AtheistNexus.org dicussion from 2014 on Atheism and Hollywood reposted in bold and italicized print

Atheism Bad For Business Hollywood Says
Posted by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 7:20am in Atheism
View Discussions
.



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2014/03/hollywoods-hi...






 Like 
2 members like this
.
Share   
  

 

Views: 419
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Michael Penn on March 7, 2014 at 7:38am

Yes, piety is profitable and in more ways than one.
I must identify with you so that I am deemed worthy to be among you.
Over 76 % of Americans are christian so why are you attacking me all the time.
We are all entitled to our opinions, so will you shut up about your atheism.

Things along that line pretty well sum it up. Then some moron comes along claiming that if the Buybull said 2+2 = 5 he would believe it. This means he would be believing an obvious non-fact.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 4:33pm

Why not, Michael Penn? They believe in non facts all the time.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 7, 2014 at 8:31am

Actually, if you think about it, the bibble is good marketing strategy for Hollywood. For one thing, you don't have to come up with an original idea for a movie.  This saves money. You can use a dart board to pick which fable you want to bring to technicolor.
Two, you have a known group to which you can easily market your product. Much like a crack head or heroin junkie, they'll buy whatever you offer to sell them, and at a very good profit.
Three, get some A list actor to play the lead role of Moses, Abraham, Noah, Samson, or JC, and they'll flock to it in droves, which means your media coverage and advertising revenue skyrocket.  All in all, an enterprise that has little risk and all the assurances of high dollar return.
Now, try to market a movie to atheists. You have to come up with an original idea, and a plot line to hold an intelligent and curious audience. This means an actual review of literature, and/or an original idea. And, one that does not necessarily have a happy ending.
Next, the media will either 1) ignore your film or, 2) have a firestorm against the 'religious intolerance' the film promotes (see The Last Temptation of Christ). And, recognizing that even bad press is still press coverage, it can result in limited distribution so as not to 'offend' the true believers who are in the majority of paying movie goers. More lost revenue.
Finally, good luck on getting a well known actor to star in it. They have their career to think about, and really don't want the negative publicity.
The bibble has been a sure fire money maker for Hollywood ever since the Klu Klux Klansman magically transformed into Jesus Christ in D.W. Griffith's 1915 film, Birth of a Nation.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Grinning Cat on March 7, 2014 at 11:35am

You're right, movies playing to the majority's beliefs, no matter how reality-based or not, will have an instant accepting audience.

You can use a dart board to pick which fable you want to bring to technicolor.
There are plenty of stories of shocking sex, violence, misogyny, murder, and "gyno-sadism" (as Jonathan Kirsch describes it in The Harlot by the Side of the Road) that somehow don't get read from the pulpit or in Sunday school. The core audience for biblical epics would probably fiercely denounce those tales taken directly from their holy scripture!

...get some A-list actor to play the lead role...
Movies might be better if our culture idolized not superstar actors but screenwriters who bring powerful, original stories to the screen. (Loren and Pat mention a few, like Inception.)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on March 7, 2014 at 11:38am

Well put, Pat and Grinning Cat.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Grinning Cat on March 7, 2014 at 12:09pm

Thanks!
For finding just how incompletely the Christian bible is read in church, it turns out a magic phrase to google is "reverse lectionary". Here's one for the Episcopal Church as of a few years ago.
(In synagogues, the entire Torah is read in the course of either every year or every three years.)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 7, 2014 at 12:44pm

Thanks, Ruth.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 9:15am

The theory has it that you give the customers what they want.  Problem is, the majority of the customers believe in the Tooth Fairy.  So Hollywood gives the majority of customers the Tooth Fairy, while the potential atheist viewers, who still languish in the minority, take one look at the Tooth Fairy trailer and instantly reach for the Pepto.
Still, every now and then, something intelligent and original shows up to break the pattern.  The last time I saw such a flick, Leonardo diCaprio was diving into people's dreams in Inception.  Sadly, it seems that such movies are the exception rather than the rule.  Can we hope that this trend changes as the population of the "nones" grows?
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 7, 2014 at 10:21am

