Spiritualities: The Sacred and the Screen

M.F.C 6172 -Essay

Liam Whetstone

The Libertine (2004)

Staring; Johnny Depp Directed by: Lawrence Dunmore

Written by: Stephen Jeffreys (Screenplay and Original Stage Play)

5,000 words

“Rochester 1:18:01, – Do you ever think on our Lord Jesus Christ, He was cast like me into the wilderness, he was scorned and reviled, he was betrayed by his followers”.

An Exploration of John Wilmot Earl of Rochester As an Outsider figure through a Spiritual Analysis of the film the Libertine.

The film The Libertine (2004) starring Johnny Depp based on the play aboutthe life of John Wilmot is rich in spiritual, religious themes, stories and symbolism. This essay will explore John Wilmot the Second Earl of Rochester’s role as an outsider through a spiritual analysis of the film. The essay uses scenes as examples to illustrate Rochester’s outsider status within the film. The essay also looks at his relationships with his wife, the King and his lover the actress Lizzie Barry, it also looks at the reasons behind his alcoholism, along with this Rochester’s references to Christ will be considered. There will also be brief explorations of the biblical books of Ecclesiastes and Isaiah. Isaiah is quoted in the script and Ecclesiastes which poses questions about whether or not life is pointless, is a recurring theme that Rochester struggles with throughout the film. The essay also looks at Rochester’s eventual conversion to Christianity and his death.

The film opens with a prologue featuring a head and shoulder shot of Rochester speaking directly into the camera. Rochester has an interest in plays and the film is based on a play about his life, making it appropriate that the film opens with a monologue. The dialogue spoken by Depp in the role of Rochester at the beginning of the film is arresting and memorable. The protagonist bluntly introduces himself to the audience.

“Allow me to be frank at the commencement, you will not like me, the gentlemen will be envious and the ladies repelled. You will not like me now and you will like me a good deal less as we go on. Ladies, an announcement. I am up for it. All the time. That is not a boast or an opinion. It is bone- hard medical fact. I put it round, you know. And you will watch me putting it round and sigh for it. Don’t. It is a deal of trouble for you and you are better of watching and drawing your conclusions from a distance than you would be if I got my tarse up your petticoats. Gentlemen, do not despair I am up for that as well and the same warning applies, still your cheesy erections until I have had my say, but later when you shag and later you will shag, I shall expect it of you, and I will know if you have let me down. I wish you to shag with my homuncular image rattling in your gonads, feel how it was for me how it is for me, and ponder was that shudder the same shudder he sensed. Did he know something more profound? or is there some wall of wretchedness that we all batter with our heads at that shining live- long moment, that is it, that is my prologue, nothing in rhyme no protestations of modesty you were not expecting that I hope, I am John Wilmot Second Earl of Rochester and I do not want you to like me” (scene1, 0:01:40)

In other words from the commencement he starts honestly as he intends to go on. Rochester states he isn’t boasting in this prologue he is simply outlining what the audience should expect, from the film.

In his book The Outsider Colin Wilson states the following about how outsider figures tend to express themselves.

“The outsider tends to express himself in Existentialist terms. He is not very concerned with the distinction between body and spirit, or man and nature; these ideas produce theological thinking and philosophy; he rejects both. For him, the only important distinction is between being and nothingness” (Wilson, 2001, p 27)

A scene in which Rochester expresses himself in existentialist terms is when his mother urges him to serve God. (Scene 1, 0:05:08)

The scene starts with a short exchange involving Rochester’s mother urging him to be attentive to his wife Elizabeth Mallet as “she’s not accustomed to London”.(1,0:04:54) Rochester replies “ Mother I shall in all things endeavour to serve her and you”(scene 1,0:04:57). His mother’s response to her son’s promises to serve her and his wife is “serve God”.

Rochester’s reaction to this is a look of exasperation but not of surprise. It is in this short sequence that the audience witnesses evidence of Rochester’s atheism. It is evident from Rochester’s reaction that this is not the first time that his mother has urged him to “serve God”. ” The argument from improbability, properly deployed, comes close to proving that God does not exist” (Dawkins, 2007,p137) Rochester is a rational thinker and his is the argument of improbability of Gods existence. Although his mother is very puritanical she is genuinely concerned for her son’s wellbeing. Even though it seems that Rochester is more disappointed in his mother’s belief in God rather than the fact that she is urging him to “serve God. “The thinking of men who believe in magic and miracles is bent on imposing a law on nature; and in short religious worship is the result of this thinking”(Nietzsche,2004,p82) This is the thinking that Rochester’s mothers religious belief is based on. It is her constant insistence that annoys Rochester the most in this sequence. “Secondly, I wish to declare also that, not feeling that I possess any absolute truth or any message, I shall never start from the supposition that Christian truth is illusory, but merely from the fact that I do not accept it” (Camus cited in Pelikan,1990, p29) . It could be argued that this is Rochester’s opinion of Christian truth at this stage in the film, he cannot accept it. Rather than he outright denies it.

(scene 1 0:05:25) involving Rochester and his wife Elizabeth (played by Rosemuned Pike) during their coach journey to London, is significant in terms of the insights into Rochester’s character and his strong but not true love of his wife “Love is the only way to grasp another human being in the innermost core of his personality. No one can become fully aware of the very essence of another human being unless he loves him” (Frankl,2004,p116). His wife recounts the story to him of abducting her when they first met. As she is telling the story Rochester is sexually pleasuring her with his hand. After his wife has finished the story and he has finished pleasuring her he sucks his fingers, there is a look of recognition on his face, the physical act is not the thing that gives Rochester pleasure it is symbolic of the emotional comfort he gets from his wife and his deep affection for her.” Thus love is not understood as a mere side-effect of sex; rather, sex is a way of expressing the experience of that ultimate togetherness that is called love.” (ibid) His wife is a very supportive and caring person, but as with most of the significant characters she fails to understand or even ask why he behaves the way he does or what causes him to drink as much as he does. She only urges him to stop his self destructive behaviour. In a scene towards the end of the film; she asks Rochester if he is a rational man why does he persist in destroying his body with heavy drink. (Scene 13, 1:21:27)

(Scene 2, 2 0:06:58) sees Rochester in a coffee house with his friends, and this serves to emphasise Rochester’s outsider status and anti-monarchy opinions. To have anti monarchy views in the 1660s was seen as taboo. The majority of people at this time in history would be extremely unlikely to call into question the existence of God or the morality of a monarchy. But Rochester says to his friends “All monarchs I hate, and the thrones they sit on from the hector of France to the cully of Britain” Rochester (scene 2, 0:09:15).

In this sequence he learns that Etherege (played by Tom Hollander) has written a new play about him called The Man of Mode. Etherege seems to admire Rochester enough to write this play about him, but Etherege does not quite have the stomach for the life that Rochester pursues, nor does Etherege have the same depth and intensity of thought that Rochester possesses. It could be argued that Etherege is struggling with writer’s block as a playwright, and is using Rochester as his main point of focus because he has run out of ideas. Etherege is unable to equal Rochester in life, so he resorts to writing a play about him. During this scene Rochester remarks on the fact that Etherege has not written a new play for seven years. Even when Etherege replies that he has written a new play it seems as though Rochester is unimpressed from the way that he responds”Oh written a new play has he?” (Scene 2, 0:10:11)

In scene (3, 0:14:56) set at the theatre, the films audience are introduced to Rochester’s “friendship” with King Charles the Second (played by John Malkovich). This scene shows Rochester entering the theatre and taking his seat. After the king enters he gestures towards Rochester with a beckoning finger, to which Rochester utters “Oh freeze my piss if the royal finger ain`t beckoning me, how exiting.” (Rochester) (Scene 3, 0:17:07). This is not only a statement of sarcasm, but of tedium and boredom. Firstly Rochester is anti monarchy and usually when a king beckons to you, you must go to him. Whilst the king is explaining his predicament Rochester does not seem to be giving the king the respect he deserves. Rochester is frustrated that the king has to live as the “King” and not simply Rochester’s friend Charles. Rochester feels as though Charles is presenting the image of a pious king, when in fact Rochester thinks that the true nature of Charles’ character is the opposite of how he comes across in public as the “king”.

During scenes (3,4 and 6) in which Rochester helps Lizzie Barry(Played by Samantha Morton), he not only teaches her how to improve as a stage actress but he also passes on some important words of advice about life in general, and therefore helps her gain the confidence she requires to become a great actress. During these scenes, the audience also gains insights into Rochester’s mind and the way he views the world and those around him. Rochester first meets Lizzie after she has been dismissed from the theatre, and Rochester is able to obtain a reprieve to get her job back for her. It is in this scene that the audience learns something about Rochester’s attitude towards people when he provides Lizzie with some advice.

“In my experience those who do not like you fall into two categories the stupid, and the envious. The stupid will like you in five years time, the envious never.”Rochester (Scene 3, 0:23:27)

Though this advice could be viewed as arrogant, the purpose of this is to give the despairing actress a sense of confidence and the psychological means to become the great actress Rochester knows she can be. This particular quote also gives the audience an insight into the earl’s mind. Rochester rejects conventional values and sets himself above everybody else by placing those who do not like him into two simple categories; the stupid and the envious. Rochester is not bothered what people think of him as a person and encourages Lizzie to be the same way. In this statement Rochester is identifying himself as the ultimate outsider, as Wilson describes in The Outsider.

“Barbusse has shown us that the Outsider is a man who cannot live in the comfortable, insulated world of the bourgeois, accepting what he sees and touches as reality. ‘He sees too deep and too much’, and what he sees is essentially chaos. For the bourgeois, the world is fundamentally an orderly place, with a disturbing element of the irrational, the terrifying, which his preoccupation with the present usually permits him to ignore. For the Outsider the world is not rational, not orderly. When he asserts his sense of anarchy in the face of the bourgeois` complacent acceptance, is not simply the need to cock a snook at respectability that provokes him; it is a distressing sense that truth must be told at all costs, otherwise there can be no hope for an ultimate restoration of order. Even if there seems to be no room for hope, truth must be told” (Wilson, 2001,p15) Rochester definitely sees too much and too deep. and believes that truth must be told at all costs.

During scene(4) Rochester explains to Lizzie Barry What he feels about the accepted order of things “This bounteous dish which our great Charles and our great God have, more or less in equal measure, placed before us sets my teeth permanently on edge” Rochester (Scene 4, 0:33:17). “Christianity wants to destroy, shatter, stun, intoxicate: there is only one thing it doesn’t want: moderation, and for this reason, it is in it’s deepest meaning, barbaric, Asiatic, ignoble, un-Greek.” (Nietzsche,2004,p85).This is Gods bounties dish that Rochester is referring to.

He then goes on to state that life is pointless “Life has no purpose, it is everywhere undone by arbitrariness I do this and it matters not a jot if I do the opposite” (scene 4, 0:33:29). This philosophy as stated by Rochester ties in to the theme in the biblical book of Ecclesiastes,

” all is vanity and vexation of spirit” (Lessing,1999,p5). This biblical book is posing questions about whether or not life is pointless. “Mans search for meaning is the primary motivation in this life and not a `secondary rationalisation` of instinctual drives” (Frankl,2004,p105). This is definitely Rochester’s primary motivation in life; the theatre is one thing that has meaning for him. Taking into account Rochester’s opinion that life is pointless this gives him a licence to peruse certain temptations, as he feels as though there are no consequences to his actions. Unlike the other characters in the film he is bored by the pursuits that others find pleasurable. For instance he does not enjoy drinking alcohol even though he is seen in nearly every scene with a glass of wine. It could be argued that he gets drunk to escape his conscience. He does not enjoy being drunk but it helps to shut out the disturbing thoughts in his head. For Rochester being continually drunk is a destructive medicine, whereas characters such as Etherege are able to enjoy drink without being alcoholics. Generally characters like Sackville (played by Johnny Vegas) seem to be able to relax and enjoy life whereas Rochester is constantly internally troubled by everything that is going on around him. His constant search to find true love, he does love his wife, however he does not identify with her the way he connects with Lizzie Barry. His desire to always speak the truth regardless of how this may affect those who care about him shows that Rochester is a very deep and intense thinker. He seems to be constantly questioning everything and everyone he comes into contact with, as well as questioning his own actions and beliefs.

The King asks a great favour of Rochester during (scene 4, 0:25:25) in which the earl is once again drinking wine and not paying much attention to the King. The King asks him to write a play that will stand as a monument to his reign. Though this is a great opportunity for the earl to display his talent and great mind to the world, he behaves as though the King is nagging him once again. Rochester also feels as though the King requires him to write a flattering play that lies – something that the earl is not prepared to do, as Rochester strives to speak the truth. This scene sets up the most pivotal scene in the film. The reason for Rochester’s constant drinking should be considered a significant aspect of this scene. After the King has explained to Rochester what he requires from him and urges him not to mess it up, the camera cuts to a shot of Rochester having his wine glass refilled as he considers what the king expects of him. Rochester does not wish to do what the king is asking from him.

(Scene 5, 0:38:10) Rochester is walking through St James Park in a drunken state with a voice over of Depp reciting one of Rochester’s poems, A Ramble in Saint James’s Park. (Rochester, 2004, p18) As he walks through the park the camera is tracking his progress with the earl in the foreground of the camera shots, it cuts to grainy green shots of sexual acts of all kinds, this disgusting sight horrifies Rochester, and this is evident from the voiceover of Rochester’s internal thoughts. “Much wine had passed with grave discourse, of who f**ks who, and who does worse”. (ibid) The fact that Rochester seems to be disturbed and disgusted by the multiple sexual acts he is witnessing, could serve to help the audience understand what Rochester is trying to say about the king in the play that he writes. He is saying is this all you can do?

The play is indeed a great and complex work, (Scene 10, 1:06:02) however many of the characters, including the King, fail to notice the deep messages and questions contained within the play. The King seems unable to see beyond the surface content of the play. Once more Rochester’s mind and intellect has been misunderstood as lazy and sexually perverted instead of clever and insightful. The messages contained within this play, are profound. As the director Laurence Dunmore points out in his commentary the nymphs at the beginning of the play are not that offensive. The French ambassador even remarks to the King about the good quality of the dildos that have been handed out in the audience. The problem with this play is how its messages are perceived by the King. Later in the sequence a dwarf is pushed onto the stage on the back of a large artificial penis in the shape of the British Isles. This is then positioned at the back of the stage facing an artificial backside in the shape of France. Obviously the French ambassador is not amused by this. The artificial penis is then placed in a position pointing up the artificial backside in the shape of France. This is the offensive part of the play. It isn’t simply the fact that there is a penis and a bottom on the stage, but the fact that with two visible symbols Rochester is literally saying ‘f**k France’. He is not only displaying his contempt for the King’s problems, but that he is fed up of the King constantly nagging him. Unlike many of the other characters, including the King, Rochester succeeds in telling the truth about life at the Royal Court with his representation in this play. However Rochester pays the price for telling the truth. It is at this point that he is betrayed by his followers for telling the truth. At this stage in the film he definitely is an outsider.

In a previous scene(2) when he is sat in the coffee house with his friends Rochester remarks on how much he hates the monarchy, so in retrospect it isn’t that surprising that he wrote the play he did. Rochester appears on stage impersonating King Charles (scene 10, 1:08:56). Of course this is an offensive act of treason and the King is understandably displeased. Rochester dressed as the King makes his entrance onto the stage through the backdrop of the stage set that has a large painting of a naked women with her legs spread wide. Rochester enters the stage through the female genitals at the back of the stage. He then sits on a throne. The prostitute Jane then kneels in front of him. He then begins his speech; a monologue that he has written from observing the King in his day to day activities. The honest speech is a treasonable offence by the earl, and is the tipping point of the film’s narrative.

“Thus in the zenith of my lust I reign I eat to swive and swive to eat again. Let other monarchs who their sceptres bare to keep their subjects less in love than fear, be slaves to crowns, my nation shall be free my pintle only shall my sceptre be. My laws shall act more pleasure than command and with my prick I’ll govern all the land” (Rochester) (Scene 10, 1:09:20)

This very honest speech is not appreciated by the King – indeed Charles is very disgusted by it. He set Rochester the task of writing a play that would stand as a monument to his reign. Well this play would certainly be remembered by those who witnessed it as members of the audience at the theatre. Another thing that should be pointed out here is that the theatre is Rochester’s drug as he states to the actress Lizzie Barry in an earlier scene. In this setting he has attempted to portray the truth. This play was an opportunity for Rochester to display his talents as a writer, but only he was able to fully appreciate his play and its complex meaning. What should be pointed out here is the fact that Rochester seems to be the only person in the theatre who knows exactly what he is going to say in this speech. This is probably why the camera cuts to a shot of Lizzie Barry looking very anxious as she watches the speech from back stage. This play was written when Rochester’s mood was at its lowest; Thomas Moore explains that “Many poets and artists have created their best work out of emotional their darkness. Even if you don’t see yourself as an actual artist, you are an artist of your own life. You create your own story and have your own ways of expressing yourself” (Moore,2009,p11)

After this sequence Rochester goes into hiding. His illness worsens and it is at this point that the references to God by the earl become more frequent, as he begins his road to death.” To anticipate death, we are told, means neither to commit suicide nor to brood over death, but to make death the unifying factor in my existence, to relate all my possibilities to this one capital possibility. In other words, it is to see and to accept the nothingness of my existence”(Macquarrie,1973p,119). At this point in the film Rochester has anticipated his death and accepted the nothingness of his existence.

During scene (12) where he is posing as the quack Doctor Bendo, he compares himself to Christ.

“Do you ever think on our Lord Jesus Christ? He was cast like me into the wilderness, he was scorned and reviled, he was betrayed by his followers” (Rochester 1:18:01)

This is true, Rochester was betrayed by his followers, cast into the wilderness, scorned and reviled. However it must be pointed out that his life was of a completely different character to that of Jesus of Nazareth, who was not a drunken lecher like Rochester.

After the sequence involving Rochester comparing himself to Christ. The King eventually finds him ;( scene 12, 1:19:04) and the King’s servants force Rochester to his knees. In the conversation that follows the King informs Rochester that he considered putting Rochester’s head on a spike for his very treasonous play. However the King informs him that he has decided on something worse, and tells Rochester that he is condemning him to be himself. This is a very intriguing thing for the King to decide as punishment for an act of treason. The King appears to be giving Rochester the freedom he wished for at the beginning of the film. The freedom to be himself, and not have the king asking him to help him by lying for him, so instead of condemning him, the King is indirectly giving Rochester a gift. He is giving Rochester something he, as King of England can not have, authenticity of character. As king he must present a demeanor of majestic dignity, as a King he has to live a lie. He cannot be himself; he has to be the King, a figurehead and nothing more. In condemning Rochester to be Rochester, he is giving Rochester the one thing that the King cannot have, permission to be honest, even though this honesty might offend people. During this scene the King accuses Rochester of being a coward and this is Rochester’s response “All men would be cowards if they only had the courage” Rochester, (Scene 12, 1:20:09) this is an interesting subversion of the concept of cowardice.

“There must, therefore, be an alternative to that fallen existence- the spiritual man is set against the carnal man, authenticity over against in-authenticity. And this implies that man stands in need of conversion”(Macquarrie,1973,p119). This is the reason for Rochester’s conversion his failure to find meaning in life has given him the need to convert and God provides him with this meaning. It is very clear from the final scenes of the film that Rochester has gone from atheist at the beginning, to a believer in God at the end of the film. He is definitely not a fickle person, nor would an atheist fear the prospect of hell because an atheist does not believe in the concept of hell.

(Scene 15) Rochester asks the priest at his bed side to read a passage from the book of Isaiah. “And he is despised and rejected of men a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief and we hid our faces from him” Isaiah as quoted by the priest at Rochester’s death bed (1:27:29). This quote from Isaiah is important because, Rochester feels as though he is the crucified one, a Christ figure. Similar to R.P. McMurphy in One Flew over the Cuckoos Nest “In this titanic and religious struggle, the forces of evil are manifested in Nurse Ratched, the infamous “big nurse” and the forces of good in the Christ-figure R.P.McMurphy. It is McMurphy’s self- sacrifice which alone will save the inmates and, hence, the world” (May,1992, p147) Rochester has sacrificed himself because he is the only one who is brave enough to speak the truth. In trying to speak the truth he has been ignored simply because he has gone against the status quo. It is this ignorance that causes him to despair and drives him to the lechery that causes his fatal diseases. Jesus’ death was a sacrifice that paid for the sins of Rochester; Jesus was a complete outsider and so was Rochester but in a significantly different way.

