Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
amirenjantassov
Reviews
The Message (1976)
My homework assignment
Moustapha Akkad in his film message tells a story of the early Muslim community in the age it emerged and started gaining popularity on the Arabian peninsula. Play of actors, soundtrack, script, and costumes, all of them deserve recognition and positive reviews. But the most important part of this film is its social, political, and religious implications that compose a symphony with the narrative of the film. This film examines Islam and the Muslim community on a deeper level than it may appear at first glance. It demonstrates the progressive character of Islam as a new religious institution, shows the Islam relationships with different religions (Christians, Zoroastrian).
Firstly, the film "Message" demonstrates a positive shift in the life of society Islam as a religion and institution carried. In the age of Jahiliyyah, Arab society lacked centralized government, law, relationships were just regulated by tribal chief councils (shuras), and weaker were victimized ("Religion and Society in Pre-Islamic Arabia"). There was no order and wild customs were abundant. One such custom is burying female children alive. In one of the scenes of the film, there is a demonstration of reception of the revelation sent to prophet Mukhammad and an intensive discussion of this revelation by followers of prophet Mukhammad. This shows the significance of this issue and Islam's attitude towards it, which was very negative and prohibiting. The new verse of the Quran prohibited and outlawed such a horrific practice. This was a reflection of the progressivity of Islam as a religion. Another scene that demonstrated progressivity of the Islam is a scene of redemption of a slave who refused to whip one of the prophet Mukhammad's envoys. Slaves were one of the most vulnerable groups of a society subjected to abuses from their owners and other different hardships of life. Such attention and care he received from the follower of prophet Mukhammad may be unusual, but not for the Muslims. They appreciated his sacrifice and worshipping one monotheistic God. Such mercy and attention towards a slave demonstrate a progressive and egalitarian perspective of early Muslims and the progressive character of Islam. All of these cases showing the progressive character of Islam contradict with perspectives of some European thinkers of the colonial age. As far as Ernest Renan is concerned, Islam is irrational religion incompatible with progress and science ("Colonialism and Transformation of Muslim Societies"). This is a perspective of the colonial age European representative, which reflects disrespect and a sense of dominance over Islam. As we can see, examples of slave redemption of the prohibition of female child murder disapprove this perspective Eurocentric and colonialist thinkers, who although had significant authority in his society.
Secondly, this film demonstrates the relationships of Islam with different religions. We can find evidence of the character of relationships with Christians, Zoroastrians. Christians are demonstrated in an ambiguous way, which reflects the complexity of relationships between two Abrahamic religions, Islam and Christianity. In one of the first scenes, where the Muslim envoy reaches the emperor of the Byzantine Empire, we see surprised and to some extent shocked Byzantine court members. They do not understand why the prophet Mukhammad is a messenger of God. This scene demonstrates the controversial character of relationships, which included mutual acceptance and theological controversies. Unlike other non-Muslims, Christians are categorized as Ahl al-Kitab (Jews and Sabians also belong to this category), which should be protected and protection tax ("The Spread of Islam"). So, there are positive and negative tones in their relationships because they received the revelation but still are not Muslims. The negative side is presented by religious controversies, which can be found in primary sources. For example, Al-Hajari (diplomat) argued with Christians that Muslims know God better because they do not worship images (unlike Christians), which is prohibited in Psalter (Ahmad ibn Qasim Al-Hajari, "The Supporter of Religion Against Infidels", p. 142). The positive side of their relationships can be found in the scene of the film where the Abyssinian king (Christian) allows persecuted Muslims to settle in his lands and says while creating a line on the ground: "the difference between us and you is no thicker than this line". This was said after a religious argument between him and Muslims. So, relationships between Muslims and Christians are controversial and include some degree of mutual acceptance as well as a disagreement in theological questions. The scene with the Persian emperor demonstrates that relationships between Islam and Zoroastrianism were more simple and unfriendly. In this scene, the Persian emperor tears apart the message brought up by the Muslim envoy. Zoroastrians, unlike Christians, belong to another category of non-Muslims, mushrikkin. This category of non-Muslims should be fought with ("The Spread of Islam"). We see no ambiguity in relation to the Zoroastrian emperor in particular and Zoroastrianism in general. The relationships between Muslims and Zoroastrians are very unfriendly.
