Heard about the new Hollywood film coming out depicting berserk followers of a strange religion who kill scores of innocent Americans in service to their twisted terroristic idea of divine justice?
I speak, of course, of the Mormons.
Here's Michael Medved with a kick-butt column on Hollywood's slashing depiction of an ugly incident from LDS history, coming not only at a time when a prominent Mormon Republican is running for president, but also amid a rather startling absence of films making use of the actual religion whose followers -- an influential segment of them, anyway -- are killing real people in the here and now, or advocating for ruthless murderous violence. Medved:
The film's deliberately drawn analogy between Mountain Meadows and 9/11 raises the most puzzling question about this peculiar project: Why frame an indictment of violent religiosity by focusing on long-ago Mormon leaders rather than contemporary Muslims who perpetrate unspeakable brutalities every day?In fact, Hollywood's reluctance to portray Islamo-Nazi killers remains difficult, if not impossible, to explain. Since 2001's devastating attacks, big studios have released numerous movies with terrorists as part of the plot, including Sum of All Fears, Red Eye, Live Free or Die Hard, The Bourne Ultimatum and many more, but virtually all of them show terrorists as Europeans or Americans with no Islamic connections. Even historically based thrillers downplay Muslim terrorism: Steven Spielberg's Munich spends more than 80% of its running time showing Israelis as killers and Palestinians as victims, while Oliver Stone's World Trade Center highlights the aftermath of the attacks with no depiction of those who perpetrated them. United 93 stands out among recent releases in showing Islamic killers in acts of terror — and it would be hard to tell that story without portraying the suicidal hijackers.
Beyond topicality, Tinseltown's respect for Muslim sensibilities has proved so pervasive that there has been little or no reference to bloody episodes of the Islamic past. In Kingdom of Heaven, Muslim followers of Saladdin appear far more sympathetic than the thuggish, devious Christian Crusaders. Despite the fact that founders of Islam built their religion through centuries of conquest vastly more bloody than incidents at the beginnings of Mormonism, it's unthinkable that filmmakers would ever depict Mohammed and his followers as viciously as they handle Brigham Young in September Dawn.
I guess we can expect to see Mormons rioting in the streets to protest this attack on their religion, and pronoucing fatwas against the filmmakers. Right? Right? Bueller?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
That's true, Nick, and plenty of other TV shows do stories dealing with Islamist terrorists - NCIS, Criminal Minds, Lost, Law and Order, 24, CSI Miami, Jericho, the list goes on and on...
Most of those shows appear to try for some sort of balance and fairness, as well, though they don't always achieve it. After all, these are mostly predictable dramas that are churned out at a rapid rate.
Going back to what I said above, I think there is a real story to be told about the murder of Theo Van Gogh and the ostracism of Ayaan Hirsi Ali by her adopted country, Holland. Of course, if anyone ought to be writing that screenplay, it is Hirsi Ali herself.
I am responding to your need to blog extensively about Islamic fascism while treating conservative Christians with kid gloves. Look how many times in a week you blog about homosexuality and Muslims and oppressed Christian conservatives. Now look how much you blog about everything else.
You own the printing press. If I am criticizing the person who holds the megaphone, then my criticisms are going to to correlate to the message of the one with the megaphone.
We hear a constant drumbeat of discussion about "Islamic fascism" in our society, but very little about the power and voice of religious conservatives.
"but also amid a rather startling absence of films making use of the actual religion whose followers -- an influential segment of them, anyway -- are killing real people in the here and now, or advocating for ruthless murderous violence"
Sorry, Rod. I don't think anyone will do a film about AIPAC.
Kim M
"You'd have to be utterly naive to think that there was no agenda involved in this film's production."
I think you'd have to be utterly paranoid to presume that Hollywood had a forshadowing that the Stepford Governor would buy himself first place in the Iowa straw vote just before they released film that must have been started (script, casting decisions)several years ago.
Harvey Lacey's point about making lots of movies about murderous behavior that is based on cult-leaders from many faiths is well taken. Muslims are not more or less prone to being deluded by charismatic cult leaders than anyone else. Krakauer's book is a great read if you haven't read it yet. Then move on to Rogue Messiahs by Colin Wilson, and Feet of Clay by I can't remember - a British shrink.
The Mormons (who prefer their church to be called "The Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints") have, in some ways been asking for this sort of movie for years. Like all religons, they have a lot of secrets. They have made secret keeping an art form.
Last year, one of the churches early sites was open to the public. But after the public finished it's tour, the place had to be closed for a special blessing. Which is their way of saying that the rest of us contaminated their "holy" site.
When a forger produced faked documents that "showed" that the founders of the church had lied, the top people in the church arranged for the documents to be bought by well-to-do church members, who were then required to donate the documents to the church for "safe-keeping" in a vault, far from laymen's eyes. (For more about this, "The Mormon Murders" is back out in paperback, and is a good read).
They "baptised" Jews who had been murdered in the holocost, without asking the families permission. In fact, if you have a Mormon family member (I do) you have probabaly been "baptised" without YOUR permission). They don't want visitors, and they have forbidden non-Mormons to come to the weddings held in their churches, even when the non-member is a parent or sibling of the bride or groom. And I'm not talking about the crazy ones who believe in poligamy--I'm talking about the ones who sit in the church (or do they stand--again, we don't really know much about their services)next to Matt Rommney on Sunday morning.
Don't get me wrong. One of my best friends is a Mormon, my cousin and her family are Mormon. And it isn't like my own brand of Christianity doesn't have some real issues both past and present (not all Lutheran pastors thought Hitler was wrong). All churches do. That is the natured of any group of more than two people. We all sin, therefore there will be things we do that we are shamed by.
But the Mormon church has gotten itself in the mess by denying these parts of it's past for far too long. Sunshine is a great disinfectant. And this will shed too little light on the church to do any harm.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.