There are a few good ones out there, but you have to search. Two that come to mind are The Ledge with Terrence Howard and The Man From Earth with David Lee Smith. Compare their distribution with that of The Passion of the Christ. An anti-semetic, wife beating drunk can still make more money than a thoughtful director.  In 1960, Inherit the Wind with Spencer Tracy did well at the box office. Times have changed though (for the worse), and I doubt Inherit the Wind would get the box office receipts it did back then.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 12:04pm

I think it was you who introduced me to The Man from Earth, Pat.  One neat film, designed to make people think ... which is probably why it wouldn't go over with the bible-bibblers...
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 7, 2014 at 12:12pm

I know from experience that film doesn't go over well with them, I loaned out my DVD copy to a couple of Xtians (one, a minister). I carefully explained that the movie was science fiction, and not to be confused for reality, though the historical and anthropological dialogue are reality. The explanation didn't seem to do a damned bit of good. All I heard was how it was an attack on religion, and the Xtian woman was intentionally portrayed to be a weak, unintelligent foil for the rest of the characters.
Face palm!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 12:17pm

Anything that has the temerity NOT to agree with the BS amounts to "an attack on religion" to them.  Poor ol' long-suffering christers!  They can be critical about anything they want, but when someone turns a critical eye on christianity, They're Being PERSECUTED!!!
Bloody hell.
▶ Reply


‹ Previous

1

2

3

4

Next ›

Page 
..

RSS
..

http://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/atheism-bad-for-business-hollywood-says









 








Atheism Bad For Business Hollywood Says
Posted by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 7:20am in Atheism
View Discussions
.



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2014/03/hollywoods-hi...






 Like 
2 members like this
.
Share   
  

 

Views: 421
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Michael Penn on March 7, 2014 at 1:43pm

Oh, yes! They are being persecuted, and they believe that because the Buybull said it and Jeezus said it. In fact, when you turn away the JW's at the door, they too take this as the "persecution" the scriptures claim the "righteous" will suffer. You have to watch these "end times" because the persecution will become so great that Jebus will have to come and save them and "rapture them" away. To be "good christiasns" they have to want to be persecuted so they can be raptured away, etc.
Are they really persecuted? Maybe in thier minds or in a 3rd world country.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 4:43pm

I've always responded to their claim of persecution by saying I will be happy to give them what they really want, if only they pay for the hammer, cross timbers, and nine-inch nails.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 5:12pm

James, yer such a SWELL guy! [wry chuckle!]
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 4:41pm

My favorite will always be Luis Bunuel's The Milky Way. He throws in scenes of historical Christianity and the Gnostic sects and treats them as if they were legitimate, in one scene depicting Jesus about to shave his beard. His mother, Mary, tells him, "Oh, I am so glad you're doing that: you look so much better without the beard." In another scene he has two pilgrims on the road to Campostela in Spain, site of the famous shrine devoted to the disciple James (Santiago). A Christian picks them up as they hitchhike, but when they begin to argue and use the "Lord's" name in vain, he pulls over and puts them out. In other scenes he depicts the nocturnal rituals of gnostics (I think the Basilideans). By taking these groups literally, he makes all religion look ridiculous. A lot more caustic than, say, The Life of Brian.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Stephanie Griffith on March 7, 2014 at 12:36pm

Well, I apparently need to watch Inception.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 12:59pm

I'd say you don't NEED to watch it ... but if you do, I think you'll be glad of the experience!  I have it on Blu-Ray and I surprise myself at how often I break it out, just to spot through certain scenes, and also to enjoy, Hans Zimmer's amazing score.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Daniel W on March 7, 2014 at 2:34pm

