http://johndray.co.uk/journal/ en john.dray@kcl.ac.uk Copyright 2010 2010-01-11T17:11:55+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/avatar-new-age-space-smurfs/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/avatar-new-age-space-smurfs/#When:16:11:55Z James Cameron’s Avatar is set in the future. A corporation from a dying earth is seeking to exploit the mineral resources of the beautiful planet Pandora occupied by the indigenous Na’vi people whose major city lies above a huge mineral deposit. A scientific team launch a ‘hearts and minds’ campaign to try and persuade the ‘noble savage’ Na’vi people move and allow mining to commence. To break cultural boundaries, they create ‘Avatars’, artificially created alien bodies to be ‘driven’ by human operators. If the team fail, a large military force stands ready to force the Na’vi from their home. The story sees a former marine controlling an Avatar ‘goes native’ before he organises the Na’vi resistance in the inevitable battle to come. 3D Falling Flat? Avatar was supposed to usher in a new era of 3D cinema. Instead shows both its strengths and weaknesses of this technology. Avatar is supposed to be an immersive experience, inviting you into the life of the tribe. To a certain extent, with the costly use of 3D animation as well as cutting edge motion capture technology, it succeeds. However, despite the huge expense, Avatar still looks like an animated film and when not jumping out at the viewer, the 3D effects often resemble a 1990s ‘Magic Eye’. Moreover, the design concept of the Na’vi people is weak. Although beautifully rendered, these 12ft blue aliens with strategically placed dreadlocks accompanied by ‘tribal music’ struck me as silly and possibly offensive. As of yet no technology can replace a good script and good characters. Pandora v New Creation Avatar carries heavy handed, if open ended, allusions to the war on terror, mission, colonialism and the ecological crisis. The new age Na’vi religion (a kind of theistic pantheism where everyone is connected to the mother god called Eywa) is prominent. It praises the power of nature and calls people to integrate with their surroundings rather than impose their will upon it. It stresses the importance of the collective rather than the individual (the Na’vi representing an ideal humanity in perfect relationship with each other and their surroundings). However, Eywa never lives among her people, remains impersonal, contactable only through strange ritual and interested only in maintaining ‘balance’. Whereas the idealistic world of the Na’vi can only ever be an aspiration in a fallen world, we have hope in a new creation characterised by a perfected relationship with ourselves, with each other, with the environment and with a personal loving God. Films 2010-01-11T16:11:55+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/2012-review-an-american-apocalypse/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/2012-review-an-american-apocalypse/#When:21:53:02Z Imagine you made a movie combining Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow. Then throw in a $200 million budget and a determination to make it ‘bigger and bolder’. You probably wouldn’t end up far away from 2012, Hollywood’s latest vehicle for a good two and a half hours of escapist CGI sequences. The result is probably as good as could be expected. The animation is impressive, if ultimately forgettable. The incidental ‘plot’ sees the earth’s core warm due to an unexplained combination of the alignment of the planets and solar radiation. This causes huge tectonic activity threatening to end all life on earth. Global governments, aware of the coming doom build a series of Noah-esque ‘arks’ (complete with pairs of animals) to survive the flooding of the world due to huge tsunamis. Despite the obvious biblical illusions about the Great Flood and the apocalypse, they are fairly peripheral to an expression of American conservative libertarian family values. Appealing to the Sarah Palin voter, governments are treated suspiciously. The ‘ordinary man’ becomes the hero while global destruction aids the reconstruction of a broken nuclear family. Although America has its own ark, it is one among others and built in China, perhaps demonstrating how the US is beginning to see itself as a global superpower among others. References to organised religion are made throughout from the appearance of the Dalai Lama to the collapse of St Peter’s. Religions are shown respectfully and as having a vague common message affirming ‘faith’. Yet, religious leaders can do little more than die pathetically with their flock. Had the film been made on this side of the Atlantic, I suspect religious leaders would be treated far less sympathetically. Ultimately however, American pluralism seems little preferable to European secularism. Films 2010-01-07T21:53:02+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/the-invention-of-lying/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/the-invention-of-lying/#When:13:52:08Z This film imagines an imperfect world but one where nobody has ever lied. In conversation, people respond with brutal honesty. A fizzy drinks adverts proclaims, ‘it is basically just brown sugar water’ while the nursing home is called a ‘sad place for abandoning old people’. There is no such thing as fiction; entertainment