Rochester prays to God on his death bed “God, raise me from this bed to do what I must do” Rochester (Scene 13, 1:27:54) the significance of this line is not the fact that Rochester prays to God, it is the fact that he has decided to do something important. The King has requested favours from Rochester and he has refused to help the King. Not long before Rochester’s death Parliament is trying to pass a law that prevents the king’s successor from succeeding to the thrown because he is a catholic. Rochester feels that this is unjust, as King Charles the seconds’ father was murdered outside the parliament building, and his killers were given process of law, despite their crime. Rochester feels as though condemning the king’s successor because he is a Catholic and not a Protestant is unjust. He feels as though he must go to the House of Lords and help the King by making a speech (1:28:23). Not even his crippling illness will prevent him from doing what he must do.

During the death bed scene his wife is at his bedside, and Rochester says “I have tried to speak the truth but I have been betrayed” Rochester. (Scene 15, 1:39:37) He has always made a point of being honest about himself, and what he thinks of others. Throughout the film Rochester demands that everyone he meets should be authentic, many refuse. This is what he means by trying to speak the truth and being betrayed. As a result of the people he knows constantly refusing to be honest and never admitting their hypocrisy.

He then asks his wife to tell him the story of when they first met, before she finishes the story he dies. Rochester’s penitent death could be related to the words of St Augustine. “Once I even dared to plan an enterprise of sin leading to death while your sacrament was being celebrated in church” (Augustine, 2005,p35)

The song at the end of the film (scene 16, 1:40:57) is the catholic mass sung in Latin and in English. “Kyrie, eleison! Lord, have mercy! Christe, eleison! Christ, have mercy!”- http://requiemonline.tripod.com/lyrics/latinlyrics.htm#Kyrie This appears in the song at the end of the film and is significant to Rochester as it is praying for God to have mercy on him for his destructive and sinful life.

“The history of Jesus Christ,” writes Graybeal, “has taught us all that the nonconformist, the questioner of certified authority and established procedure, the lover of persons and of life, will be killed. God’s story in Christ has also taught us that not even death will be able to stop the liberator’s empowering effect. The audiences applaud because, once more they have heard and seen the truth” (May,1992,p152). As the audience stand and applaud after they have witnessed the truth from Rochester. The audience in the theatre is applauding Rochester not Etherges play. The lines that stand out as the camera pans round the packed theatre where Etherges play about Rochester has just been performed are “Stand for him, Kneel for him, as he lies low in kneaded clay, pray for him who prayed too late that he might shine on judgement day”. (Scene 16, 1:41:43) “ This meaning of this part of the lyric is both a request for the audience to give Rochester the recognition he deserves, it is also a warning to the earl with another request to the audience to pray for him to give him a chance on judgement day. It is not until after his death that the other characters understand Rochester as an intellectual, emotional and physical Outsider.

“What is certain is that the Outsiders problems have begun to resolve themselves into terms of Ultimate Yes and Ultimate No; for the intellectual Outsider, the Existentialist form: being or nothingness? For the emotional Outsider: Eternal Love or eternal indifference? and for the Nijinsky type of Outsider, the man of action, the physical Outsider, it is a question of life or death , the body’s final defeat or triumph, whether the final truth is ‘I am God’ or an ultimate horror of physical corruption” (Wilson,2001,p106)

During the epilogue Rochester once again speaks into the camera addressing the audience directly. Rochester summarises the film to the audience and refers to Jesus, in this final speech he places himself metaphorically in Christ’s place on the cross “Show me our Lord Jesus in agony and I mount the cross and steel his nails for my own palms” Rochester (Scene 16, 1:42:24). Rochester is symbolically replacing the crucified Christ. He finishes by asking the audience“do you like me now?” (Scene 16 1:42:51) This could be described as a rhetorical question or a direct plea; it is evident from this final line that Rochester is definitely the ultimate outsider, and definitely a man of sorrows.

Word Count 5,270

Bibliography

Books

Augustine St (2008) the Confessions of St Augustine New Spire Edition

Barclay W (1983 revised edition) The Daily Study Bible: the Letter to the Romans The Saint Andrew Press Edinburgh

Barrett CK (1979) A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans Billing and Sons Limited London

Camus, A. (2000) the Outsider London Penguin Books

Camus, A (2004) The Plague, The Fall, Exile and the Kingdom, and Selected Essays London New York Toronto Everyman’s Library Alfred A Knopf

Childs G (2005) Secrets of Esoteric Christianity Temple Lodge Publishing

Dawkins R (2007) the God Delusion Black Swan Edition

Frankl V E (2004) Man’s Search for Meaning London Rider Ebury Publishing

Guyon J (1981) Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ Seed Sowers Publishing Jacksonville USA

Jeffreys S (1994) the Libertine Nick Hern Books London

Johnson JW (2004) A Profane Wit University of Rochester Press

Lamb J (2005) So Idle A Rouge: the Life and Death of Lord Rochester

Sutton Publishing Limited

Lessing D (1999) Ecclesiastes Grove Press New York

Macquarrie, J. (1973) an Existentialist Theology London Penguin Books

Malone P (1988) Movie Christs and Anti-Christs Sydney Parish Ministry Publications

May JR (1992) Images &Likenesses: Religious Visions In American Film Classics Paulist Press

Micklethwaite.J.& Wooldrigde A, (2009) God is Back London Penguin Books

Moore T (2009) Dark Nights of the Soul Piatkus Little Brown London

Motyer J A (1999) Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries: Isaiah Inter Varsity Press USA

Murdoch I (1993) Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals London Penguin

Van Ness, P.H (EdIitor) (1996) Spirituality and the Secular Quest, New York A Crosword Herder Book New York

Nietzsche, F (1997) Thus Spake Zarathustra London Wordsworth Classics of World Literature

Nietzsche, F (2004) Human, All Too Human London Penguin Classics

Nietzsche, F (2004) Ecce Homo: How One becomes what one is

London Penguin Classics

Passmore J (1971ed) the Perfectibility of Man London Duckworth

Pelikan J (1990) The World Treasury of Modern Religious Thought Little Brown and Company Boston Toronto London

Pullman P (2010) The Good Man Jesus and The Scoundrel Christ Cannongate Books

Rausch TP (2003) Who is Jesus? An Introduction to Christology Liturgical Press Collegeville Minnesota

Sagan,C(1999) The Demon- Haunted World London Headline Book Publishing

Sawyer J F A (1984) the Daily Study Bible Old Testament: Isaiah Volume 1 The Westminster Press Philadelphia, The Saint Andrew Press Edinburgh Scotland

Sawyer J F A (1986) the Daily Study Bible Old Testament: Isaiah Volume 2 The Westminster Press Philadelphia The Saint Andrew Press Edinburgh Scotland

Simon S & Hendricks G (2005) Spiritual Cinema: A Guide to Movies That Inspire, Heal, and Empower Your Life. Hay House

Steiner R (2005) From Jesus to Christ: Eleven Lectures by Rudolf Steiner

Rudolf Steiner Press

Stott R. et al (2001) Making your case, Harlow: Longman

Syrios B& T Syrios (2002) Ecclesiastes: Chasing After Meaning Inter Varsity Press

Vardey L (1995) God in All Worlds New York Pantheon Books

Vieth DM editor (2002) The Complete Poems of John Wilmot 2^nd Earl of Rochester University of Yale Press New Heaven and London

Weeler G (2004) Man of Sorrows: God, Salvation, and the Book of IsaiahReview and Herald Publishing Association

Wilmot J (2004) Selected Works London Penguin Books

Wilson C. (2001) the Outsider London Phoenix, Orion Books

Film for Spiritual Analysis

The Libertine (2004) (U.K)

Websites

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375920/

Date visited 27/10/10

Rochester’s Poetry and Life

http://www.ealasaid.com/fan/rochester/poems.html

Date Visited 27/10/10

http://www.luminarium.org/eightlit/rochester/wilmotbib.htm

Date Visited 27/10/10

http://www.poemhunter.com/john-wilmot/

Date Visited 27/10/10

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/earl-rochester-john-wilmot.html

Date Visited 11/11/10

Ecclesiastes

http://www.biblenotes.net/ecclesiastes.html

Date Visited 31/10/10

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=2546945

Date Visited 31/10/10

http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/synopsis/ecclesiastes/ecclesiastes.html

Date Visited 31/10/10

http://ebible.org/web/Eccl.htm

Date Visited 31/10/10

The Road to Damascus

http://www.ewtn.com/library/mary/roaddama.htm

Date Visited 24/10/10

The Prodigal Son

http://christianity.about.com/od/biblestorysummaries/p/prodigalson.htm

Date Visited 24/10/10

Jesus Christ

http://jesus.christ.org/

Date Visited 2/11/10

http://www.thestoryofjesus.com/introduction.html

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.thestoryofjesus.com/chapters.html

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.thestoryofjesus.org/

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.topmarks.co.uk/christianity/nativity/nativity1.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_Jesus_and_Christ

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.godshew.org/ChristJesus.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://miketodd.typepad.com/waving_or_drowning/2010/03/jesus-the-christ.html

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.faithmag.com/faithmag/column2.asp?ArticleID=35

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/john.html

Date Visited 25/1/11

You Tube Interviews and Deleted Scenes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwZ8Hi_VprY&p=8791B406076A5FEE&index=63&playnext=3 (Johnny Depp The Libertine/ online Video Interview)

Date Visited 31/10/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TyCYdDyR6o&feature=related

Date Visited 31/10/10 (Johnny Depp – Capturing of “The Libertine”/ online Video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ9SjuCrOIk&feature=related

Date Visited 31/10/10 – (Making of The Libertine/ Online Video)

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=The+Libertine+Deleted+Scenes&aq=f

Date Visited 31/10/10 –(Eight deleted scenes from the film The Libertine)

The Libertine Film Reviews

http://www.talktalk.co.uk/entertainment/film/review/films/the-libertine/988

Date Visited 30/11/10

http://www.film4.com/reviews/2004/the-libertine

Date Visited 30/11/10

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2005/11/16/the_libertine_2005_review.shtml

Date Visited 30/11/10

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/libertine/

Date Visited 30/11/10

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/johnny-depp-and-the-libertines-the-history-behind-his-new-role-514319.html

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/movie/109040/libertine

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.talktalk.co.uk/entertainment/film/review/films/the-libertine/988

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/the-libertine

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/libertine/

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.film4.com/search?q=The%20Libertine

Date visited 27/10/10

http://www.film4.com/reviews/2004/the-libertine

Date visited 27/10/10

17^TH Century Religion

http://www.localhistories.org/17thcenturyreligion.html

Date Visited 10/11/10

Everyday Life of the 17^th Century

http://www.localhistories.org/stuart.html

Date Visited 12/11/10

England in the 17^th Century

http://www.localhistories.org/17thcent.html

Date Visited 12/11/10

http://www.britroyals.com/kings.asp?id=charles2

Date Visited 18/1/11

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon49.html

Date Visited 19/1/11

The Restoration, 1660-1688 | The Problem of Divine-Right Monarchy

Date Visited 19/1/11

Catholic Mass

http://catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/Mass.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.mycatholictradition.com/catholic-mass.html

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/mass.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.catholicmass.org/

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.trinity.la/mass.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.sacred-heart.org.uk/mass-commentary

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://requiemonline.tripod.com/lyrics/latinlyrics.htm#Kyrie

Date Visited 27/3/11

Isaiah

http://niv.scripturetext.com/isaiah/53.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.raystedman.org/old-testament/isaiah/man-of-sorrows

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://members.net-tech.com.au/sggram/f055.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://muchgrace.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/a-man-of-sorrows-and-acquainted-with-grief-%E2%80%94-isaiah-533/

Date Visited 25/1/11

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/mos/mos03.htm

Date Visited 25/1/11

Gilbert Burnet

http://www.electricscotland.com/history/other/burnet_gilbert.htm

Date Visited 8/2/11

Appendix- 1 John Wilmot 2nd Earl of Rochester

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/earl-rochester-john-wilmot.html

John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester

The Earl of Rochester:

John Wilmot, the 2nd Earl of Rochester, is one of the most fascinating and notorious characters of the Restoration Age. In his brief life – he was only 33 when he died – he led a very eventful if scandalous existence that outlined as, his contemporary John Dennis put it, ‘his wit, his spirit, his amorous temper, the charms that he had for the fair sex, his falsehood, and his inconstancy…’ , and managed at the same time to leave a poetic output that rivals that of Dryden and is still colored by his original personality.

His friend, the playwright Sir George Etherege, based a character ‘Dorimant’ on him in his play ‘Sir Fopling Flutter or Man of the Mode’ and described him as – “I know he is a Devil, but he has something of the Angel yet defac’d in him.”

Early Life:

The Earl of Rochester, known in his lifetime as Lord Rochester, was born at Ditchley in Oxfordshire on either 1 or 10 April 1647; the date is disputed, but being born on April Fool’s Day seems quite an apt beginning in his regard. His parents were Henry Wilmot and Anne St. John.

It was two years after his birth that Charles I of England was beheaded. Lord Rochester’s father, Henry Wilmot, who became the 1st Earl of Rochester in 1652, had been a Royalist supporter of Charles I and later aided the escape of Charles II and followed him into a long exile. He died while in exile in 1658 and so didn’t see the Restoration of the Monarchy that came about just two years later in 1660. Anne St. John, formidable and strong-minded Countess of Rochester, who came from a well-known Puritan family, was to outlive her son.

Education:

As a child, Rochester both attended the Burford Grammar School and was taught by a tutor at home, and was generally considered a model, well-behaved pupil. Later he was sent up to Oxford, where, free for the first time from his mother’s eagle-eye, we hear of a slightly different personality emerging. He was just 12 when he matriculated from Wadham College, but a popular, much sought after character and already a frequenter of taverns. When he was 14, the Earl of Clarendon awarded him his MA degree. Then, as was the fashion amongst the English Aristocracy, he was sent to round off his education by traveling in Italy and France.

On his return, now a polished, sophisticated young man of 18, he took his place in the brilliant new court of Charles II – he wasn’t to grace the Parliament until he reached the more mature age of 21 – and soon quickly became one of its most well-known and outrageous wits. In May 1665, he created a stir by kidnapping a heiress, Elizabeth Mallet, as she left the Westminster Palace in her grandfather’s coach one night. Apparently she had caught his eye both for her beauty, her wit, and her immense wealth, most especially the latter, and, as she had spurned his suit, even when put forth by the King, and he was afraid that another suitor might get his hands on her money, the young Lord Rochester thought of this original Neanderthal method of winning himself a wife. As it turned out, Elizabeth was impressed and finally married him two years later, but at the moment the King was vastly annoyed by his uncivilized conduct. Elizabeth was brought back and returned to her family. Lord Rochester was arrested and imprisoned for a few weeks in the Tower of London.

In August 1665, Lord Rochester took part in the naval Battle of Vagen against the Dutch, where he is said to have shown exceptional courage. For the last time in his life, according to his detractors.

Marriage and Mischief:

On 29 January 1667, Lord Rochester and Elizabeth Mallet were married and, despite his wildness and philandering, it was to be a happy union. They had three children that he doted on. Elizabeth and the children lived mainly at the Rochester Country Estate.

The Earl divided his time between being a comparatively sober family man in the country and a hell-raising boozer and womanizer in London.

He had numerous mistresses, notable amongst them the famous actress Elizabeth Barry, who, it is said, was a rather ordinary stage performer until he took her under his wing and personally coached her in the acting skills. Probably this tale is just a tale, but certainly Lord Rochester had no mean talent when it came to acting himself.

His Court shenanigans were plenty and ranged from drunken brawls to running naked to destroying the King’s Sun-dial to writing bawdy verses that lampooned the licentious behavior of the King and the Aristocracy. He wrote about the Duchess of Cleveland –

“When she has jaded quite
Her almost boundless appetite…
She’ll still drudge on in tasteless vice
As if she sinn’d for exercise.”

This sort of thing more frequently than not succeeded in getting him banished from the royal presence, and in these periods he is known to have donned different disguises to both keep a low profile and mingle easily with the lower classes and, so it seems, to get a kick out of fooling everyone in the vicinity.

His most famous disguise was as Doctor Alexander Bendo, a German quack, specializing in fertility treatment. This came about after, in a moment of drunkenness, he mistakenly handed Charles II a particularly insulting poem on himself. In this, he described the King as –

“Nor are his high desires above his strength:
His scepter and his prick are of a length;
And she may sway the one who plays with th’ other,
And make him little wiser than his brother.”

Banned from Court for several months, he set up a stall on Tower Hill and, as the good Doctor Bendo, soon cuckolded half of London.

Lord Rochester and Charles II:

Despite his numerous offenses, Lord Rochester was invariably forgiven and allowed to return to court. Charles II had a soft soft for him as he had for all highly original and good-looking individuals and found him very entertaining to have around. He made him a Gentleman of the Bedchamber, a high honor that was only conferred upon the King’s closest friends, and the Ranger of Woodstock Park.

Lord Rochester was an important member of the infamous ‘Merry Gang’ at the Court that included other high-spirited wits and rakes like Charles Sackville (Earl of Dorset), John Sheffield (Earl of Mulgrave), George Villiers (Duke of Buckingham), William Wycherley, and others.

Most of these people, for all their baffling antics and practical jokes, were intellectuals with several literary accomplishments to their names. Lord Rochester’s lively and often sexually explicit poetry, biting satires, songs, and plays were well-known in his life-time, but most of the works were published anonymously and it was not until after his death that they were published under his own name. His play ‘Sodom or the Quintessence of Debauchery’ was later banned for being obscene and printed copies were destroyed.

Lord Rochester finds a somewhat censorious mention in Samuel Johnson’s ‘Lives of the English Poets’ –

“Having an active and inquisitive mind, he never, except in his paroxysms of intemperance, was wholly negligent of study: he read what is considered as polite learning so much, that he is mentioned by Wood as the greatest scholar of all the nobility. Sometimes he retired into the country and amused himself with writing libels, in which he did not pretend to confine himself to truth.”

“Thus in a course of drunken gaiety and gross sensuality, with intervals of study perhaps yet more criminal, with an avowed contempt of all decency and order, a total disregard to every moral, and a resolute denial of every religious obligation, he lived worthless and useless, and blazed out his youth and his health in lavish voluptuousness; till, at the age of one-and-thirty, he had exhausted the fund of life, and reduced himself to a state of weakness and decay.”

Death:

The Earl’s constant drinking and wenching proved to have a disastrous effect on his health. He contracted Syphilis and other venereal diseases, for which, in those days, there was no surefire cure, and probably also suffered from cirrhosis as a result of his alcoholism. After much suffering, his former good looks literally rotting away, he died on 26 July 1680.

Lord Rochester had always been an atheist in his life-time, but as his life ebbed, on his mother’s insistence, he had to endure the administrations of her religious cronies. One of them, Dr. Burnet, was with him at the very end and later famously claimed to have got him to repent and return to the religious fold. Whether this really happened or not, it certainly got Dr. Burnet some righteous Christian publicity.

Appendix- 2 17th Century Religion

http://www.localhistories.org/17thcenturyreligion.html

17TH CENTURY RELIGION

By Tim Lambert

In the early 17th century king and parliament clashed over the issue of religion. In the 17th century religion was far more important than it is today. It was a vital part of everyday life. Furthermore there was no toleration in matters of religion. By law everybody was supposed to belong to the Church of England (though in practice there were many Roman Catholics especially in the Northwest).

In 1633 William Laud was made Archbishop of Canterbury. He was strongly opposed to the Puritans and King Charles I supported him wholeheartedly. Laud was determined to suppress the Puritans and he sent commissioners into almost every parish to make sure the local churches came into line.