My reading of the article is that a movie about atheism, and in particular about two atheist scientists going around making speeches, would not be a best selling movie.
"Now, it would be silly to suggest that a documentary about two scientists debating religion and rationality might pose strong competition to a hundred-and-thirty-million-dollar blockbuster starring Russell Crowe as Noah on the ark."
I think most science fiction movies are pretty godless. Star Trek... The Chronicles of Reddick... Alien.... 2001... Or have a make believe religion. Star Wars.... some characters and planets on Star Trek... Avitar.
I really loved Avitar, but I don't worship trees. I also loved Henry VIII the series, even though - or partly because - I'm not christian. I really enjoyed "The Borgias" but that's probably because they were part of the Catholic papacy and totally vile. So that's kind of anti-christian.
My point is, I could really get into some movies of biblical stories, without believing them. There's a lot of drama, passion, and fantasy.
Unfortunately, making a movie about biblical themes seems to require sanctimony. Which I loathe. Overall I liked Life of Pi, but the pious aspect did turn me off.
I did enjoy Inception.
Sorry for the rambling. I also don't mean to be contrarian, but I think there's more to it than the article's author stated.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 4:44pm

Noah, you know, was withdrawn briefly so that cuts could be made to satisfy Christian clerics protesting certain inaccuracies. I might rent the DVD just to laugh my head off.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 5:11pm

"Certain inaccuracies?"  How can something that never happened be accurate?!?
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 7, 2014 at 6:19pm

Loren, No Shit! How can a fairy story, from the Big Book Of Jewish and Christian Fairy Tales be anything but inaccurate?
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Grinning Cat on March 28, 2014 at 6:27pm

The creationist Ken Ham excoriated the film as "an unbiblical, pagan film from its start"; he concludes that it "is an insult to Bible-believing Christians... and most of all, an insult to the God of the Bible. As a result, I believe Hollywood will have a much harder time in marketing future biblically themed movies to Christians."
May it be so!!!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 6:36pm

My point, perhaps poorly made, is that whatever his intentions, director Darren Aronofsky, often praised as exceptionally talented, was humiliated by the recutting. Of course, the great John Huston, an "out" atheist, not only made a film called The Bible: In the Beginning, he cast himself as Noah. Then, again, Huston probably had some location shooting to do, and that would explain his participation. He was forever taking on assignments he had little interest in but saw as opportunities to travel, e.g. to Africa for Roots of Heaven. I first saw promise in Aronofsky when he brought out Requiem for a Dream, but he has not done a thing since that pleased me. I can still watch Nicholas Ray's version of King of Kings, and Pasolini's Gospel According to St. Matthew entertains if one is into Marxist interpretations of the life of Reb Yeshua.
▶ Reply


‹ Previous

1

2

3

4

Next ›

Page 
..

RSS
..

http://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/atheism-bad-for-business-hollywood-says?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A2390995&page=2#comments









 











Atheism Bad For Business Hollywood Says
Posted by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 7:20am in Atheism
View Discussions
.



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2014/03/hollywoods-hi...






 Like 
2 members like this
.
Share   
  

 

Views: 422
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by sk8eycat on March 7, 2014 at 6:08pm

I guess I'm just weird, or ignorant...the last theatrical movie I thoroughly enjoyed was "Funny Face"...when I was in high school.  And the last live performance I loved was "Billy Elliott - the Musical."  If it doesn't have singing and dancing (or skating..*erkle*  "Show White & the Three Stooges" was a flop, and a lot of my friends were in that one.)
I'm waiting for "The Fabulous Ice Age" to come out on DVD.... It's won some prizes at film festivals, but hasn't been released anywhere yet.  As far as I know.
Other than musicals (and comedies...I did love the original "La Cage Aux Folles" in French)...I often wonder why the only Heinlein story that has ever been filmed (and ruined) was "Starship Troopers."
Damn!  There are libraries full of books that would make wonderful films, and none of them have ever been touched.  One of Colleen McCullough's best books is a very short one called The Ladies of Missalonghi; I think it's hysterically funny.  I'd love to see it on the screen...Edwardian fashions and all.  (I loved TV's "Upstairs, Downstairs" when it was depicting the Victorian and Edwardian eras...)
I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I go to a theater to see a movie, or a play, I want to be entertained!   I don't want to sit through a dramatized sermon, or anything like that.  (I don't want to be scared or horrified either, but to each his/her own.,)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 6:44pm