is a dry list of historical events. Then, the lead character (Ricky Gervais – The Office) invents lying, claiming extra money in his bank account. The most interesting and controversial section of the film comes when the main character invents religion (the film assumes that religion is a lie). When Gervais’ mother is dying, he invents the idea of an afterlife where everyone is happy and all receive a mansion. The listening doctors overhear this new knowledge and so a religious fervour spreads globally. The world demands to know more and Gervais creates a spoof Ten Commandments written on two pizza boxes. He invents the idea of a ‘man in the sky’ and is forced to construct a legalistic works based moral system to placate his followers. Disappointingly, almost as quickly as this story arc begins it becomes incidental to the relationship with his love interest. Caught between a glossy romantic comedy and a thoughtful existentialist satire like the Truman Show, the film ends up being neither. Ricky Gervais gives his celebrity friends numerous cameo roles but they break up the pace of the film. While raising issues, the film lacks the thought and scripting to follow them through. It satires a gospel-less Christianity; materialistic, graceless and self centred. Despite its faults, it will undoubtedly invite conversation about the basis of faith and the genuine gospel message. It also affirms the importance of truth as Gervais declines the opportunity to build relationships on lies. Films 2009-10-13T13:52:08+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/creation-2009/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/creation-2009/#When:18:40:21Z It is a hundred and fifty years since Charles Darwin published one of the greatest and most controversial books in science, ‘On the Origin of Species’. This film has been released to coincide with that anniversary. When I entered the cinema I expected a preachy Sunday afternoon costume drama proclaiming the merits of ‘science over ‘superstition. To my surprise, I discovered a sensitive, intelligent and engaging drama. This is no mere Richard Dawkins screenplay. In fact, the only openly atheist character in the film, Thomas Huxley is probably the most unsympathetic. The film is much less about conflict between science and religion and much more about faith, death and grief. The Struggle for Existence The film focuses on events in the Darwin household: Charles Darwin (masterfully played by Paul Bettany) becomes distraught after the death of his favourite daughter Annie from scarlet fever. As he tries to understand her death, he begins to lose his Christian faith, and questions the existence of God at all. Why did God allow Annie to die? Darwin becomes ill and reclusive, and his research languishes. His relationships with his children and devout Christian wife Emma (played by Bettany’s real-life wife Jennifer Connelly) fade as he becomes lost in his despairing thoughts. One Christian minister tries to comfort Darwin saying that ‘God works in mysterious ways. Others try to assure him of God’s righteous and careful management of creation. Annie’s death, they argue, is part of Gods righteous plan. However, through his theory of natural selection, Darwin begins to see that nature is a violent and deadly place where only the fittest survive. Species are not maintained by God’s loving hand but by the ongoing battle for survival. As Darwin writes in Origin of Species: ‘As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence.’ Darwin recognises the implications of his work: could Annie’s death simply be nature’s way of weeding out the weakest in a population? Worse still, as Darwin married his first cousin, is he guilty of her death? Darwin has visions of his late daughter, being almost haunted by her memory. Peace without the Cross? The finest section of the film follows Darwin’s attempt to find peace. Darwin tries to find physical and spiritual healing through the use of hydrotherapy, a supposed cure-all treatment. Time and time again he is showered with water (with allusions to baptism) as he attempts to wash away not only his physical ailments but his guilt and emotional pain. Towards the end of the film, Darwin is able to find a degree of peace, leading to the publication of his famous book. He is reconciled with his wife and with his children. One physician suggests that Darwin’s suffering will only be over when he finds faith again. It is clear at the end of the film that Darwin does not regain his Christian faith. Instead, perhaps he has faith in the nobility of evolution, an acceptance that it is the way of things. Bright and Beautiful? I felt that both Darwin and the Christians in the film fail to recognise the nature of the Fall. In Church, the congregation sing All Things Bright and Beautiful, extolling the glorious nature of creation. However, the reality is that God’s perfect creation has been corrupted by sin. Nature is both beautiful and cruel, as Darwin realised. As Christians, however, we can hope in a new, physical re-creation. Perhaps because of an idealised view of creation among Christians, our theology often fails to pays sufficient attention to this hope; a hope central to the message of the Good News. I would highly recommend ‘Creation’ to a Christian audience. It is rare to discover a film that treats religious faith in