Silence - a christian movie?

What was the point of all the suffering? What was the intended message here?
The discussion will unavoidably be full of spoilers, in case you didn't watch the movie yet.

Historically, their efforts and suffering were basically for naught - christianity didn't really make a dent in Japans history or belief system. Their numbers are insignificant today. I even feel like non-christian Japanese might not feel good about how naive or gruesome most of their countrymen are displayed - they will probably reject the movie as it is. Those that are already christian might see some purpose in it. So its message is not really about proselytizing then.

I understand it was a passion project for Scorcese. So is it more of a spiritual journey intended for christian viewers? If you look into the eyes of both missionaries in the beginning, they seem really frail and child-like. And throughout the movie it doesn't seem like they will ever become men. They never succeed in really teaching the evangelion, they don't attempt to explain heaven to a husband and his wife - they just leave things as they are. It leaves the impression that they left the Japanese christians - with their really basic understanding of christianity - before they physically leave town. One of them dies in vain rather quickly (not in the runtime sense): it was an honorable thing to do, but in vain nonetheless. He couldn't save the Japanese and he couldn't save himself. Neither in the spiritual, nor in the physical sense, I feel.
The other one even gets humbled by getting told that he shouldn't compare his insignificant suffering to Jesus.
Throughout the movie - until the very end - he gets continually mentally tortured by the man that brought him to Japan. A direct consequence of him never attempting to teach him what forgiving and sinning even is. There is no attempt in correcting this and I don't think that he ever understood what's wrong about this.

So what was the intended message? God won't answer most people? Suffering is part of life and you should read the book of Job again? Someone who is more versed in the bible teachings will probably see more in all of this - I'd be interested in hearing it.

The ending sequence is almost insulting in how little it trusts the viewer to draw his own conclusions - it really diminishes the impact of the movie for me. Normally I'd watch a movie again if I feel there's something else to it - but Silence is way too drawn out for that. As a movie that stands on its own, I wouldn't know to whom I could recommend it. It can't help christians in doubt, it's not intended for proselytizing, as a historic film the characters are not fleshed out enough even though the acting is good. The purpose remains unclear for me.

Attached: silence-movie-1.jpg (590x244, 130.88K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5Th7Tiz1cEk
americamagazine.org/arts-culture/2017/01/18/fr-james-martin-answers-5-common-questions-about-silence
americamagazine.org/faith/2016/12/10/full-transcript-martin-scorsese-discusses-faith-and-his-film-silence
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I haven't watched this movie, but reading other reviews, I think the film assumes that the japanese there already knew what they needed to know about christianity.

There's a scene were one of them baptizes an infant and the parents ask "So he is in paradiso now?"
The two missionaries stumble over their own words and say "No, b-but paradise is waiting" or something along those lines. They do not know how to respond and worse than that - they don't attempt to.
The character of Kichijiro (the guy that brought them to Japan) and their interactions with him make clear that they never really succeeded in teaching him the evangelion and it remains this way until everyone is dead. There's no trying, they just forgive him every time, no lesson learned. Kichijiro thinks he just needs a priest to be absolved from all consequences of his actions. And the missionaries seem to think this too, since the confession is basically them listening to a language they don't understand. Time and time again.

Attached: 399608-944-472.jpg (944x472, 58.02K)

There are two million Japanese Christians alive today. There are more Japanese Christians than there are total populations of certain Christian nations. Helping to save one soul is worth dying for. Japanese Christians are not insignificant, nor is the legacy of the mission remembered as historically insignificant by Japanese society as a whole. The faith of Japanese Christians is very pure and strong because they aren't "cultural Christians," i.e. Christians for ulterior motives or conformity or habit, but rather out of faith. Japanese have to go against the grain to be Christian, and going against the grain in Japanese society is very difficult. It wouldn't surprise me if there are more true Christians here than in certain countries with larger supposedly Christian populations. Of course not all of these Christians trace back to the hidden Christians, but the Jesuits established the first foothold.