To conclude, the film "Message" carries a lot of complex implicit concepts. First of all, this film demonstrates the progressive character of the Islamic religion by demonstrating its virtues, like the prohibition of the burial of female children alive and altruistic relation to slaves, thus challenging those who considered Islam as incompatible with progress. Another important concept is the relationships of Islam with Christianity (controversial) and Zoroastrianism (very unfriendly) as representatives of Ahl al-Kitab and mushrikkin respectively. The creators of this successfully integrate these concepts with the narrative about the life of the early Muslim community. In such a way, this masterpiece can be interesting for both regular viewers and people interested in the history of Islam.
Martin Luther (1953)
My homework paper.
Martin Luther is one of the most influential persons in human history. His figure's importance to Christianity is comparable with the authority and importance of Jesus Christ. The reformation Martin Luther initiated still has very much influence on the Christian world it created a new major division in addition to Great Schism added, the division between Protestant Christianity and Catholicism. This shattered the religious, social, and political stability in Europe for centuries. Such a person is more than worthy of a film dedicated to his life, deeds, ideas he believed in, and the world he changed forever. This film perfectly achieves the goal to portray such a great man in all his might, intellect, and greatness.
The first key aspects of his life that are given attention are the roots of his religious views and religious views themselves. One of the first scenes demonstrates the tedious nitty-gritty of the Catholic monks who clean the floor stubbornly. Another technic which the author uses successfully is shade. Shades in the monastery demonstrate stagnation, conservatism, and oppression in relationships between monks in one facet, and between monks and the Church on the other. This shows an atmosphere where our hero develops and looks for truth and is trying to escape the darkness, strictness, and to some extent mercilessness of the church and its orders. This coincides with a crisis in his life. In 1505 number of his friends die, he also faces a lightning storm, which results in him becoming one of the Augustinian monks, who usually punish themselves physically ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). This does not help him to cope with the crisis. His search and crisis reflect the same process humanity faces. His search for truth is a reflection or far consequence humanist movement of the Renaissance. Humanism was interested in the rediscovery of classics, Latin, and the Bible ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). Similarly to this, Martin Luther is in search of himself and search of the true religious meaning of the Bible. Here one of his future doctrine concepts emerges, sola scriptura. Along with solo fide (justification by faith alone), solo scriptura forms a milestone in the teaching of Marin Luther ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). This change is properly shown in an argument with the head of the monastery, where Martin Luther shatters the authority of pope and church since he finds no support for it in the scripture. The scene with drunken men who bought an indulgence, which shocks Martin shows another shift in his beliefs. This situation shows the minimum value of deeds in the salvation of the person and forges another principle of Martin Luther's teaching, solo fide (salvation from faith alone).
Another important aspect of the film is the demonstration of his ideas spread and get mature. The ideas of Martin Luther King did not gain support immediately after the famous "95 theses" were released at Wittenberg. The ideas of Martin Luther spread gradually across all walks of medieval society. One of the first scenes showing his work over and publication of "95 Theses" shows that it was initially unnoticed by broad walks. Firstly we see monks reading and working with "95 Theses ". Clergy as an educated class engaged in administration and social control first faces new advancement in Christian theology. Then a nobleman is shown. This point is more important because nobility was the most influential social group in Medieval society It aggregated all political and economic resources of society and its opinion could play a decisive role in the fate of Martin Luther's teaching. It is important to remind about the forerunner of Martin Luther, the morning star of reformation, John Wycliffe, whose ideas were similar to Martin Luther's but didn't succeed. John Wycliffe, like Martin Luther, found no scriptural support in Bib church policies (indulgences) and Papal authority ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). However, Wycliffe's ideas resembled religious leaders of peasant revolts ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). This was dangerous to nobility. On the contrary, Martin Luther published the work "Against Thieving Murderous Hordes of Peasants" ("Protestant Reformation: Part I"). This secured his crucial relationship with the nobility that tremendously contributed to the success of Reformation, unlike ideas of Wycliffe not supported by powerful nobility. So, we can see how the producers of this film effectively signify the importance of nobility. His ideas also spread better since they were more willing to negotiate with civic authorities. Another Protestant leader Calvin preaches that if the prince orders something against Gog we should not follow him (John Calvin, "Instruction in faith", p. 238). It appealed to the disadvantaged and potentially dangerous petty nobility in France ("The Protestant Reformation: Part II"). As we can see, demonstrating the success of Martin Luther and signifying the importance of nobility creators of the film implicitly distinguish Martin Luther from Wycliffe and Calvin.
This film is more than a mere biography of Martin Luther. This book is a treasury of theological and historical material that forms a unique symphony orchestrating the rise of tremendous change in Christianity.
Andrey Rublyov (1966)
One of the best films I have ever seen in my life.
