which has the unfortunate side effect of permitting an undue amount of Streisand Effect into play. But is otherwise almost provoking the bucket of popcorn by the TV chair (not that I normally eat popcorn, or for that matter watch TV, as opposed to listen to it).
Pity about the Streisand effect – perhaps the film makers crossed a few Egyptian governmental palms with silver to arrange the ban. I’m not terribly au fait with movie finances, but for a reported cost of M$140, an opening weekend of M$24.5 is pretty poor. Hopefully the film crashes and burns it’s investors badly enough to discourage them from backing more such dross.
Much more significant – pertussis seems to be evolving.
I heard about a ban in Morocco, but not Egypt.
Here’s the link for the Beeb story: Egypt has banned a Hollywood film based on the Biblical book of Exodus because of what censors described as “historical inaccuracies”.
It seems the Beeb still regards the reports of the movie’s banning in Morocco as not officially confirmed.
The Egyptian censor is undoubtedly factually correct. I can say that without even seeing the movie. 😉
One can, needless to say, do a stupid thing for a right reason because of another stupid thing.
Not that I support censorship, but I can see why crediting Egypt’s world-famous national monuments which were built over the centuries by Egyptian labour, to a foreign race with which Egypt barely manages to maintain diplomatic relations, would ruffle a few feathers.
Like all titles as a question, the answer is NO!
Religious people who think we need more open dialogue and discussion about faith among the general public often change their minds when they find out that it’s called “faith” because it can’t really do that. Real nonbelievers in real life don’t do and say what we’re supposed to do and say. They get crushed.
And then they retire back to their faith communities sniffing and sniveling about why can’t they just be left alone like they want?
It’s kind of fascinating watching parking lot messengers try to figure out why their attempts to ‘save’ me aren’t going according to the script. There’s no crushing, just confusion.
In my experience the average ‘street’ evangelist is simply not prepared for dealing with someone who isn’t a ‘false’ Christian. They’ve got all their Bible verses lined up and ready to go and are used to arguing interpretation. If the other person doesn’t agree up front that “the Bible is the Word of God” then they’re nonplussed.
If the other person doesn’t even believe in God, then it’s even more confusing. Sometimes they still follow the script anyway — which can lead to some amusing conversations which aren’t conversations at all.
The times I’ve seen them prepared for actual non-belief their script starts with denying that you don’t believe using (I think) 2 Romans and then trying to fish for why you hate god. If they’re bad at fishing it’s a bit fun to watch.
I know their end game is a kind of Chick Tract conversion, and it probably takes a lot of bravery to attempt your first street evangelizing effort, but it always feels like some kind of empty, scripted insider game that can only play out they way they think it should in a different universe.
If you really want to see them have a mental divide by zero error, just walk up to them and hit them with Pascal’s Wager before they have a chance to start talking.
Do you mean with Homer Simpson’s version of the wager?
No, I mean walking up to them and asking them what if they’re wrong and its really Mormons or Catholics or some other denomination that’s correct.
It works best if you take them completely by surprise so move quickly.
… There being no “con-” in their “-versation”?
There needs to be a movie about Zeus ending up being the real god & coming down from Olympus to kick all of our unbelieving asses. It could be titled in a similar way to all the Christian movies so that it would trick people into seeing it as part of the suspence with the Zeus reveal being left to the end.
I wonder if American Gods would make a good movie…
I think it would but there would have to be a lot of editing to get it into movie form. I hope Gaiman writes more about the modern gods like Media & the tumor with all the scalpels on it. He said in an interview that he’d like to.
Óðinn is the true king of the gods, you blasphemer!
Or Zombie Jesus versus Muhammad the Molester, although that sounds more like pro wrestling.
Nice of “Pureflix” to use the same font as Netflix. At least try to be original, people.
Good catch – a transparent attempt to associate an unknown brand with a well-known brand.
Wait. Are we talking about the Xtian co-opting of the Jewish Torah or the Pureflix font?