The novel was written by a Christian author. I haven't seen the movie nor read the novel, but the filmmakers didn't necessarily keep a Christian moral in their version, and it wouldn't surprise me if they indeed subverted any Christian moral present in the original, if the author put one in there in the first place. Hollywood is as much a Christian zipcode as Shinjuku.

I haven't read the novel, but apparently that final scene was added by Scorcese.
I did enjoy the film for the amazing acting and cinematography, however I was left feeling much like you. I couldn't quite make sense of it all.
Looking back on it, I wonder if that confusion we felt, and the asking of "what's the point?" was totally intentional.

Put yourself in the shoes of those two missionaries. You're going into a foreign land on the opposite side of the globe. You don't know their language, and very few know basic words from yours. You see immense suffering and poverty. Would you not be asking yourself for what purpose?
They point to this later in the film when they discuss Japan being a swamp in which the seed of Christianity can not germinate.

According to wikipedia (don't know where else to look) it's about 1% of the population - which is not really 2 million. So one percent may be seen as having insignificant impact on their society as a whole, even if you attribute a different worth to the christian individual.
Likely true.
That's what I'm trying to find out - I fail to see the bigger message here. I also didn't read the book. Scorcese is a self proclaimed lapsed catholic and in his third marriage, make of that what you will. Silence is not his first "christian" movie either. I'd rather have a subverted message than the message being "there is no message, just silence" or something equally stupid.

I saw the film recommended here (or on another board, can't really remember), so the film must have been of worth to someone.

Maybe - but is that really the best message he could come up with? In the passion of christ theres purpose to the suffering, whereas here it's just suffering.
I wonder what Japanese christians feel when they hear that line.

Attached: 4.jpg (1704x789 65.2 KB, 167.5K)

That percentage is rounded down from the fraction. A more accurate percentage is 1.6%, or about 2,024,640 individuals. The high estimate with a looser definition is three million. It all depends on how you define "Christian." Many people you meet who call themselves Christians in any country simply aren't even if they formally belong to an orthodox denomination. Only God knows the number of true Christians.

Christians have a significant impact on Japanese society as a whole. Jesus wasn't joking when he called us the salt of the earth. Putting in a pinch of salt changes and enhances the flavor of the whole dish. Several prime ministers have been Christians. We're discussing a movie based on an internationally bestselling novel written by a Japanese Christian. The role of Christians in Japanese history is taught in history class in public school. Various missionaries brought different technologies and fields of learning and foods to Japan and spurred many local developments. Christian missions have been a main point of contact with the West. Two million people is a large group of people, and Japan is not a geographically large country.

The ending to me was insulting because the way it is shown we are supposed to believe that there was still a fragment of Christianity in him and in a way to sympathise with him, but that is just utter nonsense. He kept rejecting Christ over and over the years, we should be angry/disgusted with him.

youtube.com/watch?v=5Th7Tiz1cEk

Theoretically you would think that the Japanese would be ideal Christians considering how much they’re culture emphasizes dedication and self discipline

Attached: B4C3D82C-B8F5-4CE5-B3C5-E857C1C618A3.jpeg (200x284, 16.14K)

Well they would have been Christian if there was no Tokugawa, or if Portuguese had a backbone to fully invade their island

Not sufficient enough to make anyone a Christian

I read the book: much better, only for one scene…no, two.
First, the apostasy scene: Ferreira is not supposed to be there, and his line seems to imply that, as long as one keeps God in his/her heart, it's fine to hide your faith. Horrible and wrong on so many levels, but it seems to be the moral of the movie as for…
Second, the burial: when Rodrigues died, he got a Buddhist cremation to remove him from Japanese history; however, in the movie, his "wife" puts a small cross in his hands, symbolizing he never truly gave up on God, but this is again a not good message, for it's pretty much says: just keep God hidden inside of you, don't bother, don't create waves (something that Shusaku Endo always opposed) and just be a closet Christian.

The book is a difficult book, telling you how most of us are weak and despicable, and as soon as difficult times will come, most of us will betray their faith, but God, even if looking silent, will always be with us. The movie, well, like I said, missed on many marks.