Furthermore the Puritans had their own preachers called lecturers. These men were independent of the Church of England. Laud tried to put a stop to these preachers – with some success.

Most of all Laud emphasised the ceremony and decoration in churches. These measures were strongly opposed by the Puritans. They feared it was the ‘thin edge of the wedge’ and Catholicism would eventually be restored in England.

In 1642 came civil war between king and parliament. The war ended in 1646 and Charles I was executed in 1649.

In the 16th century everybody was supposed to belong to the Church of England. However in the 17th century independent churches were formed. The first Baptist Church in England began meeting in 1612.

Later in the 17th century George Fox (1624-1691) founded the Quakers. Fox believed that everybody had an inner light and during the 1660s and the 1670s he travelled across England. However the Quakers were persecuted and Fox himself was often imprisoned.

From the end of the 16th century there were also Congregationalists or Independents. They believed that every congregation had a right to run its own affairs without any outside interference.

Charles II (1660-1685) was not particularly religious but as far as he had any religion he secretly leaned to Roman Catholicism. (He had to keep this very quiet as he feared the people would rebel if they found out).

Meanwhile parliament was determined to crack down on the many independent churches that had sprung up during the interregnum (the period between 1649 and 1660 when England was without a king) and make Anglicanism the state religion again.

They passed a series of acts called the Clarendon code, a series of laws to persecute non-conformists (Protestants who did not belong to the Church of England). The Corporation Act of 1661 said that all officials in towns must be members of the Church of England.

The Act of Uniformity 1662 said that all clergy must use the Book of Common Prayer. About 2,000 clergy who disagreed resigned. Furthermore the Conventicle Act of 1664 forbade unauthorised religious meetings of more than 5 people unless they were all of the same household.

Finally the Five Mile Act of 1665 forbade non-Anglican ministers to come within 5 miles of incorporated towns. (Towns with a mayor and corporation).

However these measures did not stop the non-conformists meeting or preaching.

When Charles II died in 1685 he was followed by James II, who was openly Catholic. James II promptly alienated the people by appointing Catholics to powerful and important positions. In 1687 he went further and issued a Declaration of Indulgence suspending all laws against Catholics and Protestant non-Anglicans.

Worse in June 1688 James had a son. The people of England were willing to tolerate James as long as he did not have a Catholic heir. However his son would certainly be brought up a Catholic and would, of course, succeed his father.

James II was deposed in 1688. Afterwards the Bill of Rights (1689) said that no Catholic could become king or queen. No king could marry a Catholic.

Parliament also passed the Toleration Act in 1689. Non-conformists were allowed their own places of worship and their own teachers and preachers. However they could not hold government positions or attend university.

Appendix- 3 17th Century Timeline

http://www.localhistories.org/stuarttime.html

17th CENTURY TIMELINE

By Tim Lambert

1600 The East India Company is founded

1601 The Poor Law is passed. People are made to pay a rate to support the poor.

1603 In March Queen Elizabeth dies. James I becomes king.

1605 The gunpowder plot, a Catholic conspiracy to blow up parliament, is discovered.

1607 Jamestown, the first successful British colony in North America, is founded

1611 The King James Bible is published

1625 James I dies. Charles I becomes king.

1628

William Harvey publishes his discovery of the circulation of the blood

The Petition of Right is presented to the king by parliament

George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham is assassinated in Portsmouth

1629-1640 The Eleven Years Tyranny. Charles I rules without parliament.

1632 Christopher Wren is born

1633 William Laud becomes Archbishop of Canterbury

1641 MP’s draw up a list of grievances called the Grand Remonstrance.

1642

Civil war between king and parliament begins. They fight the indecisive battle of Edgehill.

Isaac Newton is born

1644 Parliament wins the battle of Marston Moor

1645

Parliament wins the battle of Naseby

William Laud is executed

1646 Charles I surrenders to the Scots and the first civil war comes to an end

1648

.Charles I starts another civil war. The Scots intervene on his behalf. However the battle of Preston ends hopes of restoring Charles I to power

Pride’s Purge. Thomas Pride removes some Presbyterian MPs from parliament.

1649 King Charles I is beheaded

1651

A Scottish army invades England in an attempt to put Charles II on the throne. The Scots are defeated at Worcester and Charles flees abroad.

Thomas Hobbes publishes his work Leviathan

1652 Inigo Jones dies

1652-1654 The first Anglo-Dutch war

1653 Oliver Cromwell becomes Lord Protector of England

1655-1657 Rule of the Major-Generals

1658 Oliver Cromwell dies. His son Richard takes over.

1659 Richard Cromwell resigns. His fall from power is so swift he becomes known as ‘Tumbledown Dick’.

1660 Charles II becomes king

1661 Robert Boyle publishes his great work The Sceptical Chemist

1662

The Royal Society (a Scientific organisation) is given its charter by Charles II

Charles II marries a Portuguese princess, Catherine of Braganza

The Act of Uniformity is passed

1663

The first turnpike road is opened. (Turnpike roads were owned by turnpike trusts that maintained them. You had to pay to use them.

1665 Plague in London. This is the last outbreak of bubonic plague in England.

1665-1667 The second Anglo-Dutch war

1667 John Milton publishes Paradise Lost

1666 The great fire of London. Most of the city is destroyed but it is soon rebuilt.

1670 Hudson’s Bay Company is formed

1672-1674 The 3rd Anglo-Dutch war

1673

The Test Act is passed. Catholics and Protestant dissenters are prevented from holding public office.

1670 The Ashmolean Museum in Oxford is founded

1678 Titus Oates claims he has discovered a ‘Popish plot’ against Charles II. (The whole thing is a hoax).

1679 The Act of Habeas Corpus. Imprisonment without trial is outlawed.

1685

Charles II dies. James II (a Roman Catholic) becomes king.

The Duke of Monmouth (Charles II’s illegitimate son) leads an unsuccessful rebellion in Southwest England.

1686 ‘Hanging’ Judge Jeffery’s sentences many of the rebels to death.

1687

Isaac Newton publishes his great work Principia Mathematica. He lays the foundations of modern physics.

1688

The ‘Glorious, Bloodless Revolution’. James II flees abroad and William and Mary become the new monarchs.

1689 The Bill of Rights is passed

1694

Mary dies of smallpox aged 32

The Bank of England is founded

1698 Thomas Savery invents the first steam engine

Appendix- 4 Ecclesiastes

http://www.biblenotes.net/ecclesiastes.html

Ecclesiastes:

This, in general, is a pessimistic book — with statements that history merely repeats itself and nothing is new, and there is no reason to think of what might have been.

The most famous section is Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 (from King James’ Version):

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Ecclesiastes states that people should enjoy themselves and the fruits of their labors. The pessimism is most pronounced when considering man and animals returning to dust, and not knowing where their spirits go (Ecclesiastes 3:18-21). A few other points:

“Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income. This too is meaningless.” (Ecclesiastes 5:10).
“… to accept his lot and be happy in his work — this is a gift of God…” (Ecclesiastes 5:19-20)
“Better what the eye sees than the roving of the appetite (i.e., dreaming). This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.” (Ecclesiastes 6:9).
On predestination: “Whatever exists has already been named, and what man is has been known; no man can contend with One who is stronger than he (i.e., can fight with God).” (Ecclesiastes 6:10)
“…the day of death better than the day of birth.” (Ecclesiastes 7:1)
“…all that God has done. No one can comprehend what goes on under the sun…man cannot discover its meaning. Even if a wise man claims he knows, he cannot really comprehend it.” (Ecclesiastes 8:17)
“Wisdom is better than weapons of war, but one sinner destroys much good.” (Ecclesiastes 9:18).
“Whoever watches the wind will not plant; whoever looks at the clouds will not reap (i.e, if you want perfection, you won’t do anything.).” (Ecclesiastes 11:4).
“As you do not know the path of the wind, or how the body is formed in a mother’s womb, so you cannot understand the work of God, the Maker of all things.” (Ecclesiastes 11:5)
“…the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.” (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

Appendix-5 The Libertine Film Reviews

http://www.talktalk.co.uk/entertainment/film/review/films/the-libertine/988

Date Visited 30/11/10

Film

The Libertine review

certificate 18

Running time: 114 minutes

Starring: Johnny Depp, Samantha Morton, John Malkovich, Rosamund Pike, Tom Hollander, Johnny Vegas

Rating 5 out of 10

That The Libertine has only just now been released in 2006 after first being screened at the Toronto Film Festival back in 2004 suggests that all was not well. It’s hard to imagine what shape it was in back then given that all the subsequent reworking has barely made this rendition palatable. Even the presence of Johnny Depp is unable to salvage things.

That the engaging Depp for once comes across as less than endearing is due more to the self-professed unappealing nature of his character than a reflection on the actor. Depp plays the Earl Of Rochester whose opening words, spoken directly to the camera in a confessional manner, are “You will not like me. I do not want you to like me.” Nearly two hours later, you know what he means. In the intervening period, the Earl, a real life figure whose name was John Wilmot, enjoys a ruinous lifestyle of drink and debauched degradation before succumbing to a disfiguring demise as a result of syphilis at the age of 33.

Stephen Jeffreys has adapted his stage play, which originally featured John Malkovich in the title role. Malkovich, who doubles as producer, now plays the earl’s benefactor King Charles II. Under the direction of Laurence Dunmore, The Libertine is a dark morality tale about the consequences of indulgence and excess set in 17th century England.

The once banished earl is invited by the king to return to London and write a suitably fitting work to glorify the king’s achievements in reviving the country’s artistic liberalism. “You’re my literary giant,” the king explains. “Elizabeth had her Shakespeare, you can be mine.” But instead, with the king’s �500 payment to subsidise his whims, the earl teams up with old drinking friends, playwright Sir George Etherege (Tom Hollander) and wastrel Charles Sackville (Johnny Vegas) and immerses himself in the swinging London social scene, much to the chagrin of his long suffering wife Elizabeth (Rosamund Pike).

Struck by the intensity of the young actress Elizabeth Barry (Samantha Morton), the earl takes her under his wing and transforms her into the day’s leading actress, not before she becomes another one of his conquests though. The scenes between the impassioned Barry and her immodest tutor are some of the film’s most effecting with Morton matching Depp’s charm with her own distinctive conviction.

While the earl declares himself the “cynic of the Golden Age,” there is little golden about the period as seen through Alexander Melman’s lens and Michael Nyman’s production designs. Instead The Libertine has a distinctly gloomy look to match its tone. Perhaps on stage, it was easier to see the piece’s merits, but on screen, through the grainy mire, it is far harder.

Kevin Murphy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2005/11/16/the_libertine_2005_review.shtml

Date Visited 30/11/10

Johnny Depp delivers one of the best performances of his idiosyncratic career in The Libertine, a low-budget British gem from debut director Laurence Dunmore. Depp shines through the murky gloom of 17th-century England in this intoxicating biopic about the little-known John Wilmot, aka the Earl Of Rochester, a debauched poet who proved mad, bad and very dangerous to know for all who hovered around his seductive light.

You’ve got to love any film which starts with its protagonist proclaiming to camera: “You will not like me.” Yet despite the proud boasts of Depp’s Wilmot, it’s impossible not to like this charismatic anti-hero. Equal parts charmer and harmer, he doesn’t care who he offends, repeatedly upsetting the King, Charles II (John Malkovich), with his bawdy take on life. Closer to home his wicked, wicked ways with wine and women leave his loving wife (a fantastically raw Rosamund Pike) despairing. Potential salvation arrives in the shape of upcoming actor Elizabeth Barry (Samantha Morton), but when Wilmot falls for the career-minded thespian, the seeds of his doom are sown.

“FULL OF WIT AND SPARKLE”

The Libertine is based on a play by Stephen Jeffreys, and those roots are on show in the dialogue-heavy scenes. That’s not a criticism, however, for this is a mature, intelligent drama full of wit and sparkle. It also feels surprisingly relevant for modern times. Laurence Dunmore’s past lies in advertising, and he brings that visual elan to the 17th-century with eye-catching results. And if that still doesn’t convince you, there’s always Johnny Vegas in a wig.

End Credits

Appendix-6 Jesus of Nazareth

http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/history/jesus.htm

Date Visited 30/3/11

Christianity was founded on the life and teachings of a Jew named Jesus Christ. The English word “Jesus” comes from the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua, a common name which means “savior.”

“Christ” is a title and it comes from the Greek form of the Hebrew Messiah, meaning “anointed one.” Since the time of the earliest Christians, “Christ” has been used both as a surname and as a name that stands alone.

Christians believe, and the majority of scholars agree, that Jesus was an actual historical figure. The Christian calendar, in use throughout most of the Western world, centers around the birth of Jesus. The abbreviation “AD” stands for the Latin anno domini, “in the year of our Lord.” Interestingly, Jesus was actually born a few years “Before Christ” (BC) due to a calculation error of the monk (Dionysius Exiguus) who established the Christian calendar in 525 AD.

Sources on the Life of Jesus

The earliest available records of the life of Jesus are the four Gospel narratives, which were written by Jesus’ followers within a few decades of his death. A handful of other sources from the first and the second centuries, including Christian, Roman, Jewish, and Gnostic sources, also mention Jesus. The following article is a summary of the life of Jesus according to the Gospel accounts. The “historical Jesus” as investigated by scholars will be treated in a later article.

Jesus’ Birth and Early Life

Jesus was born to a devout Jewess named Mary and a carpenter named Joseph. According to the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Jesus was conceived by a miracle of the Holy Spirit before the couple had had any sexual relationship. {1}Matthew and Luke also report that Jesus was born in Bethlehem because the Roman emperor had decreed that all families register for a census in their ancestral hometowns. {2} Mark and John do not discuss Jesus’ birth; they begin their narratives with Jesus’ adulthood.

The Christ Child, from Sandro Botticelli’s Madonna of the Pomegranate.

The Gospels are virtually silent when it comes to Jesus’ early life, but some information can be inferred from references elswhere. Jesus was from a small town called Nazareth {3}, where he probably trained as a carpenter under his father.

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a Semitic language related to Hebrew, though it seems he knew enough Greek to converse with Roman officials during his ministry.

The Gospel of Luke offers the only account of this period, in which a 12-year old Jesus wanders off from his parents in Jerusalem to discuss religion in the temple. When his frantic parents finally track him down, Jesus asks, “Didn’t you know I would be in my Father’s house?” {4}

Teaching and Healing Ministry

Jesus reenters the Gospel narratives at about the age of 30 (circa 26 AD). The four gospels agree that Jesus’ first act was to be baptized by John the Baptist, a charismatic and ascetic figure who called people to repentance and baptized those who responded. {5} This event marked the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. (Some have also theorized it was at that moment the human Jesus became divine. {6})

After the baptism, several of John’s followers left to follow Jesus. Jesus then selected several others until he had established a group of 12 disciples. (Two of these disciples, Matthew and John, are the traditional authors of the Gospelsthat carry their name.)

Christ as teacher, from the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus (d. 359 AD). St. Peter’s, Rome.

Jesus then spent from one to three years teaching and working miracles among his disciples and before large crowds. His recorded miracles included turning water to wine, walking on water, cursing a fig tree, healing the sick, multiplying a small meal to feed a crowd, casting out demons, and even raising a man from the dead.

The teachings of Jesus focused primarily on the “the kingdom of God” and were usually relayed through parables drawing on familiar images from agricultural life. He rebuked the hypocrisy of some Jewish leaders and taught the importance of love and kindness, even to one’s enemies.

While Jesus’ teachings were fundamentally Jewish, they departed significantly from the Jewish law of his day. Perhaps most astonishing of all was that he taught on his own authority. Whereas Jewish prophets had always prefaced their messages with “thus saith the Lord,” Jesus said things like, “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.’” {7}

Jesus’ popularity grew quickly, but so did opposition from local leaders. Roman rulers were uncomfortable with the common perception that he was the Messiah who would liberate the Jews from Roman rule, while Jewish leaders were disquieted by Jesus’ shocking interpretations of Jewish law, his power with the people, and the rumor that he had been alluding to his own divinity.

Ecce Homo by Bosch (1475-80).

Betrayal and Execution

In the Gospels Jesus repeatedly suggests to his disciples his end is near, but they do not fully understand or accept the idea. The clearest expression of this is at the “Last Supper,” which took place on the night before his death. All four Gospels record Jesus shared bread and wine with his disciples, asking them to “do this in remembrance of me.” {8} Christians celebrate this event in the sacrament of the Eucharist, or Communion.

On this evening Jesus also predicts that one of them will betray him, which is met with astonishment and denial. But that very night, Jesus’ fate was sealed when Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples and possibly the group’s treasurer, led Roman soldiers to Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. As they arrested Jesus, the ever-colorful Peter defended his master with a sword, slicing off the ear of a centurion. But he was rebuked by Jesus, who admonished, “Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” {9}

Jesus was brought before the Jewish chief priests for trial. When questioned, he said very little but affirmed he was the Messiah. He was then judged worthy of death for blasphemy and handed over to the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, for punishment. Although reluctant to condemn Jesus for reasons not entirely clear, Pilate sentenced Jesus to death at the insistance of the mob that had gathered. According to Matthew, when Judas learned of the sentence he threw his silver coins into the temple and hanged himself. {10}

The Dead Christ Supported by Mary and John by Giovanni Bellini (1460). Pinoteca Brera, Milan.

Jesus was brutally beaten, clothed in a mock-royal purple robe and crown of thorns, then executed by crucifixion at Golgotha (The Place of the Skull). This method of execution, apparently a Roman invention, entailed nailing or tying the victim’s hands and feet to a wooden cross. It produced a slow, painful death by asphyxiation.

The Gospels report that only Jesus’ mother and a handful of female disciples were present at the execution. Jesus suffered on the cross for six hours before finally crying out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” and breathing his last. The Gospels of Matthew and Mark report extraordinary events upon Jesus’ death – the entire land went dark, there was a great earthquake, the temple curtain was torn in half, and some recent dead came back to life. {11}

The Empty Tomb

The Appearance Behind Locked Doors
by Duccio di Buoninsegna (1308).

Jesus’ body was taken down from the cross by Joseph of Arimathea, and placed in a tomb carved into rock. Again, Jesus’ mother and one or two other women were the only ones present. {12} These same devoted women came to his tomb the following Sunday morning to anoint his body with spices. When they arrived, they were astonished to find the stone covering the entrance to the tomb had been rolled away, and the tomb was empty. {13}

The four Gospels vary somewhat in their reports as to what happened next, but all generally agree that the women told the other disciples but their story was not believed. But the risen Jesus later appeared to the disciples, where he passed through a locked door yet demonstrated he was not a ghost by eating and allowing himself to be touched. {14} He made several other appearances among various groups {15} before ascending into heaven {16}.

The Resurrection of Christ by Giovanni Bellini.

The resurrection of Jesus is central to the early church. Historically, it may be impossible to determined what happened or what the disciples actually experienced, but one thing seems clear – they sincerely believed, from an early date, that Jesus had been raised from the dead.

All four Gospels include an account of the resurrection. In Acts, the central message preached by the apostles is the resurrection of Christ. In his first letter to the Corinthians, which dates to as early as 55 AD, Paul writes that the resurrection is of “first importance” and that “if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”

The belief that Jesus’ resurrection makes it possible for people to have peace with God in this life and meet a favorable end in the next was a major source of the incredible courage shown by the early Christian martyrs.

References

Mt 1:18; Lk 1:26-38. Mk and Jn begin their accounts with Jesus’ adulthood.
Mt 2:1-12; Lk 2:8-20.
Mt 4:13; Mk 14:67, 16:6; Lk 4:16; Jn 1:46; Ac 24:5.
Lk 2:41-50.
Mt 3:13-17; Mk 1:9-11; Lk 3:21-23; Jn 1:29-39.
Later called “adoptionists” or “dynamic monarchians.”
Mt 5:27.
Mt 27:17-29; Mk 14:12-25; Lk 22:7-20; Jn 13:1-38.
Mt 26:52.
Mt 27:3-5. See also Ac 1:16-25, in which Judas “fell headlong.”.
Mt 27:27-56; Mk 15:16-41; Lk 23:26-49; Jn 19:17-30.
Mt 27:57-66; Mk 15:42-47; Lk 23:50-56; Jn 19:31-42.
Mt 28:1-10; Mk 16:1-8; Lk 24:1-12; Jn 20:1-10.
Mk 16:14; Lk 24:36-43; Jn 20:19-31, 1 Co 15:5.
Two men on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-32); to Peter in Jerusalem (Lk 24:34; 1 Co 15:5); to seven disciples fishing (Jn 21:1-23); to 11 disciples on a mountain (Mt 28:16-20; Mk 16:15-18)); to more than 500 (1 Co 15:5); to James (1 Co 15:7); at the ascension (Lk 24:44-49; Ac 1:3-8).
Mt 28:16-20; Mk 16:19-20; Lk 24:44-53.