Yes 🙂
The whole belief system was cobbled together from nicked pieces of other prior faiths, so originality has never been a strong suit.
Seems like we see the entire movie in the trailer. It appears to be strictly for the flock. I think the days of these types of movies as big money-making blockbusters are gone.
Despite having grown up on the 6 Million Dollar Man, I didn’t recognize Lee until the end of the trailer.
A dire warning of the consequences of poking Farrah Fawcett. I’d still have taken the risk though.
YES I Believe! I believe I’d rather watch The Interview than this thing.
Calling all NK hackers…
[ring] ♪ ♪♪ ♪ ♪♪ “Hello, NSA Operations desk. You will help me with something. Or else!”
Even Cybill Shepherd has stooped this low???
Even Sean Astin?!
/@
Yeah, WTH Samwise?
How the mighty have fallen! Ted McGinley, please tell us this movie is only a sideshow stop until you reprise your role as either Jefferson D’Arcy from “Married with Children” or Stanley Gable from the “Revenge of the Nerds” series. 😉
Long-term unemployment makes people desperate.
Cybill Shepherd’s life has always been somewhat of a mess, but leaving that aside for the moment, she has previously described herself as: “a goddess-worshipping Christian Pagan Buddhist”. Now that she is desperate and needs the money, she has returned to her original faith. She credits her return to Jesus as the reason she was able to land this acting role of a lifetime (okay, I exaggerated there a bit). Recently, she stated:
“I was born a Christian, sang in the choir. Then I lost touch with my saviour Jesus Christ. I stopped talking to Him and praying. Then I just started talking to Jesus and I started to feel really good and I got the offer to do this film”.
She’s a nut.
Bummer, I thought she was so bad ass when I was younger.
What a coincidence I am a Jewish Muslim pagan Jedi.
I think it’s surprising how many people find this surprising. Not only does going through the motions of talking “to” someone feel good, it also starts to feel as if you’re not talking to yourself, there’s someone really there who is listening and even answering (in a strange, not-a-voice but thoughts in your head.) For those who put a lot of weight on the idea that intuitions are wise and somewhat magical, this turns into a conviction that there IS someone else there.
Iirc somebody did an experiment where they asked subjects to imagine they were talking to Elisha Otis, the inventor of the elevator. After several days it began to feel real — like he was there, and listening.
Psychologist Richard Wiseman calls this The “As If” Principle.
I often imagine I’m talking to my wife, even though subsequent events show no information was being received.
Still, she undoubtedly exists.
There must be some kind of communications damping system that activates once a couple is wed.
I’m sure of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1eUIK9CihA
I’ve been told by christians that talking to jebus gives them a lift. Maybe they should talk to Otis instead, since he’s lifted millions.
Yeah, but he’s also let down as many….
b&
Same as Jebus (except he lets down more than he lifts).
Well, it’s not exactly as if falling in with a group of lunatics for monetary reasons is exactly uncommon in Hollywood.
Will this be her Last Picture Show?
Reviewing the casting of the last few of the genre, they do seem to fill a niche that has been missing since the demise of the Love Boat.
Missing, but not necessarily mourned.
That’s one boat that should have gone down with all hands. In the Bermuda Triangle, for preference.
Please, anywhere but the Bermuda Triangle. It’ll just encourage the Believers.
Where’s my anal probe – the big one, with the knobs on and no lubricant?
Hmm, stated with such probity.
I hope that’s for the crew of the Love Boat, not me.
Back in the days of the more inane sitcoms, usually featuring smartass Cute Kids (like e.g. Webster or Different Strokes), at moments of more extreme inanity, I used to fantasise some heavy walking in through the door holding a Thompson gun with a 100-round drum magazine and emptying the entire lot into the cast.
It helped me stay sane, you understand.
For anyone forced to watch Do You Believe, I recommend the same technique.
Watchutalkinbout infiniteimprobabilit?