Andrei Tarkovsky makes a very good job depicting the life of monks and the political, cultural, and social environment surrounding them. His job shows that despite the process of the historical development of the society various facets of the Church's life tend to have features that can endure the centuries of change and historical development of the world. At first glance, it appears as a demonstration of the cruel and dirty nitty-gritty in Medieval Russia. However, the situation is more complex. Through the demonstration of monks' life, particularly Andrei Rublev, the author shows different facets of Christianity which can be seen through the actions of the main characters.
The work of Andrei Tarkovsky reflects numerous features of Christianity. Even the beginning of the film reflects one of the major characteristics of the Church, namely strictness and conservatism. At the beginning of the film, a couple of men are trying to launch a flying device from the top of the Church and their efforts are being stopped by the intervention of some unidentified men (possibly monks or warriors). However, they successfully launch the flying device into the air. It may seem to just only reflect the conservatism of the Church that hindered technological and scientific progress. The true meaning is much deeper than it may seem. Unidentified men (probably monks or warriors), who unsuccessfully try to prevent the launch of the flying device symbolize the Church which tries to make religion more rigid, ordered, and codified. It tolerates no deviation. The men who are trying to launch the flying bulb, in turn, symbolize the various heretics (Arians, Nestorians, Monophysites). This scene shows the repressive role of the Church which using ecumenical councils repressed the various deviations from Orthodox Christianity. For example, the first ecumenical council condemned Arianism, the third ecumenical council resulted in a schism with Nestorian Church and the fourth ecumenical council condemned monophysite heresy ("Christian Schisms"). The persecution of those who want to launch the flying bulb is analogous to the persecution of heretics in the previous centuries and this scene reflects Christianity's tendency to show zero tolerance to those who don't accept mainstream beliefs. To sum up, we analyzed the similarity between the persecution of men launching the flying device with the persecution of various heresies by the Church.
Another interesting aspect of Tarkovsky's work is the argument between different attitudes towards Christianity and its social implications. Humans are a very important subject of discussion in every religion including Christianity. In the film, Theophanes the Greek (the famous icon painter) and Andrei Rublev have different perspectives on the nature of evil and humanity. According to Theophanes the Greek, humans are innately bad, driven by fear, and humans and the world do not change. At the same time, Andrei Rublev questions the point of view of Theophanes and claims that humans are victims of ignorance. What can be the reason for such different views on the natures of humans and sin? They both have different backgrounds and origins. Theophanes the Greek grow up in the Byzantine Empire and studied there. Andrei Rublev grow up and studied in Moscow principality. Their different background resulted in different attitudes. This is similar to the controversy between the Greek Orthodox Church and the Coptic Church. Greek Orthodox Church had support in urban areas and Greek upper class ("Christian Schisms"). Whilst the Coptic Church dominated the area along the Nile river ("Christian Schisms"). This different social background resulted in differences in certain religious questions in the case of Orthodox Christians and Copts too. To summarize, this film reflects how a difference in the social background shapes the differences in religious views.
The controversy between Churches can exist on a deeper level resulted from schism. This schism can be reflected by the relationships between monks in the film. These monks are Kirill and Andrei. Kirill was not so talented and tried to become assistant of Theophanes the Greek using sycophancy. He envied Andrei Rublev's talent and tried to give bad feedback on him. Finally, after some time messenger arrives at the monastery and tells that Andrei Rublev, not Kirill is invited. Kirill initiates a scandal and accuses everyone of greed. However, his envy was not the only reason for conflict between him and Andrei. Another source of conflict is his dissatisfaction with himself, with his lack of talent. These numerous factors resulting in conflict between Kirill and Andrei show the similarity between Great Schism and conflict between Andrei and Kirill. There also were numerous reasons, like changes in the Nicene Creed, the question of Papal supremacy, the question of celibate versus married priesthood, the question of what bread should be eaten during the communion leavened or unleavened that resulted in Great Schism ("Christian Schisms"). Similarly to the envy and dissatisfaction of Kirill, they finally culminated in a Schism in 1054. So, Andrei Tarkovsky artfully shows break up between Kirill and Andrei symbolizing the Great Schism.
In his genius work, Andrei Tarkovsky demonstrates various aspects of the Christian religion. He shows the rigid and repressive character of the Church which tolerates no deviation from mainstream religion. Another aspect of Christianity that is shown is the influence of different backgrounds on the religious views of different people. Andrei Tarkovsky also successfully demonstrates how a complex of controversies results in break-up or Schism. To conclude, Andrei Tarkovsky successfully shows different aspects of Christianity in his film.