There was one other Heinlein novel turned into a film, sk8ey - The Puppetmasters - and it wasn't half-bad, though they took a LOT of liberties with the original.  I agree with you about Starship Troopers, though.  That was a travesty.
The one Heinlein which I not only want to see made but which I think would bring something unique to the screen is The Star Beast.  Granted, it starts out as the somewhat cliched "boy-and-his-alien" plot line, but has twists in it I've seen in no other film ... and I'd LOVE to see Lummox and John Thomas on the big screen!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by sk8eycat on March 7, 2014 at 8:22pm

 Mr. Kiku is my favorite character in that book!  But the most interesting things about him take pace inside his head.  Hard to film.
Have you read The Free Lunch by Spider Robinson?  It incorporates parts of The Star Beast AND Have Space Suit, Will Travel in sections of the theme park, plus it has just enough violence, action and horror to satisfy some teens.  I want to meet The Mother Thing; I need her.
I also wish there was a way to film Stardance....  Damn!  I would have loved to see Jeanne Robinson go on a shuttle flight (or to the International Space Station) and experiment with zero-gee dance to her heart's content.  She died much too young!
The Callahan's stories would make a fine mini-series, too, but I have a suspicion that Spider doesn't want Hollywood to slaughter his work.  Can you imagine actually hearing, and seeing, Fast Eddie at the piano?  I'd give anything for that...except custody of my cats.  (Would the Callahan's Lady stories be sexy enough for H'wood?)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 8:55pm

Henry Gladstone Kiku is one neat fella.  I imagine Andre Braugher or Yaphet Kotto playing him.  His friend who hang out with him (name forgotten at the moment) would be a fun casting job.  As for the Secretary, I have the guy in mind but again, can't remember the name.  John Thomas and Betty Sorenson would be kids and new finds, I would guess.
Only Spider Robinson I've ever read was Variable Star, the piece that RAH started and he finished.  Lots of echoes from Time for the Stars, but it has its own voice, as does Spider.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by sk8eycat on March 7, 2014 at 9:38pm

Oh, DO read the first of the three Stardance books!  Maybe it just means so much to me because dance and skating were such a big part of my life.  I've often wondered how much adjustment would have to be made to do classical ballet on the moon...1/6 Gee would require a whole new set of reflexes IMO.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Christine on March 7, 2014 at 6:09pm

There is the recent movie "The Unbelievers" with Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss, but it got a lousy review that was a great disappointment. I was looking forward to seeing it, but it's one of those art-movie-house limited-release things on top of having been badly done. My heart sank when I read the review.
If I happen to be near a theater where it happens to be running, then I'd go see it.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 7, 2014 at 6:40pm

If it got a lousy review, my question would be whether the quality of the review was on the merits of the film or the religious biases of the reviewer.  I've heard less than complimentary reviews of The Unbelievers which were based in the former, but I wouldn't be surprised to find plenty such reviews based in the latter.
As an atheist, I don't really care.  I want to see it because it features two singularly intelligent and expressive gentlemen, and I want to hear what they have to say.  Much as I'd like to see it in a theater, the limited nature of its release likely precludes that, but the DVD or Blu-Ray will be in my collection the instant I'm aware of its release.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Christine on March 8, 2014 at 8:05pm

I did consider the reviewer's POV, but it wasn't a religious one. In fact, I seem to recall the reviewer came across as atheist-friendly.
Just afraid that seeing it would make me cringe. But it would be cool to support the release and "vote" with my dollars.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Dr. Allan H. Clark on March 7, 2014 at 7:54pm

A couple of months ago I had a long conversation with a Hollywood producer working on a new thriller film from a novel with particularly gruesome details.This man produced some fine films in the past, but is no longer a major figure in the industry. I remarked that many people my age do not go to movies because they no longer tell a story we want to see, that there is too much violence on the screen.
He replied that my viewpoint would be quite different if I were a stockholder in a movie company since it is violence that sells to teenagers and teenagers are their main audience. Whatever sells tickets is what Hollywood will produce and the more sex and violence they can get away with, the more they will cater to the audience that wants it. It's a business and that's all.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 10:50pm

Suggest you watch some Wes Anderson. His violence is minimal and he treats it comically. His movies are adult in the sense that they do not insult your intelligence.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 8, 2014 at 9:06am