What I said. When forced to watch some indescribably horrid TV show (such as Love Boat or Webster), it helps to fantasise some hideous and preferably ultra-violent fate befalling the cast.
Fortunately, with the rise of the Internet, this circumstance doesn’t occur so often, as one can turn on one’s laptop, slap on headphones, and read WEIT and ignore the TV.
I think those arrived on these shores during the 15-or-so years when I didn’t have a TV.
I still tend to listen to the TV instead of watching it. And I FF through the adverts. Always.
You weren’t missing a lot 😉
FF through the adverts? I wish… I take it then that your ‘TV’ arrives on – some sort of recordable medium. (I was going to say ‘videotape’ but that’s obsolete).
A PVR dumps stuff to disk while I’m at work, and when I get back home – up to 2 months later – I watch it. I did consider one of those “Pivo” (?) boxes which automatically chop out the adverts, but I expected they’d need substantial bodging to get them to work here.
Of course, most TV doesn’t have adverts other than trailers.
Ah, I assumed you watched the stuff on TV while on the rig or wherever you are.
Most rigs have a couple of TVs in the recreation rooms (smoking and non-smoking). They are pretty universally tuned to sports channels, with occasional excursions to news channels.
It’s getting more common for there to be a TV in each cabin. Which is not a lot of good when you’re sharing with someone on a different shift. And then, you’re constrained by what channels the radio operator patches onto the rig’s internal channels. Don’t even get started on the way that satellite decoding cards are restricted from being used in non-domestic settings – a number of operators got grassed over that a few years ago and the availability of TV dropped off a cliff again after that.
I noticed the film had not been rated as yet. I vote for Holly Crap.
Or Mistletoe Poo?
/@
And I thought of Cher: http://youtu.be/5Uu3kCEEc98
The same way you don’t get why Richard Dawkins keeps tweeting, I don’t get why you do advertorials like this to two bit products that are mean to exploit the market.
You should be telling the world about movies like Priest[1]
[1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110889/
Think of the trailer as aversive conditioning – at least that was its effect on me.
Ya gotta know what the not-so-loyal opposition is up to!
Sorry, but Professor Ceiling Cat doesn’t take well to commenters telling him not to post on certain subjects. Please read Da Roolz on the sidebars.
How come you never see red band trailers for Christian movies?
All fur coat and no knickers. This looks way beyond bad.
“All fur coat and no knickers.”
-I’m not sure that’s a metaphor for a bad thing, er, well maybe for a “bad” thing… 😀
Torry fishermen’s wives may well be “bad”, but that doesn’t necessarily make them immoral. You wouldn’t want to cross one. Seriously, you do not want to cross one.
It’s my hope (perhaps a vain one) that in a strange way movies like this one will will actually serve to undermine the idea that faith is both humble and daring, noble and wise — and we never, ever criticize or mock it Faith defines who a person is. This film isn’t just a defense of believing in God, it’s a defense of a very specific, sectarian view of God. God is Jesus.
Do you believe the right way? Because screw spirituality and whether or not it gives you peace and satisfaction. My way is right and your way is wrong.
That will not play out well in the long run. Evangelicals are ironically tainted with the same criticism as gnu atheism: it’s judgmental. Unless every single one of the characters who converts is an atheist, it’s going to be divisive in the community which wants to close ranks among the faithful. When promoting belief in belief, you’re not supposed to want to deal with what’s objectively true. God is supposed to look like many things to many people.
Never come right out and say that someone else is wrong about God. Do it by implication and with a sigh when it’s treated like a fact which contradicts other facts.
Real life doesn’t look like this, any more than movies about the paranormal (“it’s REAL!”) resemble what actually happens. Yes, folks, it looks like fiction because it IS fiction — and like all literary genres will appeal to a limited audience driven by taste for Knowing more than a taste for truth.
Got your bag of wedges … mallet?