such a sophisticated manner, even though it ultimately ends with a loss of faith. Both non-believers and believers are likely to be challenged by the film. Questions for discussion or reflection •How could Darwin’s pastoral situation have been better handled? •What comfort can we draw from thinking about the creator God who experienced the turmoil of death and grief in giving his Son? •How far does our theology and evangelism reflect the fact that the whole of Creation has been corrupted by sin? •Can love, guilt or grief be a product of the ‘primordial soup’? http://www.facingthechallenge.org/creation.php Films 2009-10-05T18:40:21+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/looking-for-eric-a-fairy-tale-about-brotherhood/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/looking-for-eric-a-fairy-tale-about-brotherhood/#When:14:59:01Z Football at the Movies It used to be a truth universally acknowledged that any film with football in it would be about as entertaining as watching Gillingham draw 0-0. However, following The Damned United, Looking for Eric is the second worthwhile football film in just a few months. Again, it has an appeal beyond viewers of Match of the Day and collectors of sticker albums. Of course, neither film is really about kicking a round ball into a net for ninety minutes. Instead, Looking For Eric is a working-class fairytale about the importance of community and brotherhood. Although imperfect, the film is thoroughly entertaining with a number of memorable moments. ‘It was a pass’ The film centres around the character of ‘Little Eric’ Bishop (Steve Evets), a football mad postal worker whose life has fallen apart. His two step-sons show him no respect, using his house as a squat, while he cannot even bear to face the only woman he loves, his ex-wife. The turning point comes when Bishop’s hero, the charismatic Manchester United legend Eric Cantona (famed for his talent, upturned collar and kung-fu kick of a supporter) ‘appears’ in his in front room. From this point onwards, Cantona becomes Bishop’s imaginary life-coach, inspiring him to sort out his own life and the lives of those he loves. At first, Bishop assumes his cocky Gallic idol has had an easy existence with no need of anyone else. However, as the film makes clear, Cantona could not have been a success in football without his fellow players and without the fans. Perhaps the most important part of the film occurs when Cantona is asked his greatest moment in football. He selects not one of his many goals but a pass to a team-mate. Rather than simply obtaining glory for himself, his greatest moment was through helping another. I am Eric Cantona The director of the film is Ken Loach probably best known for classic TV drama ‘Cathy Come Home’ and literary adaptation ‘Kes’. Loach is well known for his social realist style which often reflects his own socialist beliefs. Looking for Eric is no different, featuring a group of friends from a postal sorting office. In the end, it is they, rather than just football star Cantona that become the heroes. Towards the climax of the film all the friends don Cantona masks to help ‘Little Eric’ protect his family - they all become Cantonas, all one big team helping each other just as Cantona was just one player in Manchester United football team. The Religion of Football? From a Christian perspective, it would be easy to see Looking For Eric as demonstration of how football has become an idol in our society. Little Eric admits the last time he was truly happy was at the last football match he saw while his fellow supporters chant, ‘What a friend we have in Jesus, and his name is Cantona’. One might even read the appearance of Cantona as a type of religious experience. While the cast sometimes use Christ’s name casually, Cantona’s is spoken with reverence and awe. However, the film also demonstrates positive aspects of football culture from its portrayal of its skill and beauty of the game to the kinship between supporters. Brotherly love The moral of Looking for Eric, which underlines the importance of brotherly love, has much to be applauded (even if the eventual way it is demonstrated cannot be). Although the message of the film is inspired by socialist humanism not the good news, the selfless love and support seen in ‘Little Eric’s’ fellow postal workers should be found in our own churches. True glory is found in putting others first, as Christ became our slave at the cross. The unconvincing ‘fairytale ending’ of the film reminds us that only through Christ can we be fully reconciled to one other. http://www.facingthechallenge.org/eric.php Films 2009-09-16T14:59:01+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/angels-and-demons/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/angels-and-demons/#When:14:57:38Z Ron Howard’s take on the prequel to ‘The Da Vinci Code’ resurrects the old ‘science vs. religion’ debate, but doesn’t have much new to say. A container of anti-matter has been stolen by an ancient sect of scientists persecuted by the Catholic Church for their beliefs. With it, they aim to destroy the Vatican. Only Robert Langdon can avert disaster by following a trail of clues across Rome. Following the success of ‘The Da Vinci Code’, now comes ‘Angels and Demons’, the latest Dan Brown film adaptation. The movie sees the return of fictional Harvard Professor of ‘Symbology’ Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks). A film conspiracy The filming of ‘Angels and Demons’ could provide the plot for its own Dan Brown story. For fear of attracting opposition from the Roman Catholic Church (who didn’t take to kindly to ‘The Da Vinci Code’) filming was carried out under the secret title ‘Obelisk.’ Yet the result is a surprisingly sympathetic portrayal of the Church. The film acknowledges the Church’s attempt to create a better world. For instance, at the end of the film, a cardinal asks Langdon: ‘When you write about us, and you will, do so gently.’ The film’s view on religion is summed up by the line by a Cardinal: ‘Religion is flawed because man is flawed,’ This realisation of fallen human nature is unlikely to draw criticism! However, the film does urge the development of a new version of Christianity based on co-operation between science and religion, and it implicitly marginalizes the unique truth claims of Christianity. The Real Story The real Illuminati were a secret society founded in 1776, many years after the death of Galileo Galilei in 1642. They were a movement of Enlightenment freethinkers. Writers at the time accused them of a number of conspiracies including the French Revolution. In modern times, they have been a popular part of ‘New World Order’ conspiracy theories (including those of David Icke). Galileo did come into conflict with the Catholic Church over his theory that the Earth was not the centre of the universe. This was felt to be at odds with the Bible (for instance, 1 Chronicles 16:30 which states that ‘the world is firmly established; it cannot be moved’). Although Galileo was a personal friend of the Pope Urban VIII, he lost his support and stood trial for heresy. Galileo spent the remainder of his life under house arrest. In 2000, Pope John Paul II issued a formal apology for the trial of Galileo. Artistic licence Although the book ‘Angels and Demons’ is a prequel to ‘The Da Vinci Code’ the movie is a sequel to the hugely successful 2006 film. ‘The Da Vinci Code’ was a huge box-office hit, but critics and audiences alike were generally left uninspired. Ron Howard’s direction was deliberate and safe. He had little ambition beyond providing a faithful film adaptation that wouldn’t alienate the book’s cult following. The wordy conspiracies revealed so thrillingly in the book became dull in the film. In avoiding being either an Indiana Jones or Nutty Professor clone, Tom Hanks’ portrayal of Robert Langdon was bland, if not boring. In ‘Angels and Demons,’ Howard felt more able to make key changes from the book. This makes the film more entertaining than its predecessor. For instance, most of the first third of the book set at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN is cut while the ending becomes (slightly) less absurd. As a result, this movie is better than ‘The Da Vinci Code,’ although it isn’t likely to be considered be a classic. The Fictional Iluminati The key theme in ‘Angels and Demons’ is the relationship between science and religion. The film juxtaposes the world’s capital of science (CERN) with its capital of western religion, the Vatican. On one side, the (Roman Catholic) Church stands for religion, while on the other the Illuminati stand for science. In the film (contrary to the historical reality, as noted above) the Iluminati are a secret society with origins in the renaissance. As Robert Langdon explains, ‘The Illuminati did not become violent until the 17th Century. Their name means ‘The Enlightened Ones’. They were physicists, mathematicians, astronomers. In the 1500s they started meeting in secret, because they were concerned about the church’s inaccurate teachings. They were dedicated to scientific truth. And the Vatican didn’t like that. So the began to, how did you say it? Oh, hunt them down and kill them.’ The ‘God Particle’ The message of ‘Angels and Demons’ is that science and religion would best serve humanity by joining forces; an undue focus on either leads to fundamentalism. The old Pope is murdered is because he would like to see greater cooperation between science and religion. He is fascinated by research into ‘the God Particle,’ and believes this should be amalgamated with Catholic Doctrine. Perhaps through science we can understand what we define as ‘God’? Of course this is nonsense. The ‘God Particle’ is a popular term to describe a theoretical particle - the ‘Higgs Boson’ - which helps explain why things have mass. The discovery of the Higgs Boson would be important, but it would hardly be the basis on which to re-write Christian doctrine or to understand scientifically the nature of God. A ‘Scientific’ Religion? ‘Angels and Demons’ urges Christians to embrace science more fully. But scientists who are Christians (whether within the Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox tradition) would argue that their research is already compatible with their faith. What is this ‘scientific’ Christianity meant to look like? The film makes a few suggestions. Firstly, there is a scene which discusses embryo stem-cell research. The Catholic Church is wary of such research, but the film suggests that if the Church was more embracing of science, it would remove its opposition. The second refers to the LBGT (Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual/ Transsexual) movement. In the film, onlookers in St. Peter’s Square wave the rainbow flag of the movement prominently at various points. I understood the implication to be that this ‘scientific’ religion would take a different stance on issues of gender and sexuality. Science versus Religion Despite appearances, ‘Angels and Demons’ has very little to say about the age-old debate about the compatibility of science and religion. Moreover, as it focuses on the Catholic Church, it does not address the reliability of the Bible, which is one of the key points at issue in such discussions. However, the film may raise questions for viewers in this area, as many still feel that science and religion are incompatible. So although it is not ideal, the film could be used in an apologetic setting. For anyone interested in reading more about this topic, I strongly recommend the books of Alister McGrath, including ‘The Dawkins Delusion.’ McGrath is a highly respected professor and his work is very readable. http://www.facingthechallenge.org/angelsanddemons.php Films 2009-09-16T14:57:38+00:00 http://johndray.co.uk/journal/its-star-trek-jim-but-not-as-we-know-it/ http://johndray.co.uk/journal/its-star-trek-jim-but-not-as-we-know-it/#When:14:54:50Z The new Star Trek moves at warp speed, packing in more action than ever, with a new fresh faced cast (Chris Pine as Kirk, Zachary Quinto as Spock) and state-of-the-art special effects. And - most importantly - for the first time in decades Star Trek is cool again. After the failing Star Trek TV spinoff Enterprise was cancelled in 2005, ‘Bones’ McCoy might well have commented of the ageing franchise ‘He’s dead Jim’. However, where Dr Who and James Bond have boldly gone before, the latest film sees a complete reinvention of the series for a new generation. Enjoyable prequel I really enjoyed this excellent reinvention of Star Trek. The film is directed by JJ Abrams, the man behind TV series Lost and Mission Impossible III. It is a prequel (of sorts) to the original series. It takes a little time to find its feet, but by the time a suspended James T Kirk is smuggled onto the USS Enterprise it soars. Its greatest strength is its screenplay, which includes loving, ironic, witty but rarely mocking nods to the original series. It satisfies our nostalgia, but leaves the audience waiting expectantly to see how the new characters will develop in the future. Missing message Missing from this roller-coater ride is the pretentious high-mindedness of the originals (particularly the Next Generation). The film may take your breath away, but isn’t so taxing on the brain. The essence of the science-fiction genre is its ability to consider big questions by creating new worlds. (Think Blade Runner, which considers the nature of humanity, or 1984 which warns about state control of thought and sexuality.) In the past, Star Trek was no different. The original creator of Star Trek was Gene Rodenberry (1921-1991). Through Star Trek, he saw an opportunity to comment on contemporary issues. Roddenberry stated that: ‘[By creating] a new world with new rules, I could make statements about sex, religion, Vietnam, politics, and intercontinental missiles. Indeed, we did make them on Star Trek: we were sending messages and fortunately they all got by the network.’ Ever since, the franchise has reflected the issues of respective eras. For instance, the original series saw the first ever broadcast interracial kiss. Throughout, there has always been a message - heavy-handed at times - about the importance of tolerance. Religion One of the most notable aspects of the Star Trek world has been the conspicuous absence of religion. Rodenberry was raised a Southern Baptist, but did not become a believer himself. Instead, he considered himself to be an agnostic atheist humanist, and saw religion as the cause of wars and suffering. In the utopian society of the ‘Federation’ religion is absent, while the rituals of rival societies are regarded as archaic but to be respected. I wonder whether ‘Trekkies’’ obsession with this utopian vision of society reflects a dissatisfaction with our sinful world; through the Federation, one can still retain a confidence in humanity to improve itself and progress towards perfection, in spite of the evidence of the real world. Contemporary issues The new Star Trek completely passes on the opportunity to comment on contemporary issues such as financial meltdown, religious fundamentalism, the war on terror and an increasing rich-poor divide. In fact, it looks to dismantle some of the concepts of the past: The ‘rational’ Spock is involved in two separate brawls. When he seeks ‘illogical’ revenge on his enemies, it is celebrated. Characters are motivated less by a desire to serve the Federation selflessly than by a desire for personal success. Confusion With contemporary confusion about the nature of good and evil, and concern for the future of our planet, perhaps the utopian vision of the future presented by the original series would not be credible to audiences anymore. The idealistic Federation has become yet another victim of the post-modern challenge. The new Star Trek underlines the desperate search in our society for a moral authority that can ultimately only be satisfied by Jesus Christ. http://www.facingthechallenge.org/startrek.php Films 2009-09-16T14:54:50+00:00