Appendix-7Isaiah

http://christianity.about.com/od/oldtestamentbooks/qt/isaiahintro.htm

Book of Isaiah

Introduction to the Book of Isaiah

By Mary Fairchild, About.com Guide

See More About:

Raphael (1483-1520) portrayed Isaiah with a Hebrew scroll.

Image: Scan

The proper beginning

The chapter should really begin with the statement placed back in the previous chapter, “Behold my Servant…” (Isa 52:13). So we will take our passage for study beginning there and continuing through to the end of chapter 53.

Key Verse for this lesson

In our study of these 15 verses, we will not attempt to glean everything they offer, but will concentrate our thoughts around a key statement, He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief ” (Isa 53:3).

The two main ideas

This statement refers to Christ’s suffering on the cross, where “his appearance was marred more than any man…” (Isa 52:13-14). Our passage ends with the statement, “He poured out himself unto death and was numbered with the transgressors —yet he himself bore the sins of many and interceded for the transgressors (Isa 53:12).

Here we are given two main reasons why Jesus sorrowed and suffered…

First to atone for our sins (Christ our Saviour who died). Atonement means to make at one with God those who are separated from him by sin.
Second to intercede for us (Christ our great High Priest who ever lives). Intercession means being our advocate with God, representing us before God.

The New Testament shows these two aspects of Christ’s work, (Rom 8:34, Heb 7:25-27, 1Jhn 2:1-2).

Our focus in this lesson

In this lesson we concentrate on the second aspect of Christ’s work. He is our advocate, our highpriest, our intercessor. Christ is fully qualified, by virtue of his sufferings, to act as such —as we now observe in our first point…

1. Man of sorrows acquainted with grief

Isa 53:1-3

In the hearts of unbelievers, Christ “has no form or majesty… that we should be attracted to him”. As believers, however, he does attract us, because like us he is “a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief”. The very thing that makes some people despise him, makes us turn to him, because he understands our struggles and hurts and sorrows.

In him we see God not as a remote and incomprehensible Being, but as “a man…” who is truly one of us. Moreover, as “a man of sorrows” he has been through the same sorrows and temptations as we experience and therefore is able to understand and sympathise with us (Heb 4:14-16).

2. His power to overcome tribulations

Isa 53:4

Christ is pictured as one who “bore our griefs and carried our sorrows. This is more than just understanding and sympathising with our sorrows and griefs because he is acquainted with sorrows and griefs. This is actually shouldering those troubles and lifting the burden from us. When Matthew points to the fulfillment of this prophecy, he shows Jesus healing the sick and casting out demons. He showed his power to overcome tribulation. (Mtt 8:16-17).

How good it is to know that we can come to Christ not only for understanding but for overcoming. It is good to have a friend to listen to our troubles and be sympathetic, even if that friend is powerless to help us. It is better to have a friend who can not only listen, but can act to empower us to overcome and conquer.

3. He dealt with our deepest needs

Isa 53:5-6,10

Our greatest trouble in life I will mention in a moment, but our second greatest trouble is that life is so uncertain, and ever so short. Death comes to us all, and always too soon. Which brings us to the greatest of all our troubles: We have sins to condemn us when death thrusts us before our Maker.

Oh what if there were a way to make death not the end of life but the beginning of a far more wonderful life that never ends! And what if there were a way to get rid of our guilt so that we could made worthy to enter into that life! There is such a way, and Christ is it (Jhn 14:2,3,6, Rom 3:23-26).

The prophecy “He shall see seed, he shall prolong days” speaks of the everlasting life and joy that Christ gives us because he became “a guilt offering” on our behalf (Isa 53:10).

4. He set us an example to follow his steps

Isa 53:6-7

The manner in which Jesus lived, and died, causes us to follow him. If we would walk in the steps of another, we can have no better example and shepherd than Jesus. “All we like sheep have gone astray”. Who will shepherd us? He who himself was “led as a lamb to the slaughter” is able now to shepherd us along life’s way, to be our spiritual guide along the right path. If we walk as he walked, and if we walk with him, he will lead us to green pastures of eternal life (1Pe 2:20-25 Psa 23).

Appendix-8Christ Figures in Film http://www.usask.ca/relst/jrpc/art8-cinematicchrist.htmlDate Visited 30/3/11The Structural Characteristics of the Cinematic Christ-figure

Anton Karl Kozlovic, School of Humanities, The Flinders University of South Australia

Abstract

Christ-figures are built into many popular films, particular in the science fiction genre, but they are frequently ignored by critics, unappreciated by film fans, or resisted by anti-religionists. Conversely, believers sometimes want to see them where none credibly exist, thus religiously distorting their reading of the films. So, what can be legitimately called a cinematic Christ-figure? Previous calls for research into this area have been overlooked, but given the pervasiveness of Christ-figure films today, it is now opportune to address that scholarly deficiency. Using textually-based, humanist film criticism as the analytical lens, the critical literature is reviewed, the popular cinema scanned, and twenty-five structural characteristics of the Christ-figure are identified and explicated. Numerous examples are used to illustrate the genre points raised. It is concluded that the Christ-figure film is a legitimate pop culture phenomenon, and that as a living genre, its usage will be undiminished in the foreseeable future. Further research into Christ-figures, holy subtexts and the emerging interdisciplinary field of religion-and-film is recommended.

Introduction

[1] Barry McMillan (2002, 360) argued that the alien in many science fiction (SF) films can be viewed as “a ‘transcendent’ being—a benign entity who brings wisdom and knowledge, the imparting of which brings resolution, insight and the beginnings of personal or political harmony.” As evidence, he cited The Day the Earth Stood Still, E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial,Contact and K-Pax. However, their transcendent natures were not accidental Hollywood creations, rather, they were deliberately engineered as cinematic transfigurations of Jesus Christ (J.C.) and are best described as Christ-figures, but not Jesus-figures. As Peter Malone (1997a) explained concerning this essential ontological difference:

“Jesus-figure” refers to any representation of Jesus himself. “Christ-figure” describes any figure in the arts who resembles Jesus. The personal name of Jesus (in line with contemporary spirituality, thought and practice) is used for the Jesus-figure. The title “Christ”—the “Messiah,” or the “Anointed One”—is used for those who are seen to reflect his mission. In cinema, writers and directors present both Jesus-figures and Christ-figures (59-60).

[2] By their very nature, Jesus-figures are easier to detect. Some famous examples include Max von Sydow in The Greatest Story Ever Told, Jeffrey Hunter in King of Kings, and Willem Dafoe in The Last Temptation of Christ (Kinnard and Davis, 1992; Stern, Jefford and DeBona, 1999; Tatum, 1997). No doubt, Jim Caviezel will be added to this honourable list because of The Passion of the Christ directed by Mel Gibson. Conversely, Christ-figures occur when:

… Jesus is not portrayed directly but is represented symbolically or at times allegorically. Christ figures can be identified either by particular actions that link them with Jesus, such as being crucified symbolically (Pleasantville, 1998), walking on water (The Truman Show, 1998) or wearing a cross (Nell, 1994; Babette’s Feast, 1987). Indeed, any film that has redemption as a major theme (and this includes many, if not most, recent Hollywood movies) is liable to use some Jesus symbolism in connection with the redemptive hero figure (Reinhartz, 2003, 189).

[3] Therefore, Barry McMillan’s (2002, 360) transcendent beings, the alien Messiahs of science fiction are technically Christ-figures. Why? Because these commercial feature films do not try to copy popular conceptions of Jesus’ biblical time, place or image. That is, they are not located approximately 2000 years ago in ancient Judaea. Nor do they star a protagonist who is male, tall, longhaired, blue-eyed, bearded, with WASP features, wearing sandals and a white toga looking like some 20th century hippie. Indeed, hippies frequently fashioned themselves after Jesus Christ to support their own political agendas (Stern and Stern, 1992, 212).

[4] For many Christians, these pop culture representations of Jesus Christ are important holy subtexts (aka sacred subtexts, divine infranarrations) that have to be taken seriously precisely because of their sacred subject matter and undeniable cultural pervasiveness. Indeed, as Ernest L. Simmons (2003, 254) argued: “For many people today, especially the young, popular culture is culture, and theology, to remain true to its calling, must take such cultural expressions seriously.” Somewhat ironically, given the traditional clash between “science” and “religion,” the SF genre provided an unexpected home for religious storytelling. Especially following the decline of the 1950s rash of biblical epics triggered by Cecil B. DeMille’s Samson and Delilah, a “watershed film” (Schatz, 1997, 394). As Hugh Ruppersburg (1987, 165) argued: “science fiction films of the 1970s and ’80s serve the same function as the biblical epics of the 1950s and ’60s.” They still perform this function today, and no doubt, will continue to do so well into the post-millennial age. The only difference is that the religious agenda of these SF films is artfully hidden using holy subtexts.

In Pursuit of Holy Subtexts

[5] What exactly are holy subtexts? In essence, a filmic narrative can have a dual nature, namely, an overt plot plus a covert storyline of varying complexity that is comparable to the metaphorical or symbolic within literature. As Bernard Dick (1998, 129) described this relationship: “the narrative and infranarrative (or text and subtext) are not two separate entities (there is, after all, only one film); think of them, rather, as two concentric circles, the infranarrative being within the narrative.” Put another way, a holy subtext is “anonymous religiousness” (Gallagher, 1997, 151), or better yet, the pursuit of “overtly religious themes in a secular ‘wrapper’” (Ellis, 2001, 304). Through this narratological arrangement, secular films can engage in religious storytelling about biblical characters, ideas and themes without appearing “religious.” In fact, innumerable Christ-figures and other holy subtexts are hidden within the popular cinema. It is a living genre whose engineering, re-discovery and scholarly criticism grows yearly (Deacy, 1999; Hurley, 1980; Kozloff, 1981; Kozlovic, 2000, 2001, 2002a, 2002b, 2003a, 2003b, 2003c, 2003d, 2004; Ruppersburg, 1987). Somewhat surprisingly, previous calls for research into the area have been overlooked (Brunstad, 2001; Hurley, 1980), but given their pervasiveness and increasing contemporary importance, it is opportune to address that scholarly deficiency now. Indeed, why do they exist at all?

Christ-Figures, the Hero Cycle and Hollywood Scriptwriters

[6] Neil P. Hurley (1980) had argued decades ago:

I submit that there is a compelling mysterious force within the creative human imagination which shapes fictional characters and dramatic plots in the image and likeness of the central personage and events of the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (431).

Yet, there is no need to evoke anonymous mysterious forces. Cinematic Christ-figures can exist for a variety of more mundane reasons. For example, in addition to making money, some filmmakers, as committed Christians, have employed the movies to advance their particular faith or Christian culture in general. They used the silver screen as a defacto evangelical tool while operating in a cinematic lay preacher mode. This is how the co-founder of Hollywood, Cecil B. DeMille (1881-1959), the master of the American biblical epic, partially viewed his role. As his biographer Charles Higham (1973) reported:

Bessie Lasky … convinced me that DeMille, so far from being a cynic, was a devout believer in the Bible who saw himself in a missionary role, making the Scriptures attractive and fascinating to the masses in an age of increasing materialism and heathenism. A deeply committed Episcopalian, he literally accepted every word of the Bible without question … (ix-x).

[7] However, the real genius of DeMille was that he also used (covert, subtextual) religionwithin (overt, textual) religion thoroughly to infuse his Bible films with a Christic resonance in support of Christendom. For example, he artistically re-constructed the Old Testament/Hebraic figure of Samson (Victor Mature) as a rustic New Testament Christ-figure within Samson and Delilah. He did this deliberately as a Christian believer to upgrade the sanctity of this decidedly rogue judge following honourable Christian theological precedent rooted in Hebrews 11:32 (Kozlovic, 2003a). Whether viewers detected this subtextual engineering or not (or were supposed too), they could not help but interpret Samson positively as a hero-figure, albeit, roguish and flawed. Such is the transformative power of Christ-figure engineering and subliminal Christian construction.

[8] Sometimes, filmmakers crafted Christ-figures into their work as a joke (possibly by timid Christians), as was confessed decades later by the scriptwriter for the SF cult classicThe Day the Earth Stood Still:

… Edmund H. North himself admitted that the parallels between the story of Christ and Daywere intentional: from Klaatu’s earthly name of Carpenter, to the betrayal by Tom Stevens, and finally to his resurrection and ascent into the heavens at Day‘s end. “It was my private little joke. I never discussed this angle with [producer Julian] Blaustein or [director Robert] Wise because I didn’t want it expressed. I had originally hoped that the Christ comparison would be subliminal (von Gunden and Stock, 1982, 44).

Moreover, as North confessed elsewhere: “I didn’t honestly expect audiences to pick up the allusion … I never wanted it to be a conscious thing, but I thought it had value being there” (Warren and Thomas, 1982, 26). Similarly, Richard Donner, the director of Superman: The Movie had initially disowned the Christian origins of his comic book superhero film. Presumably, due to duress, for as he reported: “I had life threats, because people accused me of approaching Brando as God and his son was Jesus…we had Scotland Yard, the FBI, and the LAPD looking in to them. I literally had people saying that my blood would run in the streets for doing that” (Plume, 2001, 2). However, many years later, Donner freely admitted to the Christic subtext, presumably due to the cultural acceptance of such public admissions, the pervasiveness of cinematic Christ-figures, and their in-vogue fashionableness amongst the knowing. As Donner proudly claimed: “It’s a motif I had done at the beginning when [Marlon] Brando sent Chris [Christopher Reeve] to Earth and said, ‘I send them my only son.’ It was God sending Christ to Earth” (Harrington and Kavitsky, 2000, 7). Although tracking the historical changes in mood concerning the awareness and acceptance of hidden religious figures within the popular cinema is an exciting area for future research, it is beyond the scope of this work.

[9] Christ-figures sometimes result because filmmakers have been influenced by the Hero Cycle theories of American mythologist Joseph Campbell (1988), as espoused in his classic work The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Some of his famous adherents are George Lucas with his Star Wars trilogy and George Miller with his apocalyptic Mad Max trilogy (Mathews, 1984, 233-234). Campbell argued that there was a basic structural pattern within myths, sacred epics, national stories, etc., that focused upon the great deeds of hero-figures. Their faces, names and even gender may change over time, culture, story and place, thus initially disguising their identity (i.e., the hero with a thousand faces). Nevertheless, they play the same heroic roles, and they face the same sort of challenges, time and time again. Indeed, everything is completely different except for the fact that it is all the same as the familiar is reimagined. In fact, the Christ-figure can be seen as a special religious subset of the Hero Cycle, and one structural means of identifying a truly religious great (e.g., Jesus) from a lesser heroic figure (e.g., John the Baptist). That is, the Christ-figure is of a far higher order of greatness, power and mystery than other hero-figures. Since Campbell’s book is core reading in many scriptwriting classes alongside how-to manuals inspired by it (Vogler, 1998), many Hollywood scripts inevitably manifest a Christic resonance. Therefore, viewers do see and recognise the archetypal Christic pattern on some deep level, if not necessarily the Jesus face associated with it.(1)

[10] Another reason that Christ-figures exist is that Hollywood films are frequently created within a Judaeo-Christian context. Therefore, it is almost a natural response for Western scriptwriters looking for ideas and archetypes to tap into this familiar religious heritage when creating their new heroes. They know the sacred stories and thematic patterns so well (whether consciously or unconsciously) from their own socialisation, enculturation and professional education (whether religious, cultural or vocational). Indeed, as inveterate film-watchers themselves, they are being subconsciously sensitised to this phenomenon regularly, along with numerous other patterns that end up as cinematic cliches, stereotypes and hackneyed formulas (Ebert, 1994). As Alison Niemi (2003) argued regarding one aspect of this cultural conditioning:

Filmic models can be internalized intuitively instead of consciously because they are conveyed temporally, and therefore emotionally, rather than remaining within the realms of abstract thought. Life lessons and mythic realities are experienced rather than dictated (437).

[11] Of course, the power of the Christic subtext can be greatly enhanced once the filmmaker is aware of it and consciously decides to make that heroic Christ-figure choice; the script almost writes itself. One simply cinematically retells the Jesus story and mechanically connects the plot dots. The real filmmaking skill is in retelling this ancient story as closely as possible using modern garb, employing innovative techniques, and doing it well enough to make it believable (i.e., achieving the willing suspension of disbelief). Hopefully, such filmic efforts will be worthy of a spot in Campbell’s ever-growing gallery of heroic faces alongside Klaatu, Superman, E.T., John Coffey, John Connor, James Cole, Prot, etc. This desirable outcome is of course not automatically guaranteed. It is a function of the biblical knowledge, skill and commitment of the filmmakers involved. Furthermore, it is also a function of how much authentic research was done, and the compromises that had to be made along the way (whether pragmatic, financial, artistic, academic, religious, political, spiritual, etc.).

[12] There is also an interesting dynamic among filmmakers who intentionally incorporate Christ imagery in their productions and audiences who will notice it and either embrace or reject it. This is itself a function of aesthetic intention, knowledge, marketing, critical awareness, viewer sophistication, and thus another fruitful area for further research, but beyond the scope of this work. Besides, a well-crafted Christ-figure film should be received more favourably by Western audiences whose cultural context and conditioning is primarily Judaeo-Christian. After all, how many non-Muslims could detect a subtextual Muhammad-figure if crafted into a Hollywood feature film, let alone the innumerable subtleties of his sacred character, the range of his holy associates, or the nuances of the Islamic faith?

Problems, Approaches and Arguments

[13] Regrettably, such delightful examples of subtextual craftsmanship have frequently been ignored by critics, unappreciated by film fans, or actively resisted by both religionists and anti-religionists for a variety of reasons. This resistance can range from psychological denial, to fear of contamination, to trenchant opposition to the religious mindset, especially by atheists, scientific rationalists and the religiously wounded with unforgiving dispositions. Yet, cinematic Christ-figures are so common today that a certain degree of viewer fatigue has already set in among the knowing. This was aptly demonstrated by film critic Leif H (1999, 2) concerning The Matrix. He annoyingly claimed: “This movie is so chock full of obvious Christian symbolism you could choke on it,” and then proceeded to identify many of them. Similarly, the eponymously named reviewer Mr. Cranky! (2000) complained about the Scottish warrior epic Braveheart:

… [There is] a really long and protracted moment where the camera lovingly dotes on Mel Gibson [playing William Wallace] as he is taken to a platform to be tortured. It’s the kind of moment that makes preschoolers point to the screen and say, ‘Christ figure!, Christ figure!’ Either that or: ‘Look! He’s shamelessly grooming himself for the Oscars!’ (Oscar committees love Christ figures.) (1).

[14] Conversely, among some believers, there has been a disturbing tendency to see Christ-figures in films where none credibly existed. That is, they attempted to “”baptize” films that did not ask to be converted” to us Linda Mercadante’s (2001, 1) words, thus religiously distorting their critical interpretations to conform to these (unwarranted) Christic expectations. For example, the nail that the renegade replicant Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) impaled through his own hand in Blade Runner was seen by some as “an obvious crucifixion symbol” (Warner, 1991, 182; see also Palumbo, 1987, 223). Yet, Roy does so “in order to prolong his life, to defer his ‘time to die’. Roy is in this and every regard far from Christ-like … [this act and others] are allegorical shots severed from their mythological sources, empty allegories that cannot be redeemed by the Christian narrative” (Pyle, 2000, 126).