The trick is to get the first wedge in, and then let it bed in for a while before building up the strain. Then a wee tap elsewhere on the strain line and -kerPOW – split wide open.
I thought Kevin Sorbo was on steroids.
I can never get over the irony of these movies – they need fictional stories of fictional characters in fictional situations to prove their fiction is real?
Nice.
Heather
Sub
I’d like to see a whole string of satires…Wikipedia lists over 50 different deities in its list of pantheon leaders:
I would very much like to see a movie with CG Hindu gods.
Harryhausen did Kali pretty well in stop motion.
/@
Isn’t Kali the place LL Cool J may or may not have gone back to?
oh heck yes. Harryhausen did lots of mythical things well. Golden Voyage of Sinbad for the win.
Never seen that one, but when I went to see ‘Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger’ in 77 or 78 – because the trailer had fighting skeletons in it, like ‘Jason & the Argonauts’ – I think the projectionist left out at least one middle reel: no skeletons, no idea what the plot was, and too little elapsed time.
There’s some serious catching up to do.
Golden Voyage is my favorite. It has Tom Baker (the fourth Doctor) as a great villain. And my husband has a thing for Carolinen Munro. My favorite quote from it is “Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel!” the words of a skeptic indeed.
Some of the temple carvings have been animated already.
Yes, those carvings. (The link has some amusing elephants at pages 52, 61, 65 (and others). It also has a nice comment on the (scanned) library card page that “A book that is shut is but a block.”
…and “Please help us to keep the book clean and moving.” Is that the expurgated version?
Sir, that is an interpretation which did not sully my mind, pure as the driven snow as it is.
I would like to see the book of Revelation in 3D and top-notch CGI but directed by someone with a good sense of irony – maybe framed by St John the Divine going to sleep in his cave on Patmos, with gases issuing from a fissure in the rock on which he rests his head.
So basically this?
I’ve seen a lot of religious movies and there were a few I liked (especially ones about Joan of Arc and kinda sorta the recent Noah movie) and I tell you of religious films there is none, none, none worse, than “God is not Dead” (though Gibson’s Passion gives it a run for the money).
Stereotyping of atheists, stacking the deck, artificial bad stilted dialogue made worse by heavy-handed ham acting. I applaud the very few religious conservatives who gave it a bad review. Wikipedia reports that evangelical Michael Gerson called it “characterization by caricature”. Secular Amen!
The better religious films are usually by the marginally religious. When “Ben Hur”‘s success revived the market for religious epics, it’s director, William Wyler, joked that it took a Jew to make a really good Jesus movie (not to mention a script largely by gay iconoclast Gore Vidal).
I have some close friends who are very Christian who speak reverently of God Is (Not) Dead. It is abundantly clear that there is a steady audience for this kind of thing.
“Money”
“rope”
“old”
“for”
Rearrange at will until you think you have a logically satisfying answer.
At the risk of being accused of self-promotion, I rounded up some video reviews of that piece of dreck (so really I’m promoting others, not against the roolz, right?)
http://ladyatheist.blogspot.com/2014/12/gods-not-dead-they-watched-it-so-you.html
Interesting collection.
But on the subject of belief (specifically, what some Xtian nutter thinks atheists believe), you (ladyatheist) have an entertaining link here:
ladyatheist.blogspot.co.nz/2011/06/nutty-christian-caller-atheist.html
Just listened to that absolutely stooooopid questioner. Guess I shouldn’t gave been surprised…
I was amazed how long it took for her to grasp what they were saying. “No, for the fifth time, we don’t believe in Satan either. Or aliens. Or Hell.” And she still didn’t get it.
I had a workmate (a very educated ex-Catholic) who still believed I danced around a maypole sacrificing virgins on Halloween. Or something. I don’t know if he was winding me up, but he sounded sincere.
I always enjoy the strange silence when people ask me what religion I am & I say I’m an atheist so causally & with a smile on my face & a flick of my wrist. Sometimes someone else in the group will say, “me too1” & fist bump you. 🙂
There should of course be a http:// before that link – obviously WordPress only inserts it for Youtube links. Why no edit function???