Scorsese is a person who relieves his great regret at not becoming a priest by making Christian movies that always are pro-doubt. It's basically masturbation for him. His movies never inspire greater faith and at most are for normalfags who walks out of the cinemas going "wow faith is such a grey area so deep".

The point of Silence is that even though God may seem silent/indifferent at our suffering, he in fact suffers with us. And it is a good movie for illustrating a small fraction of what Christians have had to put up with during these last centuries.

Attached: 90092e1fe809a3dce555517cc4e59699becaea6a7478fc84362b7702fa3b0a26.png (363x565, 496.37K)

Fr James Martin (who should not have a twitter account but writes very interesting books) served as a consultant during production. He shared a few insights on the film:

americamagazine.org/arts-culture/2017/01/18/fr-james-martin-answers-5-common-questions-about-silence
americamagazine.org/faith/2016/12/10/full-transcript-martin-scorsese-discusses-faith-and-his-film-silence

I think an important distinction to remember is that the characters approach the faith through Ignatian spirituality, understanding that tradition may clear things up.

Attached: scor7.jpg (4240x2832, 1.25M)

LMAO the eternal jesuit

scorsese is a jew, who, no surprise, hates christ. just look at his other works. the book itself is worth reading yes, but this jewish garbage is not worth watching. there are many christian kino out there, this is not one of them.

Eh, Sicilian…not a Jew, but close enough.

As I have said, I have never watched the movie, but I think most anons here are missing the essential point. I find this movie to be similar to Bunuel's Nazarin. Nazarin even depicted a much more devout and strong character who got caught in a bleaker situation. However I don't think either of them tried to renounce the Catholic faith through their films, not at all. Both Bunuel and Scorsese are lapsed Catholics who felt the need to express their loss of faith, but on the positive side they also expressed their longing for their old love for God that has been lost. These films work as a transmission of their feelings rather than a propaganda for or against the christian faith, which is the purpose of art in the first place, a medium for transmission of emotions and not a learning tool.

Unlike the missionaries in Silence, the character Nazarin was a perfectly intelligent, reasonable, and articulate man. On top of that he was a very charitable man, the movie depicted him like a living saint. He endured all the tortures and rejections lashed upon him by the hypocrites during his journey, and from his brilliant teachings and determination he made three loyal followers. But a series of circumstances made him lose all his followers and meet many worse people with absolutely no sympathy in his beliefs. His seemingly fruitless attempts and endurance made him lose his faith in mankind and in God for creating such a cursed world. By the end of the film, the nihilistic and desperate Nazarin met the first charitable person he found in his whole journey. The charitable woman gave him a pineapple and told him "God bless you", an rejuvenating experience that made him reconsider his stance.

I think Silence depicted characters that are similar to Nazarin, although not as perfect as him, and a bleak world where all their actions seem to be fruitless. Though they seem to be weak and feeble minded, unlike the reasonable Nazarin, they endured it all to the end. There are messages they tried to tell. Bunuel told us that there might still be hope in mankind if you're courageous enough to keep looking for it. I don't know much about Silence, but I guess Scorsese too admired the endurance of the believers, an endurance that is too hard for him to emulate. Although made by practically an atheist, I think Nazarin is a great film for those who lost their belief in God due to the feeling that they are the victims of their own lives, and also for the believers who struggle to keep their sanity in their test of faith. It acknowledges their pain and would help them rejuvenate their faith.

For those who compare this to Passion of the Christ, it's not very feasible to compare them both. Passion is like a religious icon in cinematic format. For the believers it will strengthen their faith, but for the unbelievers, the message will fly over their heads. Passion depicts the antagonists in a one dimensional way, it depicts the Devil in a literal way, it depicts the miracles and resurrection of Jesus. Such subject is too fantastic for the unbelievers who reject such belief in the first place, you can't expect them to digest such subject just like that. Nazarin and Silence however are much more down to earth, they recognize human condition and psychology that made them lose their faith but at the same time they challenge their notion that the world is really spiritually hopeless. In fact, in spite of their loss of faith, Bunuel and Scorsese told us not to lose ours. No matter what the directors beliefs are, this is a pro christian faith message undoubtedly, and the the directors' loss of faith actually gives them the ability to touch the hearts of other unbelievers. Even the unbelievers have the ability to do good.