The back story: Noah, the new film about Noye's Fluud, was criticized by fundamentalist Christians for replacing the Biblical version of the flood with Hollywood's. (As if film writers and directors have not, for at least a century, taken poetic license with and departed from written materials on which they're based.) The latest issue of Church & State, the magazine of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, has an opinion piece by that organization's head, Barry Lynn, sourcing the criticism: "The film is already engendering controversy. A group called 'Faith Driven Consumer' has issued an online poll claiming that 98 percent of its supporters (some of whom had actually seen the film at the time the poll was taken) do not want to see a movie about Noah that 'strays from the Biblical message.'" Turns out, Faith Driven Consumer has a fancy web site. Take a look: http://www.faithdrivenconsumer.com/
It should be noted that Interview magazine has a dialogue between the rocker Patty Smith and the director, Darren Aronofsky in which the filmmaker makes clear his intention was not to depict the Noah story precisely as found in the Bible but as a metaphor for what Al Gore was showing us in An Inconvenient Truth. That's right: economic meltdown. Given all of the Katrina-type hurricanes we've seen, the tsunamis killing six figures, tornadoes of greater force and in unlikely places, &c., Noah could even be seen as a dystopian futurist work, like Children of Men. This country is in big trouble when Christian groups dictate what Hollywood studios release about all manner of subjects. We might as well toss the rating system and return to the days of the Hays Code, when a man and a woman could not be seen in the same bed unless one of them had a foot planted firmly on the floor.

▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by sk8eycat on March 8, 2014 at 11:27am

This country is in big trouble, period.  Even moderates seem to be so frightened of the hard core CRASStians, that they just sit on their hands and do nothing. Or give in to their unreasonable demands.
The un-funny thing is that these CRASStians don't seem to understand their own buybull...or they are reading one of the newer versions that has more interpolations and errors in translation than the KJV.
And I will keep on calling them "CRASStians" (or CRAZEtians") until they sit down and STFU.  ie: forever.
My sister has been a JeeHoover's Witless for more than 45 years, and she knows more about the actual buybull (but won't admit that most of it is fiction) than the loud-mouthed Dominionists and other fundaMENTALists who are trying to take over not only the entertainment industry, but lawmaking, medicine, and everything else...including fast food joints.
Sometimes I wish the "rapture" fantasy would come true, then we'd be rid of the yokels.
▶ Reply


‹ Previous

1

2

3

4

Next ›

Page 
..

RSS
..



http://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/atheism-bad-for-business-hollywood-says?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A2390995&page=3#comments










 







Atheism Bad For Business Hollywood Says
Posted by James M. Martin on March 7, 2014 at 7:20am in Atheism
View Discussions
.



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2014/03/hollywoods-hi...






 Like 
2 members like this
.
Share   
  

 

Views: 423
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on March 8, 2014 at 1:17pm

sk8eycat, recent studies prove beyond question that most atheists know the Buy Bull better than the average Christer. The old saying, "Familiarity breeds contempt" is at play, since the more one knows about religulous texts the more one becomes aware how illogical, inconsistent, contradictory, &c. they are. When a Witness or Mormon comes to my door I ask them, "Did God destroy Sodom because of homosexuality?" They nod and say yes, yes, yes. Then I ask, "Did God turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for looking back on Sodom?" Same reaction. Then I ask, "Did God help Lot relocate somewhere else and then direct Lot's daughters to have sex with their father?" They look at each other blankly, then beg off and leave my doorsteps.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by sk8eycat on March 8, 2014 at 5:44pm

I can't do that; I have to live with my JW sister, but she knows what I think about the buybull, and we just don't discuss religion.  Much.
I think it's funny that she considers the El-Ronners a cult, but not her own strange beliefs. (I also think she has Asperger's; she has been strange and awkward since infancy, and she shows all the traits, but there's no way I can get her to see a neuro-psych specialist for a diagnosis.  And it's much too late, anyway.)
▶ Reply


‹ Previous

1

2

3

4

Next ›

Page 
..

RSS
..


http://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/atheism-bad-for-business-hollywood-says?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A2390995&page=4#comments