Kirk Cameron aesthetics combined with the intellectual depth of Baywatch.
This is going into my quote book! 🙂
I tried watching Boobwatch once. I lasted five minutes, till they started talking and I had to give up.
But then, this movie hasn’t even got the boobs…
Boobs no? Swim suits, yes?
(Fishing for redeeming characteristics ; not even getting jellyfish so far.)
Baywatch is positively Proustian compared to most of Kirk Cameron’s antics!
And racist too, cue the magical negroe (guy with a cross) and the thug. Probably a lot of other ists too, but the racism is striking.
That really jumped out at me, too. And all these good christians are so lily white and purdy, it’s almost painful to watch.
Movies like this remind of this old (well, oldish – 2008), but excellent article by Hannah Rosin on Christian Evangelical pop culture:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2008/05/pop_goes_christianity.html
More entertainment for the booboise, the same clan that elects Gohmert, Bachmann and Palin to graffiti and deface our schools and courts, nay, our culture, with their moronic, incoherent trash.
I’d be inclined to laugh if it wasn’t so pathetic.
ho hum ho hum ho…bleeding hum!
Aargh! Now I need to hurl.
Car crashes, cop chases, explosions… guess Jebus isn’t really dramatic enough.
I believe – that science has pretty well got things right.
I believe in 1970s English Fords (and that is an article of faith and not to be questioned).
I believe I’m posting on Prof CC’s website.
I believe I’ll have a beer…
As a driver of a 1979 (IIRC) Escort Mk2, I believe I saw various English Fords in the late 1970s.
On the other hand, I also had to maintain the damned thing. “Fix Or Repair, Daily” is not a baseless characterisation.
(Only one previous “lady owner” – the Mother Superior of the local Convent of the Wholly Child Batterers, as their group runabout. Gearbox, clutch and steering were as loose as a goose.
That sounds like a whole lot of previous drivers. I’m surprised it survived.
But (as the current owner of one) at least you can _get at_ everything to screw it back on when it falls off. And it doesn’t have rubber-band cam drive, which is a huge plus.
Having spent two hours on Xmas afternoon trying to help a cousin change a headlight bulb on a ‘modern’ car, I’ll take the old ones (well, selected models of old ones) any day.
The first half hour of all car repair these days consists of finding the box of “security” driver heads for removing the “anti-tamper” screws. Then finding somewhere with the new anti-tamper head for this vehicle.
I have several boxes of those**. But why, on a motor which is 99% regular bolts, would the cylinder head bolts and the little thermostat housing screws – and only those – be ‘Torx’ heads? Bizarre.
** I regard “Do not open. No user-serviceable parts inside. Refer repair to qualified personnel” as a challenge, not a prohibition. On the whole I’ve fixed more than I’ve broken.
To reduce the chance of over-torquing?
No, because the Torx sockets fit the same 1/2″ drive wrench as hex sockets do. And the thermostat housing screws are self-tapping screws into plastic. Kinda bizarre.
What’s the amount of torque that a Torx head can deliver, compared to an Allen key or hex shaft of the same dimensions? Since the cross-section area is lower (I’d estimate a half the area), and it’s narrower, I’d guess a half to a quarter of the available torque.
“What’s the amount of torque that a Torx head can deliver, compared to an Allen key or hex shaft of the same dimensions?”
Well, Torx heads come as either socket-head (takes a Torx ‘driver’ bit) or a Torx head (takes a Torx socket). The Torx does give much more positive engagement than a hex socket or head, particularly if the hex head is a bit corroded or worn and you’re using a 12-pointed socket. In the larger sizes, the Torx head is bigger ‘diameter’ than the 1/2″ square drive, so the 1/2″ square drive would be the limiting factor, rather than the Torx.