Such down to earth approach is also found in religious artists such as Tarkovsky who basically aimed to do the same thing, to touch everyone's heart whether they're a person of faith or not. Although the difference with Tarkovsky's films is they're much more hopeful. Being a religious director he was, Tarkovsky saw beauty in the growth of weak faith into a strong one. Tarkovsky did it better, but that doesn't mean that Bunuel and Scorsese didn't intend to do good. Tarkovsky was a really big fan of Bunuel's Nazarin anyway. I don't know how religious aspect is treated in Dostoyevski's and Tolstoy's books, they're very boring to read, so I'm not going to talk about them for now.

I'm baffled by the blatant hate and ignorance in this thread. Even going as far as saying that the movie has anti christian agenda and Scorsese is a Christ hating Jew. Why are you seeing everyone from the worst angle possible and accusing them of everything? I don't think that's a very christian attitude.

Attached: nazarinpineapple.jpg (622x479, 28.4K)

"Rodrigues tramples and then follows in the footsteps of his mentor, becoming a Buddhist, marrying, and serving as an informant for the Japanese government. However, the film hints that Rodrigues secretly maintained his faith during his apostate years, and at the end, shows him holding a cross as his dead body is ceremonially burned.

Certainly the notion that Christ would condone apostasy to end someone else's suffering is deeply problematic.

Jesus left very clear instructions about renouncing Him, saying: "(W)hoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven." (Matt. 10:33)"

top lol, reddit is probably more your speed my friend

It's not the point of the scene to tell you that Christ condones apostasy or not. Does the film conclude anything like that? No it doesn't, it only shows him holding the cross, implying that during his apostasy there's still struggle in his soul to keep the christian faith. I think it's Scorsese's subtle way of telling the audience about his spiritual condition right now.

I'm trying to say that I'm trying to read Dostoyevski right now, but it's a very tough read so it will take a long while. But it's okay to be boring, art isn't supposed to be enjoyable because it's not entertainment.

I really couldn't care less about what that blashpemer feels like. What matters is if the film is good christian content, and no, there's better stuff out there. You are aware that he directed "the last temptation of christ"? If you are familiar with that than I cannot see how you can possibly defend and even recommend any of his work here.

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?

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.
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.

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.
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.
I didn't compare the movies, I compared their depiction of suffering.
For me the movie fails on both fronts. It's a movie after all, not some kind of performance art.
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.

Attached: martin-scorsese-directing-silence.jpg (1501x863, 36.41K)

If you don't care about other people, how can you even love them? How do you evangelize? Or are you just going to sit in a vacuum, hearing your own echoes? Isn't the concept of the Church itself is we have to work together towards salvation, helping each other?

I'm allowed to discuss anything related to christianity here.

No, I am not familiar with that, and I don't ignore the possibility that he might have a heretical belief.

Because I can see good in his work and an aim to a greater cause. I've seen all kinds of people with shoddy beliefs out there inside and outside the catholic church for whatever reason, but I don't rule out the possibility of them doing good.

Because I read the synopsis and reviews and notice the similarity in the theme and the directors themselves.

How can you tell what the true message is when you don't even know how art works? It is inconclusive because it's made by a man whose faith itself is inconclusive.

No, you compared the fruits of their suffering. You complained about how the suffering in this film bears no fruits.

I was talking about Dostoyevski.

I've read that article, and so He did, but for the reason that He didn't want the christians he ministered to die. Liam Neeson in the other hand did it out of fear rather than God's will. If this movie endorsed apostasy, then it would paint Neeson's character in a better light. However, he's considered as "lost" by the other priest, he exists as a contrast between God's will and man's will. I think the message of this movie might not be as bad as I thought it would be.

I still need to look into this. I'll rent the movie and come back to this thread later.