[15] Such a forced fate also occurred with the box office hit Spider-Man, the latest incarnation of Marvel’s 1960 comic book hero. Director Sam Raimi had replaced the typical Christ-figure subtext with an Everyman superhero overlay. His Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire) was a pop culture super-saviour who was only tangentially linked to the Superman mythos. Yet, many Christians wanted desperately to see Spidey as a Christ-figure, or at least a spiritualised Christian. For example, Pastor Mike Furches (2002, 1) from Cross Community Church (Wichita, Kansas) claimed that the film is “full of Spiritual references and significance. It is quite possible that Spider-Man is the most Spiritual of all super heroes and this movie adaptation helps prove it, what is even clearer is that his spirituality is rooted in Christianity.” Similarly, Pastor David Bruce (2002, 5) argued that: “Spider-Man in many ways is a retelling of the story of Superman which is a telling of the life of Jesus Christ.” He then provided ten parallels between Spider-Man, Superman and Jesus Christ to justify his assertion. However, not all of Pastor Bruce’s assertions are legitimate, justified or sustained. In the final analysis, Spider-Man has only a few Christ-like parallels and some faint Jesus echoes, but he is not a legitimate Christ-figure like Superman (Kozloff, 1981; Kozlovic, 2002a).

[16] Some scholars of religion are concerned about the potential harmful effects while hunting for holy subtexts. As Linda Mercadante (2001, 1) confessed regarding the blessed (or mentally unstable?) Bess (Emily Watson), the female Christ-figure from Breaking the Waves: “I worry that when they [students] do find a film with distinct Christic allusions, they may uncritically accept images that have been used to promote or justify destructive human behavior.” Notably, Bess’s repeated prostituting of herself with the local men in the spiritual (or psychotic?) cause of her paralysed husband, Jan (Stellan Skarsgard), whom she believed will be cured as a result of her (God-sanctioned?) salacious sexual deeds.

Scant Scholarly Research in the Field

[17] Although identifying the complex nature of subtextual holiness within the popular cinema can have potentially serious results, it can also turn film-watching into an enjoyable, religious education equivalent of a “Where’s Waldo” adventure or a “Magic Eye” picture book. Alternatively, it can be the cinematic theology equivalent of the ultra-aesthetic game played by the Castalian seminarians in Hermann Hesse’s novel The Glass Bead Game (aka Magister Ludi). Yet surprisingly, despite Neil P. Hurley’s (1980, 432) two-decades-old call for “more sustained research,” only scant scholarly work has been conducted to date (Baugh, 1997; Bowman, 2001; Deacy, 1999). This is possibly due to the inherent difficulties associated with this subgenre, for as biblical scholar William R. Telford (2000, 35) noted about Christ-figures: “They are, of course, very difficult to define. Like ghosts in the night or faces in the clouds, you can imagine that you are seeing them, when they are in fact not really there.” Nevertheless, despite the difficulties and potential dangers, as Paul Otto Brunstad (2001, 151) argued: “To formulate criteria for evaluating the abundance of Christ-figures that have emerged through the first century of film history is a task for further discussion.” Now is the time to begin that important task of recovery, discussion and the construction of an evaluative criterion.

Methodology

[18] The critical film and religion literature was reviewed and integrated into the text to enhance narrative coherence (albeit, with a strong reportage flavour). Humanist film criticism was employed as the analytical lens (i.e., examining the textual world inside the frame, but not the world outside the frame [Bywater and Sobchack, 1989]). A preliminary scan of the popular cinema revealed twenty-five structural characteristics of the cinematic Christ-figure. These were identified and explicated herein using copious film exemplars to illustrate the various genre points made.(2) Of course, not all of these elements will be found in any single feature film, and each element may be interpreted differently depending upon the context, but their putative commonality should at least be the starting point for analysis. Permutations will also abound depending upon the need for thematic authenticity, narrative coherence and the desire for higher audience recognition. Indeed, as Peter Malone (1997b) rightly counselled:

The [Christic] resemblance needs to be significant and substantial, otherwise it is trivial. It also needs to be understood from the text and the texture of the work of art, be it classical or popular, and not read into the text with Christian presuppositions (76).

[19] Yet, seeing what you want to see (i.e., text-as-reader-construct) can be very difficult to avoid for some viewers, which is why establishing their formal characteristics in a checklist fashion is so important. The following descriptive explication is a useful introductory template for assessing any Christ-figure claim, whether trivial or not, coupled with the judicious application of viewer prudence, pertinence and perseverance in identifying all the constituent elements, however artfully constructed. Conversely, the same shopping list can be fruitfully employed in a prescriptive, cookbook fashion by filmmakers who want to engineer powerful Christ-figures into their productions. In this way, they can proverbially snowball their audiences into accepting their covert religious argument without the need for blatantly overt arguments. So, what exactly are the basic structural characteristics of the cinematic Christ-figure?

Twenty-Five Structural Characteristics of the Cinematic Christ-figure

[20] Although the following twenty-five elements are the primary characteristics of this Christic phenomenon, there will be some minor overlapping and interlocking of categories, which does not seriously detract from the overall utility of the checklist.

[21] 1.0 TANGIBLE: Some scholars like Donna Bowman (2001) have argued for the existence of absent Christ-figures, but these Christic protagonists are usually tangible, visible and frequently colourful characters, albeit sometimes only partially exposed or mysteriously delayed in progressive revelation fashion (usually done as a dramatic suspense-building device). Their life story is frequently coupled with an odd, unexpected or obscure birth, origin, arrival or creation. Just like Christian believers know that Jesus was real, living among them, and was the product of a virginal conception (Matt. 1:23).(3) His personal life was also significantly obscure, except for a few interesting infant episodes (Matt. 1-2; Luke 1-2) and other childhood incidents (Luke 2:41-52), until the adult activation of his cosmic mission at “thirty years of age” (Luke 3:23). For example, in God Told Me To, a weird SF version of the Second Coming, there is a police hunt for a presumed serial killer. Throughout the course of the homicide investigation, the audience expects an adult, Jesus-looking murderer complete with twelve apostles, an inner circle betrayer, a virgin birth, and hippie garb. They are not disappointed! The Christ-as-fallen-angel called Bernard Phillips (Richard Lynch) is actually an alien-human hybrid. He wants to mate incestuously with his Catholic cop, recessive gene, twin brother, Peter J. Nicholas (Tony Lo Bianco) via a vagina located near Jesus’ traditional spear-wound site. This makes Bernard the most bizarre Christ-figure in cinematic history, and in Larry Cohen’s own assessment: “a dark version of the Superman story” (Williams, 1997, 129)!

[22] Jesus-figures are always male and always human-looking simply because the historical Jesus was male and human, the putative “Son of man” (Matt. 8:20). However, Christ-figures do not have to exhibit these characteristics since they need only reflect the attitudes, behaviours and experiences of the life of Jesus Christ. Consequently, the popular cinema has produced a number of female Christ-figures. For example, Bess (Emily Watson) in Breaking the Waves (Gudmundsottir, 2002; Heath, 1998; Mercadante, 2001), Sister Helen Prejean (Susan Saradon) in Dead Man Walking (Gudmundsottir, 2002; Rike, 1997), and even the brutally raped but forgiving nun (Frankie Thorn) in Bad Lieutenant(Hasenberg, 1998). Indeed, director Abel Ferrara deliberately crafted her as a female Christ-figure to exemplify goodness, mercy and redemption accompanied by the obligatory pieta poses, Christ-like stances and multiple Jesus iconography. A notable recent female Christ-figure with a rock-star resonance was Selma (Bjoerk) in Dancer in the Dark. Jorg Herrmann (2003, 196) described this film as “a postmodern passion play” where a “touch of feminist re-interpretation of the theology of the cross is mixed with early Protestant family theology.”

[23] Human-looking alien Messiahs are very common in SF films. For example, Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) in The Day the Earth Stood Still is very regal looking. Superman (Christopher Reeve) in Superman: The Movie is both hunky and a mommy’s boy. While Prot (Kevin Spacey) in K-Pax looks like an average human being, exhibiting normal and abnormal behaviour in keeping with his psychiatric patient status. Conversely, Peter Malone (1997b, 79) calls the Christ-figure Edward Scissorhands (Johnny Depp) a “creature” and not a “human being” because he is “not exactly human,” especially with his unnatural prosthetic appendages and gothic monster mien. There can also be non-human-looking alien Messiahs, the most notable and lovable being E.T. (voice of Pat Welsh), especially with his glowing heart straight out of Catholic iconography.

[24] There have also been a few claims for animal Christ-figures. For example, Lloyd Baugh (1997, 191) considered that the donkey Balthazar in Au Hasard, Balthazar was “one of the most theologically-complex, biblically-verified, spiritually-moving and memorable Christ-figures in the history of the religious film.” Similarly, Robert Farrar Capon (2002, 45) argued that: “in all the Lassie stories the Christ figure is Lassie, the dog. The dog is the one who makes the plot get reconciled.” Similarly, director George Miller argued that the cute pig Babe (voice of Christine Cavanaugh) in the Babe movie series is more of a Christ-figure than “Mad” Max Rockatansky (Mel Gibson) from the Mad Max trilogy. As Miller confessed to Peter Malone:

I must say that Babe is much closer to a Christ figure than Max. Particularly in Babe (dir. Chris Noonan), he does change the established order. In fact, in Babe, Pig in the City, he’s much more a Christ figure because he turns the other cheek. He goes to save from drowning the one who was about to kill him. But in Babe, he relinquishes his self-interest in order to save Farmer Hoggett [James Cromwell] and to help fulfil the dream for Farmer Hoggett and to show that a pig can, indeed, be a champion sheepdog. He does it in part for himself but it’s mainly for the farmer. Yes, he’s closer to Christ— not that a pig should be Christ but he’s more Christ-like than Max! (Malone, 2001, 89).

[25] Robert Farrar Capon (2002, 57) went one stage further and argued that a Christ-figure need not be an animal, biological or even alive to qualify. Inert, mundane objects could do just as well. For example, he claimed that in “Woody Allen’s film, September, the house, in which a totally dysfunctional family was brought to act functionally was the Christ figure.” Similarly, Glenn Erickson (2001) suggested that the rogue planet Zyra in the SF gem When Worlds Collide was a subtextual Jesus. As he argued:

Devout producer [George] Pal retained the book’s Christ metaphor that made the stellar apocalypse into a thinly disguised Second Coming … Bellus, representing the Old Testament Jehovah, will smash the Earth to pulp, killing every living soul. No simple flood this time folks … but Earth has a second chance, of sorts. A few weeks before the arrival of Bellus, its moon Zyra, representing Jesus Christ, will pass close by our planet, causing massive earthquakes, tidal waves and other assorted havoc. Only the Chosen Few technocrats who believe in science and are daring enough to build Space Arks to fly to Zyra will be saved (2).

[26] Not surprisingly, how far one can legitimately go before breaking the bounds of credulity or incredulity is always the crucial question in this field!

[27] 2.0 CENTRAL: Christ-figures are usually central characters of the film, just like the Son of God is central to the second half of the Christian Bible that is boldly prefaced: “The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” These Christ-figures are frequently crafted in either a saviour mode or a redeemer mode. Although this is a subtle distinction, it is important because it can significantly shape the moral tone of the film as well as strongly indicate its narrative trajectory. In essence, “saviour Christ-figures” represent Jesus’ rescuing, liberating, leading, transforming or saving functions in the spirit of Mark 12:31: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” A famous SF example of this Christic mode is the Jedi knight Ben “Obi-Wan” Kenobi (Alec Guinness) in Star Wars. He “is killed in battle with Darth Vader but returns from the dead in spiritual form to lead Luke in the ways of the Force” (MacDonald, 1991, 30). Ben is a Christ-figure who tells Lord Darth Vader (David Prowse; voice of James Earl Jones): “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can imagine,” just like Jesus Christ. Similarly, in both Superman: The Movie and Superman II, the flying man from Krypton (Christopher Reeve) “is a kind of mythical or cultural Christ-figure who reminds us of Jesus because he saves the community from harm” (Malone and Pacatte, 2001, 40). However, he does much more than this, and he is much more Christ-like than one can initially imagine (Kozlovic, 2002a).

[28] On the other hand, “redeemer Christ-figures” emerge from a context of evil or strife to take on the sinfulness of those around them, usually through their own suffering or death. Thus, they leave improved people or situations behind them in the spirit of John 15:13: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” For example, Tommy Tyler (Sidney Poitier) in Edge of the City was “one of the compelling Christ figures in American cinema, elaborating the profound theme of redemption through self-sacrificial blood” (Jewett, 1999, 125): “Taylor is playing a kind of Christ role in the film, struggling for the dignity of his young friend and ultimately dying in a effort to protect him from the murderous bully, Charles Malek [Jack Warden]” (Jewett, 1999, 127).

[29] Similarly, Karl Childers (Billy Bob Thornton), the mentally challenged protagonist ofSling Blade performs the same redeemer function, but this time as “the Jesus of Revelation” (Roncare, 2002, 283), the “Christ as a warrior-judge” (Roncare, 2002, 286). Karl represents the “apocalyptic image of Christ … [fused] with the humble, earthly Jesus of the Gospels” (Roncare, 2002, 282). Karl is earthy, kind and gentle, but he willingly sacrifices himself to save Frank Wheatley (Lucas Black) and his widowed mother Linda (Natalie Canerday) from the trouble-making Doyle Hargraves (Dwight Yoakam). He does this by violently wielding “the blade of judgment” (Roncare, 2002, 290) and killing Doyle with a sling blade (i.e., a freshly sharpened lawnmower blade). This results in the termination of his freedom and further incarceration at his former mental institution. Appropriately, Karl’s use of a sling blade resonates with the Jesus of Revelation coming with “a sharp sickle” (Rev. 14:14) to execute his divine judgement upon the evildoers of the world. Karl also resonates with the Jesus of Matthew 10:34: “Think not that I come to send peace on earth: I come not to send piece, but a sword.” In short, both modes of representation (saviour and redeemer) are professional do-gooding of the uplifting sort. Their Christic nature and inherent sacrificial positivity is of prime importance, and everything else constellates around it.

[30] 3.0 OUTSIDERS: Christ-figures are usually outsiders of their communities, vaguely defined as from “above” or “beyond” or “out there” and thus they are in the world but notof the world, like “the Word [who] was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (John, 1:14). For example, Superman (Christopher Reeve) in Superman: The Movie literally comes from another world outside our solar system, the planet Krypton (metaphorically heaven), thus making Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman a type of holy refugee (but not an accidental tourist) undergoing a cosmic Diaspora. Similarly, the appropriately named alien visitor Starman (Jeff Bridges) in Starman uses a bright blue light literally to come down from the stars to visit Earth on his private galactic tour, as does the alien visitor who takes on the Earth name Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) in the even more accurately entitled film The Man Who Fell to Earth. Regrettably, this “lonely, melancholic Christ” (Loughlin, 2001, 42) “reverts from a Christ figure to a drunken alien sot” (Siegel and Suares, 1978, 130) and ultimately fails in his rescue mission. The latter two film titles roughly described Jesus Christ. This is especially appropriate considering that the Bible labels Jesus as the “bright and morning star” (Rev. 22:16) who “came down from heaven” (John 3:13) and took on human form as the “carpenter” (Mark 6:3) from “Nazareth” (Matt. 21:11). Another variant of this outsider theme occurs in The Green Mile. Defence attorney Burt Hammersmith (Gary Sinise) tells Paul Edgecomb (Tom Hanks) that he cannot find much information about John Coffey’s (Michael Clark’s) background, and so he suggests that he must have just “dropped out the sky,” thus further signalling Coffey’s Christic nature.

[31] Conversely, ascending behaviours frequently occurred as Christ-figures return home to the skies at the end of their earthly missions. Just like Christ, “the Son of man ascends up where he was before” (John 6:62), “taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight” (Acts 1:9) “into heaven itself” (Heb. 9:24; see also Mark 16:19) at the end of his earthly mission. The Apostle Paul certainly expected to be with Jesus and company “together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air” (1 Thess. 4:17). For example, at the end of The Day the Earth Stood Still and E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, both Klaatu (Michael Rennie) and E.T. (voice of Pat Welsh) literally get into their spaceships and rise heavenwards for home. At the end of both Superman: The Movie and Superman II, Superman (Christopher Reeve) leaves the physical confines of Earth and flies straight into the starry skies to roam around triumphantly—his true home. While in Starman and K-Pax, both the Starman (Jeff Bridges) and Prot (Kevin Spacey) return to their alien homes in the heavens, but they do so far more mysteriously, and leave behind amazed and puzzled people, as Jesus’ amazing but scientifically inexplicable ascension left his earthly colleagues “gazing up into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

[32] 4.0 DIVINELY SOURCED AND TASKED: Christ-figures usually arrive through some form of deliberate “divine” intervention by a distant God-figure. For example, in Superman: The Movie, the biological father (and metaphorical “heavenly Father”) Jor-El (Marlon Brando) sends his baby son Kal-El (Aaron Sholinski) to Earth to help the planet progress socially (as well as save his son’s life). Just like Jesus, “the Son of God” (John 11:4) who was sent on a sacred mission by his heavenly Father: “for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I myself, but he sent me” (John 8:42; see also John 6:29; 17:3; 20:21). Superman comes to Earth to benefit all humanity, just like “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Tim. 1:15), particularly “from their sins” (Matt. 1:21), and who knows what other cosmic reasons. Being on a specific mission is frequently the raison d’être for the Christ-figure’s arrival. Whether it be the stately Klaatu (Michael Rennie) offering Earth membership in the galactic federation in The Day the Earth Stood Still or Prot (Kevin Spacey) doing further field research on Earth in K-Pax (with both films implying that humanity missed the Second Coming). Or John Connor (Edward Furlong) and James Cole (Bruce Willis) desperately trying to save humanity from desolate futures in The Terminator(Boer, 1995) and Twelve Monkeys (Dailey, 2000) respectively. If their interventionist mission is not overtly stated, it is frequently alluded too or strongly implied as a direct consequence of their “sudden” arrival at times of strife, trouble or torment.

[33] 5.0 ALTER EGOS: Jesus was “the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20:31), especially when acting in divine mode as the being who was “made a little lower than the angels” (Heb. 2:9), but during his non-Messianic duties, he was a mundane tradesman—a “carpenter” (Mark 6:3). Consequently, Christ-figures usually have alter egos, and/or double lives, and/or dual natures, one fantastic and the other mundane. This pronounced duality is especially noticeable in the superhero Christ-figures, but it is not limited to them. For example, Peter Malone (1997b, 81) described Edward Scissorhands (Johnny Depp) inEdward Scissorhands as: “He is like ordinary people. He is also not like ordinary people.” He is “a creature who is like us and yet not like us” to highlight his dual nature as a Freddy Krueger-style Christ-figure on the one hand and a talented hairdresser, gardener and dog trimmer on the other. The retarded Christ-figure, Karl Childers (Billy Bob Thorton) in Sling Blade is also a tradesman who repairs small engines, and prior to that he was an inmate at a mental institution. For that matter, Luke (Paul Newman) in Cool Hand Luke and Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) in The Shawshank Redemption were both Christ-figures (Stone, 2000, 184, 185) and inmates in their respective prisons. Indeed, Andy the former banker also plied his trade as an accountant and financial adviser to the prison staff. In bothSuperman: The Movie and Superman II, Superman, the Son of Jor-El (the God-figure from Krypton) was the bespectacled newspaper reporter Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve) who worked for the Daily Planet when not in superhero mode.

[34] The Christ-figure Neo (Keanu Reeves) in The Matrix is an ordinary office worker called Thomas Anderson who wears regulation business suits (like Clark Kent and Klaatu-as-Mr. Carpenter). Indeed, after work he is also the skilled computer hacker Neo, and thus an alter ego to an alter ego. Later, Thomas/Neo is designated the “chosen one,” the cybernetic Messiah destined to free humanity from the illusory world created by the Matrix supercomputer and its hi-tech equivalent of devilish imps. By wearing stylish black glasses, jacket and pants that made Neo look like a Eurotrash seminarian (and a creative reversal of the iconic white-clad Jesus), he materially signals his unfolding acceptance of his “divine” mission by using fashionable couture. That is, from “Thomas” (of biblical doubting Thomas fame—John 20:27) to “Neo” (meaning “a new or modern form or development”—Hanks et al., 1982, 986) to the “chosen one” (i.e., the liberating master of the Matrix). Neo’s career trajectory is similar to the sacred progression of “Jesus” to “the Christ” to the hoped for “Messiah,” “anointed one,” “saviour” of humanity. In fact, dual identities are also an archetypal feature of the mundane superheroes who are appropriately masked, such as the Lone Ranger, Batman, Robin, Batgirl, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, the Green Hornet, Daredevil, the Phantom, etc. They are not divine or semi-divine characters but exceptional human beings.