Generally, the limit is reached when the points of the hexagon head get rounded off – always a hazard on old bolts – the Torx is much more resistant to that because the points stick out much further.
You’ll laugh. You’ll cry. You’ll hurl.
That’s good. Must be a professional critic.
For my next trick, I shall invent the inflatable TV, using a screen printed on flexible LED sheets.
Why?
Because you can hurl the cat at the TV, get a vaguely satisfying explosion, and have the cat come back to your lap wanting to play again.
In days gone by, when a particularly annoying TV program came on, I used to wish for two-way TV such that cabbages and rotten eggs etc hurled at the set would magically come out of the TV camera the other end. Of course it would have made the job of TV announcer impossibly dangerous.
As to Aidan’s invention (patented it yet?), I’m not sure that having a furious cat bouncing back at you claws out is really a satisfying outcome.
You’ll fandangle in fatuity.
And vacuum in vacuity!
b&
Agh! _God is Not Dead_ is awful. I’ve never seen a movie with so many clichés. It also strikes me as being open to a sequel … which I guess this isn’t, so my Lovecraftian-level gibbering isn’t over yet 😉
What would be the sequel? “Oh wait — yes he is — uh no — he’s not — again”
Death does seem to be a flexible situation when Jesus is involved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R91L7LhH-wg
I don’t know, but what I mean is that the characters seem set up in such a way as that you could imagine them in some other story. For example, more about the Chinese student and his father. _God is Not Dead 2: Mission to China_?
(Ugh!)
Reminds me of all the Santa Claus movies I’ve just watched…if only we believe…
Will they go away if one shouts “I don’t believe in fairies” loud enough?
Stonewall are coming to out you!
I’m impressed by the people who have watched it. I know I would want my time back.
if you end up doing bad Christian movies or Syphy channel movies, there is no better indication that you have utterly failed at your chosen profession.
I sympathize with your perspective. I gather that failure doesn’t always involve not getting paid. What if one doesn’t even get hired for such movies? Even more of a failure? I assume that a given actor in such movies makes at least $100,000, better than the vast majority of humanity. How about a “suit” who determines that there is a market for such movies, and makes a killing from it? By the capitalist’s singular definition, the suit is “successful.”
Mitt Romney (estimated net worth $190M – $250M) takes umbrage at being criticized for being “$ucce$$ful.” Certainly by that definition a public school teacher is not successful, Romney of course knowing more about the challenges of (not) working and going to school and raising a family, by virtue of his English BA and George Romney-supported Harvard MBA/JD and dad nor a stay-at-home parent.
Heard somewhere the other day that megachurch pastor Joel Osteen is worth $40M. A recent break-in at his church netted the thieves an estimated $600K in cash.
that’s quite a haul, if true. Other than that, I have no idea what you are trying to say.
I’ll try again.
What is your definition of “success” for an actor? Being in any movie not religiously-themed? Surely there is non-religiously-themed schlock out there. If a journeyman actor can get a paying job of some sort, that would seem to be some nominal “success.” Only a few actors are in a position to “pick and choose” purely on the basis of their ideological/religious/aesthetic sensibilities/opinions.
Whether or not schlock, and whether or not religiously-themed, movie subject matter with relatively rare exception matters not to the capitalist corporate tyrant “suits” and pure-as-the-driven-snow investors, so long as it sufficiently maximizes return on investment.
In that religion is by all reasonable evidence man-made, would you say Joel Osteen is a failure at his “profession,” but by the Romneyeque definition a success by virtue of having allegedly accumulated a $40M net worth?
Thanks for the clarification. Yep, there is surely non-religious schlock out there, like I said, the syphy (Science Fiction channel) movies.
If someone cannot get anything but schlock, what does that say about them as their quality as an actor? And if one chooses to be in schlock, that doesn’t say much for your business sense. If you have a choice between schlock and in another job, what does that say? If someone chooses to be in a pro-Nazi production, rather than just be a waitress, I will think that they supported such nonsense.