Well I assumed that you did. However, the way you write tells me that you see purpose in reviewing movies as a whole: that is cinematography, color, how the pictures are framed etc., acting (what story does their non-verbal behaviour tell?). Yet in this instance, you chose to ignore that the whole picture could tell you something different than a limited viewpoint of it.
I realize it is the story, written by a Japanese man, through the eyes of Scorcese. He was free to choose at least parts of the message though, so that excuse is unsatisfactory.
You could say that. It all feels just really pointless. You have to squint to see a bigger purpose in their suffering.

Attached: 48645489465.jpg (325x480, 62.02K)

I liked it. But, then, I don't try to read too much into art. It's a pretty good movie.

Bishop Barron actually has a really good (and very critical) take on this film.

...

Yes, in retrospect there was certainly.
However at Gethsemane, it doesn't appear that Christ saw the grand purpose of his persecution to come.
Certainly these 2 missionaries could affirm themselves that their struggle has purpose, but to neglect the entirely human side of doubt and fear of persecution would be to miss the the actual beauty of the confusion and torture.
Not sure, when I was in Japan the only Christians I met were Mormons or some branch of protestantism. But more to the point, the character who makes the comment about the swamp-like nature of Japan clearly can only make that comment within the bounds of his life. It's not possible for him to predict the societal formation of his nation some few hundred years in the future.

makes me laugh EVERY time.
Thanks user. I needed some lulz

and

Attached: 1518842610.png (604x439, 38.43K)

...

...

...

Le hell is empty man

Le checked ami

Yes, he said a pretty foolish thing; but, in all honesty, even and Orthodox friend of mine and myself agreed that his video on the movie was a good one. Call it the broken clock which twice a day etc, but this time he had some good points and he talked about them in a decent way.

Just as I can find many good Protestant and Orthodox videos and agree with some of their point as a Catholic, even bishop Barron can have good words for us (we just need to avoid the bad ones and pray for him; I understand that his is more of an hope Hell is empty, but they way and how it claims all that is pretty weak and misleading in many ways).

Good for you. The numbers should make you maybe feel indifferent or sad, because they couldn't convert more - but laughter is maybe not the best answer.
Thanks for your well thought out post, you really advanced the discussion on this topic.

Attached: 345234589347953.jpg (650x366, 16.54K)

look up the plot synopsis for the last temptation of Christ and I dare you to come back here and continue to defend this wicked man. seriously, WTF? just nuke this shitty thread please

Did you watch it yet?

Attached: 1468820408600.png (782x790, 197.48K)

I thought it was a crappy movie. Submitting and becoming apostate is a sure way to hell according to Revelation. Whoever wrote the movie, and the book if it's the same, is not Christian.

Suffering and dying for Christ is the highest virtue. If you kneel to Satan, and you can be sure that the Japanese torturers were agents of Satan, and deny Christ, you may live well on the earth, but you will die the second death.

Actually this would be a more beautiful way to think about the movie - even though this is not likely to be the message Scorcese intended:

These weren't the thoughts I was having while I watched the movie, but I suppose you could look at it like this. I haven't read the book, but the author was a catholic afaik.

Attached: 283940234.jpg (1440x591, 65.53K)

Don't be like those idiots who burn Harry Potter books because it has wizards in it. Last Temptation is actually a spectacularly good film. It doesn't have Jesus coming down off the cross and getting married and having a family (so says the synopsis). It's just something that happens in his head the moment before his death … his last temptation from Satan, which he rejected just like all of the other temptations. Did you forget that Jesus was tempted by Satan? Maybe you should read your Bible.

kindly get the fuck off this board and never post again

… and all of that happens IN HIS HEAD while he's still on the cross and he rejects that temptation and dies on the cross.

You should actually see a movie before you pass judgment.

No, you're right, we should burn Harry Potter because it contains actual black magic spells and also because it's garbage.

Are you Muslim?

What on earth are you talking about?

And yes, it is bad. You can't even defend that stuff I've listed.

...

Considering that both the forward to the novel and the opening text crawl on the movie say, very clearly, "this is not based in scripture", yes I can defend the stuff you've mentioned by saying: watch the damn movie.

Considering how kids who read Harry Potter are more at risk to grow up to become democrat voters stumping for sodomites those 'idiots' were onto something