[35] 6.0 SPECIAL NORMAL: Christ-figures are special, extraordinary beings even though they usually appear as “normal” human beings (aliens, animals, objects) during their mundane, non-superhero times, as Jesus, the divine son, who could walk on the sea (John 6:19) was also the carpenter (Mark 6:3) from Nazareth (Matt. 21:11). Even if normal-looking, they are not quite normal. They live in the world, but are not of or sometimes evenfrom the world. Consider the alien Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) in The Day the Earth Stood Still. He is literally an alien from a planet far, far away, but he walks freely among humans unrecognised and undisturbed (albeit for only a short time, like Jesus).

[36] An often thought, but not usually asked question about their normalcy, especially in Jesus’ case, is: “Do they have sex?” This question is frequently coupled with a thematic subtext of suspicion about their masculinity, or heterosocial preferences and/or suspected homosexual tendencies. After all, the biblical Jesus had no wife or girlfriend or engaged in sexual practices that are recorded in the Bible, except the common assumption of his celibacy. Indeed, Jesus counselled his followers to make “themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake” (Matt. 19:12), if they could, and the Apostle Paul claimed that: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Cor. 7:1) and so followers should be celibate like himself, if they could (1 Cor. 7:8-9). In addition, Jesus spent most of his quality time with a band of male apostles. He spent his most intimate moments with a select group of men , the inner circle of Peter, James and John (Mark 5:37, 9:2, 14:33). This could faintly imply homosexuality, especially for those wishing to see it. In fact, this same sort of sexual suspicion comically occurred in Starman when the alien Christ-figure (Jeff Bridges):

…walks oddly, being unused to the human body he has appropriated. He is also taken for queer, when, ignorant of the etiquette of human urination, he stands smiling at a urinating man in a gas station rest room [which prompted the following exasperated comment from the bothered man:] “Every God damn place you go” (Loughlin, 2001, 45).

[37] At least the manly walking and talking Superman (Christopher Reeve) with appropriate groin bulge beds Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) in Superman II, thereby, proving he was an all-American male and just as randy as the rest of his heterosexual gender. Yet, this is not the usual behaviour of Christ-figures who are traditionally beyond the grip of debilitating carnality, and exactly as Superman ended up at the close of Superman IIfollowing the repair of his superhero indiscretion. The earthly missions of Christ-figures must always take overriding priority over their sexual desires, as graphically illustrated in the Jesus-film The Last Temptation of Christ. While on the cross, the hallucinating Jesus (Willem Dafoe) dreams of love, sex and family life, but in the end, he rejects this last temptation and fulfils his divine mission by dutifully dying. As one anonymous wit argued, if Jesus had a choice between: (a) sex, a wife and children, and (b) crucifixion, and he deliberately chose crucifixion, then what does this say about married life?! Only that married life and Christhood appear incompatible.(4)

[38] 7.0 TWELVE ASSOCIATES: Christ-figures sometimes have the iconic number of twelve intimate friends associated with them, representing Jesus’ twelve Apostles (Matt. 10:2-4), as eerily depicted in God Told Me To. Even sarcastic, anti-religious films love to re-enact this sacred assemblage, as famously done in Viridiana with its Last Supper scene. Luis Bunuel’s film was a biting visual parody of Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting, done to the strains of Handel’s Messiah, as thoroughly degenerate beggars carouse drunkenly before momentarily freezing on-cue into their holy positions. More often than not, there are not twelve figures, just a few archetypal Apostles such as Judas-figures or Peter-figures coupled with other iconic biblical characters such as Baptist-figures, Satan-figures, Mary Magdalene-figures etc. to counterpoint the Christ-figure. Their purpose is to set the scene and glorify the Christ-figure, no matter how indirectly.

[39] 8.0 THE HOLY AGE: Sometimes the Christ-figures begin their “divine” mission when they reach the mystical age of thirty, the biblical age when Jesus started doing his Father’s will (Luke 3:23). For example, in Superman: The Movie, Clark Kent walks into the Fortress of Solitude as a physically fit but troubled eighteen-year-old teenager, and twelve years later, at age thirty, Superman flies out and starts saving the world professionally. Superman’s age was not specifically mentioned in the film, it being deliberately avoided to protect his identity, so one had to calculate it (i.e., 18+12=30). However, in the various screen tests attached to the special edition of the movie, Superman clearly states that he is thirty years old, thus leaving no doubt of his Christic nature. Indeed, for Malone and Pacatte (2001, 40), “Superman’s early life can be seen as a metaphor for the Incarnation” while “Clark Kent’s life in Smallsville [sic] and in the Arctic parallels the ‘hidden life’ of Jesus” (38). Everything else thereafter is part of his holy mission.

[40] 9.0 A BETRAYER ASSOCIATE: One of the intimates and/or acquaintances of the Christ-figure plays the Judas-figure, that is, a close friend or associate who betrays him for unwholesome reasons, like Judas Iscariot handed Jesus over to the authorities (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; 14:10) and was subsequently tagged a “traitor” (Luke 6:16). For example, inThe Matrix, Cypher (Joe Pantoliano) betrays Neo (Keanu Reeves) to the Matrix’s enforcers in return for a “better” illusionary life. In Brother Sun Sister Moon, Paolo (Kenneth Cranham) is a close friend of Francesco (Graham Faulkner), but he betrays him to the religious authorities (willingly and eagerly) out of personal concern, political envy and a desire for career advancement. In The Man Who Fell to Earth, Prof. Nathan Bryce (Rip Torn) betrayed Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) to the authorities after Newton confessed his alien origins and mission. In The Day the Earth Stood Still, Tom Stevens (Hugh Marlowe) betrays Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) to the military authorities for fame, glory, and to eliminate what he mistakenly thinks is a romantic rival. He also has covetous desires for Klaatu’s “diamonds, the film’s surrogate for silver” (Gianos, 1999, 136), that ancient reward for Judas’ betrayal of Jesus (Matt. 26:15, 27:3,9). In Hannibal, the Italian cop, Inspector Rinaldo Pazzi (Giancarlo Giannini) plays the Judas role opposite the Antichrist role played by Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins). Not only does Inspector Pazzi betray Hannibal for three million dollars (i.e., a multiple of the thirty pieces of silver that Judas earned), but he is also killed in exactly the same manner as Judas. Namely, by being hanged (Matt. 27:5) and then having his bowels spill out (Acts 1:18). To underscore this biblical association, Hannibal gives a history lesson about Judas Iscariot!

[41] 10.0 A SEXUALLY IDENTIFIED WOMAN: There is frequently a Mary Magdalene-figure floating around the Christ-figure, a sexually tagged woman who is related to him in some close way, but who does not know how properly to express her sexuality with him. For example, Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) in Superman: The Movie is a journalist who is in love with Superman (Christopher Reeve), the film’s Christ-figure (Kozlovic, 2002a). She writes newspaper copy about sex maniacs and in a personal interview she asks Superman how “big” he is (i.e., not how “tall”), and both are embarrassed by this obvious sexual innuendo. She asked Superman to tell her what colour her underpants are (i.e., pink—iconic of girls and romance), thus physically inviting Superman to examine her sexual wares via his x-ray vision. In Superman II, she goes undercover with Clark Kent inside the Honeymoon Hotel and uses even more sexual innuendoes until Superman comes out of the superhero closet. They eventually consummate their physical love in the Fortress of Solitude.

[42] Other notable Mary Magdalene-figures include Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) in The Matrix, Mireille Fontaine (Catherine Wilkening) in Jesus of Montreal and Mary-Lou (Candy Clark) in The Man Who Fell to Earth. Even Helen Benson (Patricia Neal) in The Day the Earth Stood Still is such a figure, being sexually experienced as a widow with child. In accord with Mark 16:9, as the subtextual “Mary Magdalene she goes to the space ship/tomb and is the first to see the resurrected Klaatu” (Gabbard, 1982, 152). There is even a “scene where Klaatu gestures goodbye and Mrs. Bensen’s [sic] eyes light up, and you realize that there could have been something, but they just never get together” (Long, 1990, 27)—like the Jesus and Mary Magdalene non-event according to Scripture. Sometimes the Mary Magdalene-figure is overtly signposted, as in A Short Film about Love featuring the sexually promiscuous Maria Magdalena (Frazyna Szapolowska). Given Krzysztof Kieslowski’s choice of her character’s name and salacious behaviour, subtextually she is the supposed penitent of Scripture (Matt. 27:56,61; 28:1; John 19:25). Lloyd Baugh (2003, 552) describes the film as “the story of a love-relationship that is authentic, committed and redemptive, a love-story that is nothing less than an elaborate metaphor of the redemptive-salvific encounter of Jesus Christ and the sinner.” Especially considering that the link between the unnamed sinner of Luke 7:36-50 and Mary Magdalene is a popular belief, although it has been academically discredited.

[43] 11.0 A POINTING PROPHET AND BAPTISM RITES: Sometimes there is a John the Baptist-figure who identifies and/or points the way to the Christ-figure, and fades away in the tradition of John 3:30: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” For example, the frail, old, Story Teller (Francis J. McDonald) warns the bulling Philistines about the young and virile Samson-as-Christ-figure (Victor Mature) in Samson and Delilah (Kozlovic, 2003a) and then we see no more of him. Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) in The Matrix seeks, tests and verifies Neo’s (Keanu Reeves) Messianic status (although his continuing presence in the sequels mitigates this identification). In Jesus of Montreal, the on-screen stage actor Pascal Berger (Cedric Noel) refers to another actor greater than himself, Daniel Coulombe (Lothaire Bluteau), the Christ-figure who later acts the part of Jesus in his redesigned Passion Play. Similarly, in A Man Escaped, director Robert Bresson gives the Christ-figure Lieutenant Fontaine (Francois Leterrier):

…a precursor, a kind of John the Baptist who prepares the way for him, in the person of Orsini [Jacques Ertaud]. Orsini’s ill-fated attempt to escape gives Fontaine the information he needs to escape. As they hear the gunshots of Orsini’s execution, the old man Blanchet [Maurice Beerblock] says to Fontaine: “He had to fail so that you might succeed,” echoing the dynamic of John the Baptist and ultimately, of the redemptive salvific mission of Jesus, who died so that we might live (Baugh, 1997, 229-30).

[44] Sometimes a watery baptism physically occurs to underscore the protagonist’s Christic credentials. This happens in Sling Blade when Karl Childers (Billy Bob Thornton) formally requested it and so:

In the next scene Karl is baptized in a muddy river as the congregation sings “Softly and Tenderly Jesus is Calling.” The first part of the refrain to this song is notable, “Come home, come home, you who are weary, come home,” because the baptism appears to be part of Karl’s preparations before the murder that he knows will lead to his return home to the mental institution…This notion is strengthened when Karl tells Frank [Lucas Black] in their final conversation that he is “real tired” (i.e., weary) (Roncace, 2002, 292).

[45] However, a far more dramatic and visually disturbing baptism occurs in The Matrix. The Christ-figure Neo (Keanu Reeves) is disconnected from the neural network and is subsequently rejected by the supercomputer. He then “awakes” while in the process of being flushed into a watery grave before being rescued by Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne), the John the Baptist figure. Neo successfully passes his rite of passage from one level of awareness into another, so Morpheus takes a backseat to Neo in the tradition of “he that cometh after me is mightier than I” (Matt. 3:11). Morpheus had proclaimed Neo the “chosen one” and charged him with liberating the rest of humanity from the Matrix’s unholy grip, a devastating consequence of their past technological sin, as Jesus was commissioned with saving humanity from their past behavioural sin (Matt. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:15).

[46] 12.0 A DECISIVE DEATH AND RESURRECTION: Christ-figures are commonly involved in some form of sacrifice, usually involving bloodshed, suffering and death (i.e., the embodiment of Christ’s passion), especially in their redeemer mode. They frequently “die,” like Jesus Christ who suffered death (Heb. 2:9) at his crucifixion where “he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46), leaving behind empty tombs, spaces or places, where the followers of the Christ “found not the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:3). Later, the Christ-figures are miraculously resurrected, the ultimate Christic identifier, in the tradition of John 20:9: “that he must rise again from the dead.” Once resurrected and restored, they leave for their various homes in the tradition of John 20:17: “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God and your God.”

[47] This death and resurrection event dramatically occurs to the Christ-figures: Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) in The Day the Earth Stood Still, E.T. (voice of Pat Welsh) inE.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial and Neo (Keanu Reeves) in The Matrix. Jesus of Montrealcontains a very postmodern resurrection scene. This “cinematic analogue of resurrection” (May, 2001, 54) occurs when the organs of Daniel Coulombe (Lothaire Bluteau) are farmed out to grateful medical recipients. That is, Daniel literally gives of his body so that others may live, analogous to Jesus’ cosmic gift of life to humanity (John 20:31; Rom. 6:23). Interestingly, Daniel is a professional actor who plays the Jesus-figure role in a revitalised Passion Play on the grounds of a Catholic Church, at the behest of its priest, for the benefit of the faithful, at a ritually important time. Thus, the film is pervaded by religious resonances. The iconic death and resurrection event is usually coupled with strong hints of incredulousness and/or uncertainty by witnesses, whether they be friend, foe or the disinterested in the tradition of doubting Thomas (John 20:24-29). Sometimes it also involves misidentification. As John Ralston Saul (1995) noted concerning the Vietnam War film Platoon:

The film rises through two successive apocalypses. The first ends with the Christ sergeant [Sgt. Elias (Willem Dafoe)] behind abandoned to a swarm of Viet Cong while the company rises above him in helicopters in the care of the devil sergeant [Sgt. Barnes (Tom Berenger)]. It is a false resurrection. A betrayal. We last see the good man who died for them on his knees with his arms out as if on a cross [Sgt. Elias] (235-236).

[48] On other occasions, significant precursors to their death and resurrection are enacted to reinforce their Christic nature, as in The Man Who Fell to Earth. The alien Christ-figure, Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) is coming to the end of his earthly mission. Therefore, according to Gerard Loughlin (2001. 42): “As Newton lies prostrate and naked on the bed, in a room suddenly grown dark, he has become the deposed Christ, lying in the tomb, awaiting his anointing for burial.” If there is not a fully-fledged resurrection story, then at least there can be a hint of a new life or a fresh start. As Peter Malone (1997b, 84) suggests regarding the ending of Edward Scissorhands: “Edward has disappeared. He has gone back to his father’s home. For the people, he is dead. But he is alive. He has gone beyond the ordinary world. Edward has no spectacular resurrection story, but it is a new life story, nonetheless.”

[49] 13.0 TRIUMPHALISM: Christ’s death results in triumphal victory, even if it seems a Pyrrhic victory at the time. As the Apostle Paul claimed: “we believe that Jesus died and rose again” (1 Thess. 4:14), “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23) and “so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words” (1 Thess. 4:17-18). Christ-figures offer similar benefits to warrant their cinematic saviour identification. For example, the resurrected Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) in The Day the Earth Stood Still gives Earth a second chance to join the galactic federation of peaceful planets. Jedi knight Ben “Obi-Wan” Kenobi (Alec Guiness) inStar Wars dies at the hands of Darth Vader (David Prowse; voice of James Earl Jones), only to become far more powerful than ever before in his ethereal form. In the Return of the Jedi, once the evil Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) is defeated, we see a happy ethereal Ben alongside the ethereal forms of Jedi master Yoda (Frank Oz) and the now redeemed former Jedi, Darth Vader, who form their own trinity. The resurrected Neo (Keanu Reeves) in The Matrix is now a committed warrior for human liberation (like Jesus), and thus a very serious threat to the domination of the Matrix supercomputer. Such a perceived loss is usually considered one-off, extraordinary and purposeful (as Christians believe that Jesus’ death had the same characteristics).

[50] 14.0 SERVICE TO “LESSER,” SOMETIMES UNGRATEFUL OTHERS: The Christ figure’s sacrifice and/or death is specifically for others based upon higher principles, and it is usually done with honesty, sincerity and nobility (i.e., not trite, selfish or deluded reasons). Those saved are usually of “lesser” worthiness, ability, talent, power, etc., than the Christ-figures themselves. After all, what human being of any rank can even compare to the status, power or divinity of God or Jesus, “the prince of the kings of the earth” (Rev. 1:5)? For example, in The Green Mile, John Coffey (Michael Clark) elects to die in the electric chair despite having miraculous healing powers of priceless benefit to humanity (like Jesus [Acts 10:38]). However, many of these saved others are ungrateful and even turn against the Christ-figure, like what happened to Jesus when Barabbas was freed instead of him (Matt. 27:1-26). For example, after Superman flies away from the unholy Kryptonian triumvirate in Superman II, the public quickly turns angry and disillusioned because of their failed expectations for a saviour. Some claim (unfairly) that Superman has “chickened out” and is therefore a “phoney” (actually, it is a stratagem to lure the evil trio to the Fortress of Solitude to be neutralised).

[51] 15.0 A WILLING SACRIFICE: Having assumed the mantle of Christhood, Christ-figures are frequently empowered to choose sacrifice out of their newfound knowledge, status, position, mission requirements, etc. Jesus knew that he was to die as a ransom or sacrifice for humanity and even instructed the betrayer Judas: “That thou doest, do quickly” (John 13:27). Frequently, dying is the best thing they can do, and they really want to do it, usually against the protests of loving others. For example, Neo (Keanu Reeves) in The Matrix battles the rogue supercomputer despite the concerns of his fellow hacker-warriors. Why? Because he had pierced the illusionary veil of deceit and grasped the true nature of “reality” (i.e., mundane life is actually an interactive neural simulation), and so acted decisively upon it, whether causing his own death or not! Similarly, the “good” T-800 Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) in Terminator 2: Judgement Day voluntarily steps into the furnace to be melted down to destroy the advanced computer chip inside him, thus, protecting the future from supercomputer domination. This, despite the heart-felt protests against his immanent demise by Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) and her son John Connor (Edward Furlong), the Terminator’s former adversaries.

[52] 16.0 INNOCENT: Although Christ-figures are frequently accused of, or are even found guilty of crimes, they are innocent and are often treated unfairly. For example, Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) in The Shawshank Redemption is not guilty of the murder of his wife, but is “Innocent and meek as a lamb” (Stone, 2000, 184), but he was convicted anyway. As Pontius Pilate said about Jesus: “I find in him no fault at all” (John 18:38; cf. John 19:4,6), yet Jesus was condemned to death. Somewhat frustratingly, these Christic protagonists may not profit from these pertinent facts (just as Jesus did not protest his innocence while a prisoner, but calmly accepted his fate—John 19:9-11). For example, John Coffey (Michael Clark) in The Green Mile did not kill the small children, but he still goes to his painful death willingly, taking this vital knowledge with him. Similarly, the munchkin-like E.T. in E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial and the regal Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter in The Day the Earth Stood Still are not guilty of any crimes. Yet, both are relentlessly pursued and killed because of the unfounded fears of others. Mr. Carpenter even protects humanity from its assured devastation prior to his execution. He willingly gives Mrs. Benson (Patricia Neal) the code words to stop Gort, his robot policeman companion (Lock Martin) from destroying the planet because of his death. He used the now immortal monoaural instruction: “Gort! Klaatu barada nikto!”—a mantra among SF fans worldwide.