Joel Osteen is a success as a con artist, as is Romney. As a pastor? well, if you take his religion’s claims, he’s a failure. As for Romney, he is a failure as a decent human being because of the harm he has wrought. And yep, that is pretty subjective from me. 🙂
Just congenially curious – would you consider, e.g., Kanye West “successful” in making millions of $$ making what I personally consider to be schlock? Maybe successful as a capitalist but not as an artist?
(Recently read somewhere that he spent $74,000 for Christmas for his single-digit-aged daughter.)
Yes, since Kanye west is making what he wants, and not what he must to remain a singer. He’s not doing commerical jingles.
I would guess, and a guess it is, that the actors in low budget syfy monster movies and badly written Christian movies, would prefer to be doing something else.
If I may split a hair – I always cringe when someone is described as being ‘worth’ something, as if it was an integral property of theirs.
Joel Osteen has got $40m, but if someone managed to steal it, how much would Joel Osteen be worth then?
You just can’t liquidate the guy!
It’s like being declared “redundant”. What! There are more of me working here? Where? What are they doing? How many are there? How did they come to exist? Is the universe prepared for more than one of me!*
*Things I wished I’d asked when I was downsized.
Wish someone would downsize me. I could do with losing a few inches. 😉
Me too!
/@
Me three( not to take downsizing lightly…been there, too)
If any of you find yourself declared redundant (the only put that in the documentation so I can be forgiven for missing the joke opportunity – in the process they said “due to restructuring your position is being eliminated” or something like that) feel free to make the veiled clone joke. I was going to make a joke about hoping that George Clooney would do my interview (from Up In The Air) but I went through so many cuts that by the time it was my turn, that movie was no longer current & they probably would have missed the reference, so I didn’t use it.
Wish they would.
I’ll probably retiring in a few months, so redundancy pay would be more than I’ll earn up to then. “Make me redundant, *please*”.
The prospect (of retirement) does lend a certain – insouciance – to my compliance with the more pointless and irrelevant procedures associated with my job. What can they do? Not give me a raise? Big deal. Not promote me? Ditto. I don’t do anything sackable or piss off the people I work with because, you know, I’m civilised, but my obeisance to the corporate mantras is distinctly perfunctory. I find it quite relaxing.
I’m told it’s noticeable in people approaching retirement.
Consultants, too. Our first instinct is generally to exclaim, “You want me to do what? With the what-what!?” But we generally catch ourselves and remember that we really don’t give a fuck, and are happy to submit an invoice for it is that makes you happy. We’ll take a moment to make sure you really think you want what you say you want, but that’s about it.
Quite liberating, really. Just make sure your hourly rate is high enough that you’re equally happy doing the most brilliant work of your career or digging latrines, and you’re good to go.
b&
The downside is companies like to blame their screw ups on the consultant. I actually turned down some consulting work because it was a 3 hour round trip by car on a dangerous stretch of highway in the snowbelt to a company that claimed they wanted to change but constantly fired highly talented consultants claiming that they didn’t get it because they didn’t make the change.
It sounded like a big leadership problem that I didn’t want to be sucked into.
However, that’s the great thing about consulting – you don’t have to take the crappy jobs.
Pay me enough money and I’m more than happy to take as much blame as you might wish to heap upon me. What do I or my bank account care what you think of me?
Oh, that’s easy, too. You start billing the moment you set foot out your home’s front door, and pass the taxi / limo fees through to them on the invoice. If they want to pay you ($absurd rate) × (several hours / day commute) just so you can sit idly in a car, who’re you to complain? And if there’s anything productive you can do for them while you’re being driven by a professional, fantastic — but that’s their problem if they can’t keep you busy like that.