[53] 17.0 A CRUCIFORM POSE: Christ-figures are frequently displayed in cruciform poses, an unmistakable visual emblem of their Christic nature. This pose can be represented very subtly, as with Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter (Michael Rennie) in The Day the Earth Stood Still when he is machine-gunned to death by the military. However, he does not fall to the ground in a dishevelled heap, but in a cruciform posture complete with splayed arms and bent knee! Similarly, in Cool Hand Luke, “Luke, on a dare, eats fifty hard-boiled eggs, he lies exhausted on a tabletop with arms out-stretched, his body a classic image of the pose of the crucified” (May, 2001, 57). In Taxi Driver, the mad Messiah Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) is full of religious zeal and so he saves the twelve-year-old prostitute, Iris Steensman (Jodi Foster), for whom he was willing to die. To further underscore his Christic nature, after “the sacrificial bloodbath, the camera angle gives us a direct overhead shot, with the arms of the wounded Travis stretched out in messianic agony, a view quite similar to Dali’s surrealistic painting of the crucified Christ” (Hill, 1992, 285). Conversely, this cruciform-tagging process can be done more openly, as in Brother Sun Sister Moon when Brother Francis (Graham Faulkner) turns into a living cruciform on three separate occasions: by spreading his arms and becoming a human cross upon a steeple rooftop after his spiritual awakening; by spreading his nude arms (and body) as he leaves the Assisi gates, thus signalling his Christic status, mission and profound spiritual rebirth; and at the film’s end, when he again spreads his arms in a cruciform pose mystically to embrace God and nature (Kozlovic, 2002c).

[54] Similarly, after his starship crash-landed in Superman: The Movie, baby Kal-El (Aaron Sholinski) emerged totally naked with his arms outstretched in a cruciform posture to visually verify his Christic nature (Kozlovic, 2002a). Indeed, the cruciform pose can be done very openly, graphically and meaningfully as in Jesus of Montreal. Daniel Coulombe (Lothaire Bluteau) plays the role of the crucified Jesus in his revamped Passion Play for the Canadian Catholic Church. Simultaneously, he is also a Christ-figure, which prompted John R. May (2001, 54) to call him “one of the most distinctive Christ figures in recent fiction.” At the end of The Omega Man, military scientist Robert Neville (Charlton Heston) literally gives a pint of his biochemically altered blood to save the world. It contains an antidote to make a curative serum to save humanity, decimated by plague resulting from biological warfare. Neville then dies and slumps against a statue in a cruciform posture, the result of a deadly spear wound from an enemy (like Christ’s side was pierced by the spear of a Roman soldier [John 19:34]). As Charlton Heston confesses:

As for the continuing Christ reference, it was not meant to be taken seriously as many people took it. There are fragments of the analogy throughout the film. The business of the blood of the redeemer, the survival of the innocent, the crucifixion pose, and all that (Rovin, 1977, 204).

[55] Yet, as Heston later confessed: “The analogy to Christ as Savior is inescapable, though there’s no such reference in the script. Still, there were irresistible spins I added in performance … I’m surprised at how often people mention the Christ analogy in the film” (Heston, 1995, 443-444).

[56] 18.0 CROSS ASSOCIATIONS: Sometimes Christ-figures are accompanied by cross imagery, the signature sign of Christianity based upon the Roman instrument of execution (John 19:19). This occurs in the classic Western film Shane, starring Alan Ladd as the former gunfighter turned pacifist Shane:

On his final ride into the town to confront the hired gunfighter, there is a remarkable piece of editing by which his Christ-like role is visually underlined. He passes again through the cemetery and instead of a cut to the next scene where he is silhouetted alone against the sky [director George] Stevens dissolves into it in such a way that one of the graveyard crosses appears for a time to follow along behind him as he rides (Banks, 1997, 62-63).

Similarly, in Sling Blade, cross imagery is deftly crafted to reinforce Karl’s Christic nature while he stands high up on a wooden bridge:

He is perched directly over one of the vertical pillars—which forms a T-shape with the horizontal planks—as the sun shines brightly in the sky. As this shot wonderfully suggests, Karl’s portrayal has similarities both to the crucified Christ and to the Son of Man who will come in the sky in glory, a reflection of the diverse images of Christ in the New Testament (Roncace, 2002, 291-292).

This T-shape is the “Tau” cross, alternatively known as “the Egyptian cross, or cross of St. Anthony” (Matthews, 1990, 50).

[57] In another example, Cool Hand Luke stars Paul Newman as Luke, the incarcerated Christ-figure (Stone, 2000, 185). Near the end of the film while Luke is dying, “the camera withdraws from the place where Luke’s disciples are working, providing a helicopter view of a crossroad’s inverted cross” (May, 1991, 90). This closing image is symbolically apt because the “cross can also be understood as a sign for the crossroads, as the place where the paths of the living and the dead cross” (Matthews, 1990, 50). The filmmakers artistically fuse an actual crossroad with a cross image as seen from a heavenly viewpoint, and link it with Luke, the Christ-figure, at the time of his undeserved death.

[58] 19.0 MIRACLES AND SIGNS: On occasion, the Christ-figure is identified by other iconic Jesus behaviours, e.g., exorcising demons (Luke 8:2), raising the dead (John 12:1), miraculous healings (John 5:5-9), turning water into wine (John 4:46), and particularly, Jesus’ mastery over physical nature. This includes the calming of wild winds (Matt. 8:26, 14:31-32), the quelling of sea tempests (Matt. 8:23-27) and most famously of all, walking on water (Matt. 14:25, 28-31). Indeed, walking on water is a defining moment in Being There when Chance, the gardener (Peter Sellers) does so on a lake at films end, thus clearly signalling his Christ-figure status. Similarly, Truman (Jim Carey) walks on water as he steps into the ocean near the end of The Truman Show, while Selma (Bjoerk) walks on water as she crosses a flowing steam in Dancer in the Dark. Conversely, walking on walk can also be used to signal the anti-Christ, as in Superman II when General Zod (Terence Stamp) first arrives on Earth from outer space (metaphorically heaven) and descends straight into the middle of a stream. Zod levitates slightly and walks on water to get to the nearby shore. Interestingly, in Touch, the former Franciscan missionary-now-miracle worker Juvenal/Charlie Lawson (Skeet Ulrich) becomes a stigmatic and develops tactile healing powers. However, this Christ-figure “is flawed and struggles with the burden of his power to touch others. Ultimately, he disappoints because he cannot walk on water” (Malone and Pacatte, 2001, 239), especially when he is challenged by the media to do so (physically and symbolically). There were also other signs that Jesus performed but which were not documented (John 20:30).

[59] 20.0 SIMPLICITY: Christ-figures frequently appear as nerds, klutzes, bumbling simpletons, mentally unbalanced, or fools in the tradition of 1 Corinthians 3:18: “If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.” Alternatively, they display cognitive innocence and child-like trust in the tradition of Matthew 18:3. Namely: “Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” For example, Francesco/Brother Francis (Graham Faulkner) in Brother Sun Sister Moon is variously described throughout the film as “mad,” “berserk,” a “simpleton,” an “idiot boy,” a “cringing idiot,” a “lunatic” and “a raving bloody lunatic.” He is spiritually reborn when Brother Sun mystically illuminates his soul to make him the Christ-figure of the medieval age, and a popular saint still respected today by (especially Catholic) Christians and pagans (Kozlovic, 2002c).

[60] Conversely, Chance, the gardener (Peter Sellers) in Being There is actually mentally retarded, but his pithy statements are mistaken as sophistication, perceptiveness and condensed analytical wisdom. Similarly, Karl Childers (Billy Bob Thornton) in Sling Blade is intellectually challenged and he has actually lived in a mental institution for decades. The evil Doyle Hargraves (Dwight Yoakam) maliciously refers to him as a “retard,” but subtextually, Karl is the equivalent of the Christ Child, and this nature is subtlety encoded in his surname “Childers.” Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve) in Superman: The Movie andSuperman II is often a klutz, which itself becomes the central trait of his alter ego, Clark Kent. The alien visitor (Jeff Bridges) in Starman displays a child-like wonder about Earth that is charming and loveable, as is Klaatu’s “playful and endearing curiosity about Earth objects and customs” (Long, 1990, 27). Frequently, the simplicity of Christ-figures is misread as stupidity, their saintliness confused with simple-mindedness, their tolerance and compassion mistaken for weakness and wimpishness, and so their critics often must eventually reverse their opinions.

[61] 21.0 POVERTY: Frequently associated with Christ-figure simplicity is their poverty; alternatively, this is rendered as either a lack of wealth, or the troubling question of what to do with money if available. This is reminiscent of Jesus who was poor (socially, politically, economically), powerless, and claimed: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God” (Matt. 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25). For example, Brother Francis in Brother Sun Sister Moon actively chose poverty by giving away his wealth, social privileges and fancy clothes (to the point of public nudity) to become a humble monk dedicated to the poor. Chance, the gardener has little money, he loses his house and is gently evicted from his secure world of comfort and predictability. Karl Childers is poor and from a poor family. Indeed, “the small indentations in the dirt floor of the shed [show] where Karl used to sleep, conjuring images of the manger” (Roncace, 2002, 289).

[62] In The Day the Earth Stood Still, Klaatu/Mr. Carpenter has no Earth money at all and so he gives away perfect diamonds to young Bobby Benson (Billy Gray) as a legitimate business trade. Theoretically speaking, Superman can make diamonds by crushing carbon with his bare hands, or mine for gold with his super strength, or find sunken treasure with his X-ray vision. Instead, he works as Clark Kent the reporter with the Daily Planet, mimicking Jesus who works as a carpenter (Mark 6:3), although he is offered the kingdoms of the world by Satan (Matt. 4:8-11). In Jesus of Montreal, Richard Cardinal (Yves Jacques), the Satan-smooth media lawyer takes Daniel/Jesus high up in a skyscraper (Matt. 4:5) and offers him dominion over the (media) kingdoms of the world saying: “This city is yours, if you want it” (Matt. 4:8-9; Luke 4:5-7). Indeed, “the glib, charming Cardinal offers Daniel the modern commercial city’s equivalents to a deal with the devil—media fame, a book contract, talk-show appearances, good lunches” (Testa, 1995, 104). No wonder Tom O’Brien (1990, 47) considered this scene “a modern temptation in the hi-tech wilderness, a glitzy version of Matthew 4.”

[63] 22.0 JESUS’ GARB: PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL: Many cinematic Christ-figures are clothed to look like popular image of Jesus in his iconic white robes (i.e., the colour of purity and holiness). For example, when the sick Francesco in Brother Sun Sister Moon was bed-ridden, he wears a cloth over his face that is reminiscent of the Catholic legend of St. Veronica. This image represents Christ hidden in suffering and humiliation. When he completes his spiritual transformation and is reborn as the Christ-like Francis of Assisi, he wears an ethereal white bed garment in public, thus further cementing his Christ-figure status. In Jesus of Montreal, Daniel Coulombe portrays the crucified Jesus naked on the cross, with pronounced marks of scourging. Most cunningly, the diminutive alien E.T. is placed in a bicycle basket, his head covered with a white cloth. No wonder when “the film was released, people joked that after the O.T. (Old Testament) and the N.T. (New Testament) came E.T., the Extra Testament” (Malone and Pacatte, 2001, 31)!

[64] As part of their spiritual garb, Christ-figures are also associated with holy auras and effulgent lights, like Jesus whose face “did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light” (Matt. 17:2) during his transfiguration. For example, to visually tag St. Francis’ Christic holiness in Brother Sun Sister Moon, director Franco Zeffirelli had Francis’ head fleetingly surrounded by a yellowish halo. This was a cinematic Glory Gloriole, that saintly hallmark of Christian iconography that symbolises divinity, rank and sovereignty (Matthew, 1990, 93). This sort of visual Christic tagging is done more cunningly in Starman. As Caron Schwartz Ellis (1995, 91) noted regarding the visiting alien Messiah (Jeff Bridges): “As he speaks he is driving through the Arizona desert with a golden sunrise haloing his head, as if to emphasise his purity.” Dennis Saleh (1979, 47) describes a similar light-filled scene inThe Day the Earth Stood Still when: “Klaatu’s head glows in the rings of the resuscitation machine as though halos shine at his forehead.”

[65] 23.0 BLUE EYES: Cinematic Christ-figures are frequently depicted with blue eyes; not Semitic brown eyes as one would expect from an ethnic Jew with a Jewish mother living in the rustic, desert environments of Judaea. Superman and the mysterious boarder (Jurgen Prochnow), the Jesus of the Second Coming in The Seventh Sign both have striking blue eyes, like the traditional Jesus-figures Jeffrey Hunter in King of Kings and Robert Powell in Jesus of Nazareth. This blue eye colour for both Jesus-figures and Christ-figures is now a defacto Hollywood convention. Biblically speaking, blue is the symbolic colour of “the heavenly origins of Christ (as the sky is blue)” (Owen, Grist and Dowling, 1992, 9). Symbolically speaking, blue is also “the color of the divine, of truth, and of fidelity (in the sense of clinging to truth, as well as with reference to the fixed firmament of heaven) … blue is also a purity symbol” (Matthews, 1990, 25). Therefore, it is understandable why the colour blue was chosen, and especially considering that Jesus’ “eyes must have been remarkable. Time and again we are told that ‘He looked,’ and the look seems to have been enough” (Dow, 1974, 279-280). This is an effect that piercing blue eyes can do exceptionally well. While simultaneously avoiding the negative connotations associated with yellow, red or black eyes, itself cinematic code for sickness, the demonic, and evil or bad aliens (i.e., the Greys).

[66] 24.0 HOLY EXCLAMATIONS: Someone, either directly or indirectly, on-screen or off-screen, refers to the Christ-figure protagonist as God or Jesus by literally saying: “My God!” or “Oh God!” or “Jesus Christ!” or “Jesus!” or “Christ!” or “Gee!”. This last word is a euphemistic corruption of “either “Jesus!” or “God”… the origins of this word are known to few of its users” (Spears, 1982, 168). These verbal identifiers are not random or accidental, and they are usually delivered as either a curse, astonishment, disgust or fear. In any case, they are designed to link the Christ-figure protagonist with the Divine in case anyone should miss the other subtextual artistry involved. For example, in The Green Mile, Paul Edgecomb reads the court transcripts of John Coffey, the film’s Christ-figure, and then cries out in horror, “Jesus! Jesus!” In Platoon, Sgt. O’Neill (John C. McGinley) complains behind the back of Sgt. Elias (Willem Dafoe), the Christ-figure, and says: “Guy’s in here three years and he thinks he’s Jesus fucking Christ or something!” (three years being approximately the length of Jesus’ earthly ministry [France, 1988, 338]). As Avent Childress Beck (1995, 46) noted regarding Sgt. O’Neill’s comment: “Nothing has yet justified this association, but the rhetoric prepares us for the climactic allusion in Elias’ later death,” that is, Sgt. Elias is a Christ-figure.

[67] In Superman II, deputy sheriff Dwayne (Peter Whitman) in a moment of panic directly refers to the anti-Christ General Zod (Terence Stamp) as “Jesus H. Christ!” However, one of the most intense concentrations of holy exclamations involving “Jesus” and “God” rhetoric occurs in Path Adams to identify Hunter “Patch” Adams (Robin Williams) as a Christ-figure. Jeffrey L. Staley (2002, 223) documented four divine interjections, which he wittily calls “kuriosities”:

The night before Carin [Monica Potter] dies, she says, “God, Patch, it’s amazing just what you’ve done with this place…
The next morning Truman [Daniel London] exclaims exasperatedly to Patch, “We don’t even have any gauze, for God’s sake.”
Then, the following morning when Dean Anderson [Harve Presnell] is forced to tell Patch of Carin’s murder, he says, “Christ, Patch, I’m sorry.”
The fourth use of God language comes just when Patch has decided to abandon his free hospital. Truman vehemently reacts to Patch’s leaving with, “God, you’re so self-indulgent!” (222-223).

In this way, the Christ-figure is plainly pointed out to all those who have eyes to see and ears to hear (Ezek. 44:5).

[68] 25.0 J. C. INITIALS AND “CHRIS” REFERENTS: Sometimes, the names of the Christ-figures literally have the initials J. C. (Jesus Christ). For example, John Coffey (Michael Clark) in The Green Mile, or James Cole (Bruce Willis) in Twelve Monkeys, or JohnConnor (Edward Furlong) in The Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day. At other times, they are called “Chris” or “Christopher”—Greek for “one who carried Christ” (Livingstone, 1990, 107). Sometimes the physical word “Christopher” or another similar word is partially blocked to give the visual impression of “Chris …” indirectly to tag the Christic nature. Sometimes, filmmakers fuse these various elements together, as in Twelve Monkeys when James Cole wears a top with the letters “Chris” on it. That is, he is a putatively named J.C. who is an SF Christ-figure wearing a “Chris” top, sent from another world to try and save this world for the benefit of all humanity. Filmmakers can be very cunning in this way.

Conclusion

[69] There are many ways cinematically to signify a Christ-figure, and the inventiveness already demonstrated is truly astounding. Christopher R. Deacy (1999, 326) is right that “the medium of film constitutes a fertile, if unexpected, repository of christological significance.” It is also quite illuminating to see that a seemingly non-religious film on its first reading can subsequently reveal so many Christic parallels upon deeper inspection. This point is wonderfully illustrated by Sarah L. Higley’s (1993) renewed understanding of the romantic gothic fantasy Edward Scissorhands:

… I am dissatisfied with Edward [Johnny Depp] as a Christ figure, although with some critical cutting and snipping he certainly might be read as such: a son of sorts, fashioned by a creator of sorts, through a virgin birth of sorts. He comes down from on high to the materialistic world below, beloved by women (especially the mothering Peg [Dianne Wiest] and the promiscuous Joyce [Kathy Baker], though not the pharisaical Esmerelda [O-Lan Jones]), suffering punishment for others’ sins, and vying with a violent character for the love of a beautiful soul, eventually turning her away from narcissism and toward himself. He is castigated and driven out; he expels the devil from his house; he is presumed dead by the populace when shown the false sign of his demise in the form of a substitute hand with its cross pieces (like St. Andrew’s cross); and his legend is kept alive by a witness who does not know but “believes” that he is still up there. Finally, he pours down his Holy Spirit in the form of snow at Christmas, the icy shavings from his angelic making (440).

[70] The cinematic Christ-figure is certainly a legitimate character, a valid pop culture phenomenon, and a living genre; what Neil P. Hurley (1980, 427) called a “meta-genre,” and whose career looks undiminished in the foreseeable future, even if it is frequently unrecognised by viewers today due to a decline in general biblical literacy. This regrettable state of affairs is exacerbated by the decline of Scripture study in the classroom, home and pulpit, in addition to the unnecessary reluctance of clergy to use popular culture in their traditional religious services, although this is slowly changing (Bausch, 2002). Therefore, many people do not recognise biblical characters as easily as they once did, let alone seeing subtextual figurations hidden within popular films.

[71] This is one good reason why feature films should be employed as part of a postmodern religious education, and why religious themes should be pointed out in the secular pulpit of the cinema during traditional film appreciation classes: to reintroduce Western society’s own foundation myths, in media garb easily identified during this “Age of Hollywood” (Paglia, 1994, 12) and the undisputed reign of the moving image. However, much more work remains to be done. Further research into Christ-figures, holy subtexts and the emerging interdisciplinary field of religion-and-film (cinematic theology, celluloid religion, theo-film, film-faith dialogue) is recommended to creatively reapply Jesus’ command to this exciting new field: “What I tell you in the darkness, that speak ye in light …” (Matt. 10:27).

Notes

1) In Jungian terms, these patterns are akin to archetypes, while in Christian circles they can be seen as Christ-figures. However, I am not suggesting that all of Campbell’s heroes or Jung’s archetypes or Christian Christ-figures are the same or are automatically interchangeable. Rather, these have been different labels and explanations applied to similar phenomena and so some may intersect and coincide, while others may not.

2) Two precursory attempts to define the structural characteristics of the Christ-figure have been attempted by the author (Kozlovic, 2003c, 2004).

3) The Authorized King James Version of the Bible (KJV aka AV) will be used throughout.