True, if it comes down to that. But, again, the real secret is to set your rates such that no job is crappy. Even if that means an additional ($ludicrous fee) for the fact that they’re a bunch of otherwise-intolerable assholes.
b&
Oh it was much worse. They made you come in the office and didn’t pay your travel time. They also would smear you so it would be difficult getting other jobs. They were very disfunctional. I know a lot of full time employees who hot footed it out of there.
Well, that right there is a non-starter, isn’t it? They say they want the best — you — but, if they can’t afford to pay the best, they’ll have to settle for second-best. Which is not you.
Hey-presto! Problem solved.
…did I mention how awesome it is being a consultant? You never have to turn anybody down; all you have to do is adjust your rates to make it worth your while, and everything therefore winds up being, by your very own definition, worth your while.
b&
I think the correct euphemism now is ‘right sizing’. At least that is what our State government called it when they sacked 14,000 public servants a couple of years ago 😢
I agree. His net worth doesn’t mean doodly-squat to me. But it apparently means a lot to not a few Amuricuns here in The Land of the Fee and the Home of the Craven.
I’ve always hated that expression, too. The Donald may have a gazillion dollars, but he’s a worthless sob imho.
Here’s my satirical YouTube treatment of “Do You Believe,” in a similar vein as the one I did (that Jerry posted) for “God’s Not Dead:”
“Do You Believe”–More Killer Christians & Evil Atheists by the “God’s Not Dead” Team!
Now I can’t find the Harryhausen thread, but my good high school friend, Lesley Schneer (who gorgeously looked like Liz TAylor back in the day), sadly died last month. Her father, Charles Schneer, was Harryhausen’s partner in those Sinbad, etc., films. Not my kind of movie, but they were very successful. Just talked to her 3 days before she died. Too much of this dying shit going around…
Last year you recommended Herman Philipse’s “God in the age of Science?” as an excellent book. Any recommendations this year?
regards,
S Krishna.
As a contrast, this is how we have it in the Nordic countries
“Do you believe in God?”
“Of course, man”
“Are you a Christian?”
“No I’m a Muslim”
Priceless!
Speaking of God is Not Dead and its sadly fallen star Kevin Sorbo, I just saw a trailer for the new action movie Hercules and I thought Sorbo must have scored a return to his TV role.
But some googling showed that it wasn’t El Sorberino, it was Dwayne Johnson. But the resemblance is remarkable.
They’ve been making B movies like this for a long time, but “Left Behind” was the first one I saw that had a big name star (Nicholas Cage). No doubt we’ll continue to see more of the same as long as the genre remains profitable.
I love Biblical films, and any other film about mythology. Myths of all sorts have longevity because they are ripping good yarns, and because they contain truths–like freedom is good! So I’m on board with Biblical films, though I think Greek and Roman mythology should get a serious look, too.
This stuff, though, is just glurge. Lots and lots of glurge.
Where’s Cecil B. DeMille when you need him?
Yes! Complete with harem costumes and lots of eye shadow!
😀
Loved The Ten Commandments when I was a kid. Really paid no attention to any religious message–just captivating pageantry.
(I suspect I’d laugh my guts out if I saw it now…)
they showed this preview right after showing the preview for “fifty shades of grey” at a showing for “unbroken” I went to. The crowd shouted “amen” and burst out in applause at a damn preview! I wanted to throw up. Needless to say, I live in the Bible Belt.
Did they yell oh, Jesus during the preview of Fifty Shades of Gray?
lol!
I saw the comedy Paul (Seth Rogen, Simon Pegg & Nick Frost) in a small theatre in a small town in North Carolina. A town that had giant white crosses planted several places around town that could be seen for miles, with things like “BLOOD” and “JESUS” written on them in giant red letters.
At some particularly amusing line during a scene where the little gray alien dude, Paul, is mocking a fundementalist woman’s beliefs in light of evolution I involuntarily laughed out loud. Unfortunately the rest of the theatre was dead silent, so I was very easy to identify. I received several looks ranging from “dead eyed” to “angry.” I was a little paranoid after that, especially when it came time to leave the theatre.