4) Of course, the avoidance of carnality is not limited to Jesus-figures or Christ-figures. It is also a significant signature sign of mundane superheroes, as dramatically enacted inSpider-Man. Throughout most of Peter Parker’s (Tobey Maguire) life he is in love with the girl-next-door, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). After his initial transmutation into Spider-Man, he still has strong romantic feelings for her that involve at least one very passionate kiss (while he is literally hanging upside down). However, by the end of the film, things have dramatically changed. When he accepts the immense burden of being a superhero, Peter Parker consciously, painfully and actively rejects Mary Jane’s heart-felt offer of romantic/erotic love to pursue his superhero career. He only wants to be a “friend” (and nothing more) from then on. He willingly sacrifices personal happiness for a nobler cause—selfless service to the community, the mundane equivalent of saving the world. Indeed, this thematic is also reinforced using Tarot symbolism. The upside down hanging Spidey is a cinematic re-enactment of the Hanged Man, card number 12 in the Major Arcana. Traditionally speaking, this Tarot card represented: “Spiritual Independence. Isolation, surrender, initiation, sacrifice, transition” (Karcher, 1997, 152), all the qualities that Spider-man now comes to represent as a mundane superhero.

References

Banks, R. 1997. “The Drama of Salvation in George Stevens’s Shane.” In C. Marsh and G. Ortiz, eds. Explorations in Theology and Film: Movies and Meaning, 59-71. Oxford: Blackwell.

Baugh, L. 1997. Imaging the Divine: Jesus and Christ-figures in Film. Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.

Baugh, L. 2003. “Cinematographic Variations on the Christ-event: Three Films by Krzystof Kieslowski. Part One: A Short Film about Love.” Gregorianum, 84,3, 551-583.

Bausch, M.G. 2002. Silver Screen Sacred Story: Using Multimedia in Worship. Bethesda, MD: Alban Institute.

Beck, A.C. 1995. “The Christian Allegorical Structure of Platoon.” In J.W. Martin and C.E. Ostwalt Jr., eds. Screening the Sacred: Religion, Myth, and Ideology in Popular American Film, 44-54, 163-164. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Boer, R. 1995. “Christological Slippage and Ideological Structures in Schwarzenegger’sTerminator.” Semeia, 69/70, 165-193.

Bowman, D. 2001. “Faith and the Absent Savior in Central Station.” Journal of Religion and Film, 5,1, 1-6. [http://cid.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/centstat.htm].

Bruce, D. 2002. Spider-Man (2002). <http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/spiderman.htm>, 1-12.

Brunstad, P.O. 2001. “Jesus in Hollywood—The Cinematic Jesus in a Christological and Contemporary Perspective.” Studia Theologica, 55, 145-156.

Bywater, T. and T. Sobchack. 1989. An Introduction to Film Criticism: Major Critical Approaches to Narrative Film. New York: Longman.

Campbell, J. 1988. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. London: Paladin.

Capon, R.F. 2002. “The Fingerprints of God: Tracking the Divine Suspect through the History of Images.” Consensus: A Canadian Lutheran Journal of Theology, 28,1, 45-63.

Dailey, F.F. 2000. “Bruce Willis as the Messiah: Human Effort, Salvation and Apocalypticism in Twelve Monkeys.” Journal of Religion and Film, 4,1, 1-8. [http://cid.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/messiah.htm].

Deacy, C.R. 1999. “Screen Christologies: An Evaluation of the Role of Christ-figures in Film.” Journal of Contemporary Religion, 14,3, 325-37.

Dick, B.F. 1998. Anatomy of Film. Third Edition. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Dow, J.L. 1974. Dictionary of the Bible. London: Collins.

Ebert, R. 1994. Ebert’s Little Movie Glossary: A Compendium of Movie Cliches, Stereotypes, Obligatory Scenes, Hackneyed Formulas, Shopworn Conventions, and Outdated Archetypes. Kansas City, MO: Andrews and McMeel.

Ellis, C.S. 1995. “With Eyes Uplifted: Space Aliens as Sky Gods.” In J.W. Martin and C.E. Ostwalt Jr., eds. Screening the Sacred: Religion, Myth, and Ideology in Popular American Film, 83-93, 167-169. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Ellis, R. 2001. “Movies and Meaning.” Expository Times, 112,9, 304-8.

Erickson, G. 2001. DVD Savant Review: When Worlds Collide. <http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s317collide.html>, 1-6.

France, R. 1988. “Jesus.” In A Lion Handbook: The World’s Religions, 336-42. Herts: Lion Publishing.

Furches, M. 2002. Spider-Man. <http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/spiderman_furches.htm>, 1-8.

Gabbard, K. 1982. “Religious and Political Allegory in Robert Wise’s The Day the Earth Stood Still.” Literature/Film Quarterly, 10,3, 150-54.

Gallagher, M.P. 1997. “Theology, Discernment and Cinema.” In J.R. May, ed. New Image of Religious Film, 151-60. Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.

Gianos, P.L. 1999. Politics and Politicians in American Film. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Gudmundsottir, A. 2002. “Female Christ-figures in Films: A Feminist Critical Analysis ofBreaking the Waves and Dead Man Walking.” Studia Theologica, 56,1, 27-43.

Hanks, P., T.H. Long, L. Urdang and G.A. Wilkes, eds. 1982. Collins Dictionary of the English Language. Sydney: Collins.

Harrington, W. and J. Kavitsky. 2000. The Making of Superman/Superman II. <http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/greatsleep/1023/m-making_s.html>, 1-8.

Hasenberg, P. 1998. “Pain and Redemption: Images of Jesus Christ in the Films of Abel Ferrara. In G. Larcher, F. Grabner and C. Wessely, eds., Visible Violence: Sichtbare und verschleierte Gewalt im Film, 59-76. Munster: Lit Verlag.

Heath, S. 1998. “God, Faith and Film: Breaking the Waves.” Literature and Theology, 12,1, 93-107.

Herrmann, J. 2003. “From Popular to Arthouse: An Analysis of Love and Nature as Religious Motifs in Recent Cinema.” In J. Mitchell and S. Marriage, eds., Mediating Religion: Conversations in Media, Religion and Culture, 189-99. London: T. & T. Clark.

Heston, C. 1995. In the Arena: An Autobiography. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Higham, C. 1973. Cecil B. DeMille. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Higley, S.L. 1993. “‘Cunning Work’: Edward Scissorhands and the Topos of Utility.”Christianity and Literature, 42,3, 434-43.

Hill, G. 1992. Illuminating Shadows: The Mythic Power of Film. Boston: Shambhala.

Hurley, N.P. 1980. “Christ-transfigurations in Film: Notes on a Meta-genre.” Journal of Popular Culture, 13,3, 427-33.

Jewett, R. 1999. Saint Paul Returns to the Movies: Triumph over Shame. Michigan: William B. Eermans.

Karcher, S. 1997. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Divination: A Practical Guide to the Systems that can Reveal your Destiny. Shaftesbury: Element Books.

Kinnard, R. and T. Davis. 1992. Divine Images: A History of Jesus on the Screen. New York, NY: Citadel Press.

Kozloff, S.R. 1981. “Superman as Saviour: Christian Allegory in the Superman Movies.Journal of Popular Film and Television, 9,2, 78-82.

Kozlovic, A.K. 2000. “The Bible is Alive and Well and Living in Popular Films: A Survey of Some Western Cinematic Transfigurations of Holy Writ.” Australian Religion Studies Review, 13,1, 56-71.

______. 2001. “From Holy Aliens to Cyborg Saviours: Biblical Subtexts in Four Science Fiction Films. Journal of Religion and Film, 5,2, 1-13. [http://www.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/cyborg.htm].

______. 2002a. “Superman as Christ-figure: The American Pop Culture Movie Messiah.”Journal of Religion and Film, 6,1, 1-25. [http://www.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/superman.htm].

______. 2002b. “Feature Films and Sacred Subtexts: Popular Visual Piety as Applied Religious Education.” Religious Education Journal of Australia, 18,2, 3-10.

______. 2002c. “Saint Cinema: The Construction of St. Francis of Assisi in Franco Zeffirelli’s Brother Sun Sister Moon (1972).” Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, 2, 1-21. [http://www.usask.ca/relst/jrpc/brothersunprint.html].

______. 2003a. “Have Lamb will Martyr: Samson as a Rustic Christ-figure in Cecil B. DeMille’s Samson and Delilah (1949).” Reconstruction: Studies in Contemporary Culture, 3(1), 1-23. [http://www.reconstruction.ws/031/kozlovic.htm].

______. 2003b. “Christ-figures and Other Hidden Biblical References in Popular Films: The 20th century Biblia Pauperum.” Journal of Religious Education 51,1, 57-64.

______. 2003c. Save Us! Recognizing Christ-figures in the Movies. <http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=167_0_2_0_M>, 1-5.

______. 2003d. “Sacred Subtexts and Popular Film: A Brief Survey of Four Categories of Hidden Religious Figurations.” Journal of Contemporary Religion, 18,3, 317-34.

______. 2004. “The Cinematic Christ-figure.” The Furrow: A Journal for the Contemporary Church, 55,1, 26-30.

Leif H. 1999. Christian Spotlight on the Movies: Movie Review: The Matrix. <http://www.christiananswers.net/spotlight/reviews/i-thematrix.html>, 1-9.

Livingstone, E.A., ed. 1990. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Long, L. 1990. “Klaatu, Gort and I.” Starlog, 151, 26-27.

Loughlin, G. 2001. “The Man Who Fell to Earth.” In G. Ward, ed. The Blackwell Companion to Postmodern Theology, 24-47. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

MacDonald, A. 1991. Films in Close-up: Getting the Most from Film and Video. Leicester: Frameworks.

Malone, P. 1997a. “Jesus on Our Screens.” In J.R. May, ed., New Image of Religious Film, 57-71. Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.

______. 1997b. “Edward Scissorhands: Christology from a Suburban Fairy-tale. In C. Marsh and G. Ortiz, eds. Explorations in Theology and Film: Movies and Meaning, 73-86. Oxford: Blackwell.

______. ed. 2001. Myth and Meaning: Australian Film Directors in their Own Words. Sydney: Currency Press.

Malone, P. and R. Pacatte. 2001. Lights, Camera … Faith! A Movie Lover’s Guide to Scripture. A Movie Lectionary— Cycle A. Boston: Pauline Books and Media.

Mathews, S. 1984. 35mm Dreams. Ringwood, Vic: Penguin Books.

Matthews, B., trans. 1990. The Herder Symbol Dictionary: Symbols from Art, Archaeology, Mythology, Literature, and Religion. Wilmette, IL: Chiron.

May, J.R. 1991. “Art: Shaping Images of Christ.” In F.A. Eigo, ed., Imaging Christ: Politics, Art, Spirituality, 73-103. Villanova, PA: Villanova University Press.

______. 2001. Nourishing Faith through Fiction: Reflections on the Apostles’ Creed in Literature and Film. Franklin, WI: Sheed and Ward.

McMillan, B. 2002. “24 Frames… – Film Notes.” The Furrow: A Journal for the Contemporary Church, 53,6, 360-62.

Mercadante, L. 2001. “Bess the Christ Figure? Theological Interpretations of Breaking the Waves.” Journal of Religion and Film, 5,1, 1-6. [http://cid.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/bessthe.htm].

Mr. Cranky! 2000. Braveheart. <http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/braveheart.html>, 1-2.

Niemi, A. 2003. “Film as Religious Experience: Myths and Models in Mass Entertainment.”Critical Review, 15,3-4, 435-46.

O’Brien, T. 1990. “Jesus of Montreal.” Film Quarterly, 44,1, 47-50.

Owen, W.S., P.A. Grist and R. Dowling. 1992. A Dictionary of Bible Symbols. London: Grace Publications Trust.

Paglia, C. 1994. Vamps and Tramps: New Essays. New York: Vintage Books.

Palumbo, D.E. 1987. “The Underground Journey and the Death and Resurrection Theme in Recent Science Fiction Films.” In D.E. Morse, ed., The Fantastic in World Literature and the Arts: Selected Essays from the Fifth International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts, 211-227, 239. New York: Greenwood Press.

Plume, K. 2001. Interview with Richard Donner [part 2]. <http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/57536p2.html>, 1-11.

Pyle, F. 2000. “Making Cyborgs, Making Humans: Of Terminators and Blade Runners.” In D. Bell and B.M. Kennedy, eds., The Cybercultures Reader, 124-37. London: Routledge.

Reinhartz, A. 2003. “Jesus on the Silver Screen.” In N.N. Perez, ed., Revelation: Representations of Christ in Photography, 186-89. London: Merrell/The Israel Museum, Jerusalem.

Rike, J.L. 1997. “Dead Man Walking: Criminal Justice on Trial.” Encounter, 58,4, 353-67.

Roncace, M. 2002. “Paradoxical Protagonists: Sling Blade‘s Karl and Jesus Christ.” In G. Aichele and R. Walsh, eds., Screening Scripture: Intertextual Connections between Scripture and Film, 279-300. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International.

Rovin, J. 1977. The Films of Charlton Heston. Secaucus, NJ: The Citadel Press.

Ruppersburg, H. 1987. “The Alien Messiah in Recent Science Fiction Films.” Journal of Popular Film and Television, 14,4, 159-66.

Saleh, D. 1979. Science Fiction Gold: Film Classics of the 50s. New York: Comma/McGraw-Hill.

Saul, J.R. 1995. The Doubter’s Companion: A Dictionary of Aggressive Common Sense. London: Penguin Books.

Schatz, T. 1997. History of the American Cinema, Volume 6. Boom and Bust: The American Cinema in the 1940s. New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.

Siegel, R. and J.-C. Suares. 1978. Alien Creatures. Sydney: Harper and Row.

Simmons, E.L. 2003. “Theology of the Cross and Popular Culture.” Word and World, 23,3, 253-62.

Spears, R.A. 1982. Slang and Euphemism: A Dictionary of Oaths, Curses, Insults, Sexual Slang and Metaphor, Racial Slurs, Drug Talk, Homosexual Lingo, and Related Matters. New York, NY: Signet/New American Library.

Staley, J.L. 2002. “Meeting Patch again for the First Time: Purity and Compassion in Marcus Borg, the Gospel of Mark, and Patch Adams.” In G. Aichele and R. Walsh, eds.,Screening Scripture: Intertextual Connections between Scripture and Film, 213-28. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International.

Stern, R.C., C.N. Jefford and G. DeBona. 1999. Savior on the Silver Screen. New York: Paulist Press.

Stern, J. and M. Stern. 1992. Jane and Michael Stern’s Encyclopedia of Pop Culture: An A to Z guide of Who’s Who and What’s What, from Aerobics and Bubble Gum to Valley of the Dolls and moon unit zappa. New York, NY: HarperPerennial.

Stone, B.P. 2000. Faith and Film: Theological Themes at the Cinema. St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press.

Tatum, W.B. 1997. Jesus at the Movies: A Guide to the First Hundred Years. Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge Press.

Telford, W.R. 2000. “Religion, the Bible and Theology in Recent Films (1993-1999).”Epworth Review, 4, 31-40.

Testa, B. 1995. “Arcand’s Double-twist Allegory: Jesus of Montreal.” In A. Loiselle and B. McIlroy, eds., Auteur/provocateur: The films of Denys Arcand, 90-112. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Vogler, C. 1998. The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers. Second Edition. Studio City, CA: M. Wiese Productions.

von Gunden, K. and S.H. Stock. 1982. Twenty All-time Great Science Fiction Films. New York: Arlington House.

Warner, R. 1991. “A Silver-paper Unicorn.” In J.B. Kerman, ed., Retrofitting Blade Runner: Issues in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, 178-84. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Press.

Warren, B. and B. Thomas. 1982. Keep Watching the Skies! American Science Fiction Movies of the Fifties, Volume 1: 1950-1957. Jefferson: McFarland.

Wierstra, A. 2002, October 8). Spider-Man. <http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/spiderman_wierstra.htm>, 1-5.

Williams, T. 1997. Larry Cohen: The Radical Allegories of an Independent Filmmaker. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.

Filmography

A Man Escaped (1956, dir. Robert Bresson)

A Short Film about Love (aka Do Not Desire the Wife of Another; aka Decalogue Six) (1988, dir. Krzysztof Kieslowski)

Au Hasard, Balthazar (1966, dir. Robert Bresson)

Babe (1995, dir. Chris Noonan)

Babe, Pig in the City (1998, dir. George Miller)

Babette’s Feast (aka Babette’s Gastebud) (1987, dir. Gabriel Axel)

Bad Lieutenant (1992, dir. Abel Ferrara)

Being There (1979, dir. Hal Ashby)

Blade Runner (1982, dir. Ridley Scott)

Braveheart (1995, dir. Mel Gibson)

Breaking the Waves (1996, dir. Lars von Trier)

Brother Sun Sister Moon (aka Fratello Sole Sorella Luna) (1972, dir. Franco Zeffirelli)

Contact (1997, dir. Robert Zemeckis)

Cool Hand Luke (1967, dir. Stuart Rosenberg)

Dancer in the Dark (2000, dir. Lars von Trier)

The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951, dir. Robert Wise)

Dead Man Walking (1995, dir. Tim Robbins)

Edge of the City (1957, dir. Martin Ritt)

Edward Scissorhands (1990, dir. Tim Burton)

The Empire Strikes Back (1980, dir. Irvin Kershner)

E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982, dir. Steven Spielberg)

God Told Me To (aka Demon) (1977, dir. Larry Cohen)

The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965, dir. George Stevens)

The Green Mile (1999, dir. Frank Darabont)

Hannibal (2001, dir. Ridley Scott)

Jesus of Montreal (1989, dir. Denys Arcand)

Jesus of Nazareth (1977, dir. Franco Zeffirelli)

King of Kings (1961, dir. Nicholas Ray)

K-Pax (2001, dir. Iain Softley)

The Last Temptation of Christ (1988, dir. Martin Scorsese)

Mad Max (1979, dir. George Miller)

Mad Max 2 (aka The Road Warrior) (1981, dir. George Miller)

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985, dir. George Miller and George Ogilvie)

The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976, dir. Nicholas Roeg)

The Matrix (1999, dir. Andy and Larry Wachowski)

Nell (1994, dir. Michael Apted)

The Omega Man (1971, dir. Boris Sagal)

The Passion of the Christ (2004, dir. Mel Gibson)

Patch Adams (1998, dir. Tom Shadyac)

Platoon (1986, dir. Oliver Stone)

Pleasantville (1998, dir. Gary Ross)

Return of the Jedi (1983, dir. Richard Marquand)

Samson and Delilah (1949, dir. Cecil B. DeMille)

September (1987, dir. Woody Allen)

The Seventh Sign (1988, dir. Carl Schultz)

Shane (1953, dir. George Stevens)

The Shawshank Redemption (1994, dir. Frank Darabont)

Sling Blade (1996, dir. Billy Bob Thornton)

Spider-Man (2002, dir. Sam Raimi)

Starman (1984, dir. John Carpenter)

Star Wars (1977, dir. George Lucas)

Superman: The Movie (aka Superman) (1978, dir. Richard Donner)

Superman II (1981, dir. Richard Lester)

Taxi Driver (1976, dir. Martin Scorsese)

The Terminator (1984, dir. James Cameron)

Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991, dir. James Cameron)

Touch (1997, dir. Paul Schrader)

The Truman Show (1998, dir. Peter Weir)

Twelve Monkeys (1995, dir. Terry Gilliam)

Viridiana (1961, dir. Luis Bunuel)

When Worlds Collide (1951, dir. Rudolph Mate)

Liam Whetstone

Spiritualities, the Sacred and the Screen Essay (2011)

John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester

The Libertine review

Book of Isaiah

Introduction to the Book of Isaiah

The proper beginning

Key Verse for this lesson

The two main ideas

Our focus in this lesson

1. Man of sorrows acquainted with grief

2. His power to overcome tribulations

3. He dealt with our deepest needs

4. He set us an example to follow his steps

Leave a comment Cancel reply

John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester

The Libertine review

Book of Isaiah

Introduction to the Book of Isaiah

The proper beginning

Key Verse for this lesson

The two main ideas

Our focus in this lesson

1. Man of sorrows acquainted with grief

2. His power to overcome tribulations

3. He dealt with our deepest needs

4. He set us an example to follow his steps

Share this:

Leave a comment Cancel reply