Jump to content
Mr. Tom Willecome

I've now seen the trailer.

Recommended Posts

Anyway...let's do this again, shall we?

 

"What do you mean by the FREE WILL argument? You bring it up every time this issue is mentioned, but have never explained what it is. As I understand it (and hey, I've only got an A-Level in Religious Philosophy, so I may not be thinking at a high enough level for you here), the Free Will Defence (a rather clever bit of religious backsliding which attempts to explain why, if God is all-loving, evil and suffering actually exist in the world - it's all because Man has Free Will, see?) has nothing AT ALL to do with whether God can see into the minds of Man. Not a bit. Nada."

 

If we are talking about "pure" Judeo-Christian religion- then what you are saying is that GOD knew from the very beginning that Adam would take the bite out of the fruit of knowledge given to him from Eve from the garden of Eden. It was a set up job from the get-go for man to covet godliness and yet consequently know suffering as punishment for seeking that desire/leverage and God eventually sent down his only son to allow a covenant to take place with all of mankind as a merciful act of forgivenss on his part. Yes the Judeo-Christian belief system is that God has a plan for us all HOWEVER, in spite of that plan, we make our choices at the time we make our choices. This is based on Man's FREE WILL. You will admit, that these choices that we make may or may not coincide with God's plan (they usually don't becuz of the origin of sin, but we try to do the best we can and those who follow this doctrine hopefully repent for their sins in the process). I know we haven't gotten to the omniscience part yet...........

This is your understanding of the Judeo-Christian doctrine correct? And God IS omniscient in this doctrine- agreed regardless of your choices.

 

SIDE BAR

As it stands, there are separate rules/views between Catholics and Christians and they both stem from the Judeo-Christian montheistic belief. Why the differences/viewpoints within the construct then with choosing to pray to saints (Catholics) and praying to the Virgin Mary (Catholics again). Why the difference then confessing to a priest (Catholic once again) as an intermediary figure and confessing straight to God directly(Christian). Why such discrepancies within the belief system??????? The rules as James has commented are established in the Judeo-Christian doctrine. Yet we have these discrepancies in view point today between Christians and Catholics? Please explain. ......................It stems from INTERPRETATION and we also know there is LITERAL and BIBLICAL INTERPRETATIONS. You probably believe Noah's arc actually took place with a set of every living species on board.

 

 

This films viewpoint stands firm with the comic viewpoint. The Comic view point is that God is NOT Omniscient, all-knowing and powerful. That God does not know qwhat free-willing actions (humanistic/existentialist view) you take. This film represents that religious cosmology We do not need to delve into an elaborate religious explanation into establishing the religious cosmology about this film. What plot would that be C??? We already have an A plot and a B plot. How many intricate webs are we spinning? Too many if we have to delve into that one. Let the audience sort it out. Must we spoonfeed everything. But clearly, John does comment on how he views God throough the antfarm comment and bible comment. Wouldn't that be contradictory of someone wanting to get into the kingdom of heaven???? Not if you are John ConstanTINE....arsehole (not you personally).

 

"Either God is all-knowing or He isn't."

In this film- He isn't.

 

"If He is, he can see into John's mind when he attempts suicide, and will know that it's being done for selfish reasons - to save himself. "

Out with that theory. You know I can't go with door #1 :)

 

By the film's own internal logic, according to the reasoning Gabriel gives in the scene quoted by James above, this means that God won't be fooled, and therefore won't accept John into Heaven.

 

Won't be fooled or can't be fooled?????? Hmmmmm big difference in semantics.

I'll go with door #2. God won't accept John into heaven becuz he commited suicide and has seen (God's existence) without blind faith and yet John still does not have faith in God after seeing despite his good deeds. AS I have stated before- most of us would believe and not question if we had the power to see. This is still not the case for John. It does not influence him one way or the other becauz heaven isn't that attractive to him. (He still fornicates with Ellie and doesn't believe in the whole bible bit at all........when dealing with Balthazar). That is VERY CRYSTAL clear in his comments. All along.............. John seeks a solution to his cancer dilemma.

 

The fact that He actually does seem to believe that John's 'suicide' attempt was unselfish suggests one of two things. ONE: God isn't actually all-knowing, and the film has contradicted itself.

 

That was door #1. I didn't pick that one. God is NOT all knowing in this film. He may have a plan as architect of our lives- but we design our purpose and existence with or without him. We are the authors of our lives- Not God. ANd God is unaware of our intent/actions. This coincides with the comic humanistic/existentialist view.

 

"Or...TWO: John's 'suicide' is, in fact, a sincere and selfless attempt "

 

Not sincere- but perceived as a sincere selfless act by God similar to God's only son sent down to us.

to save someone other than himself- like the son of God.

 

"and he has attained the Redemption - from God" -

God has perceived this in his "soul" formula- Conned by John through the selfless sacrifice symbolism behind the association with the Spear of Destiny- and the mercy shown by the Roman soldier Longinus for God's only son who sacrificed himself to make a covenant with mankind. There is no evidence of Faith in this film if you were following Judeo-Christian methodology? SO how could he be allowed in to the pearly gates????? Becuz people this film is not bound by those rules. Remember you have to have faith to enter. Lest I remind you of one of the two robbers on the cross during the crucifixion as to which he was told do not fear he would be with him at his side in the kingdom of heaven becuz he believed. So by that premise, this film does not meet your claims.

 

which he appears to have been after all along.

 

JC has been after saving his own arse. He is a con artist and a good one at that and yes...there is a bit of luck when you play with cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No no.

 

Let's go through THIS again:

 

The whole attempted suicide schtick is a bit shit though really isn't it?

 

Hardly very Constantinian.

 

Not the end game suicide, the initial Sixth Sense one. The superpowers too for that matter. In fact the whole "God's Cop" thing is a rancid pile of bollocks whether it's fucking con (and your reasoning behind this gets more desperate every time) or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Tom said, re. the first, 'origin' suicide (I feel tainted just typing those words) is very, very true.

 

I may get back to do a point-by-point response to Matadoor's post at some point, but right now I have work to do. I'll just say this to him:

 

Thanks for responding politely and (relatively) coherently. But you're still wrong in a number of key regards, and as soon as I have time, I'll explain why. Unless someone else gets there first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a nitpick, and not really relevant to the discussion, but when you say "Christians and Catholics", Matadoor, what you'r talking about are "Protestants and Catholics". Both of which are "Christians".

 

I haven't read the script, so I won't join the fray about the internal logic of the plot. I will come back once I've seen the film and can judge for myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Either God is all-knowing or He isn't."

In this film- He isn't.

 

Where is this stated in the film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So Matadoor is left with a choice: either Constantine cons a limited god and the movie is amazingly poorly written, or Constantine is a good little Christian boy and the film is a shit adaptation.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, we appear to have a winner. It's not just a shit adaptation, it's a shit film, too!

 

Apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

I'm none too pleased with the god's cop role, either. JC sends all these demons back to hell in an attempt to appease god into letting him into heaven? As Tom said, that's not very Constantinian. And I may just be paraphrasing what someone else wrote more skillfully than myself. And it ties into the silly suicide bit. "I killed myself, so my life is an attempt at redemption by vanquishing demons back to hell. See me, god? See me? Ain't John a good boy, now? Please let me in? I've lung cancer now, and I really need a favor!"

 

Bullshit! John Constantine would have told god to fuck straight off right to his face and would have found another con to work (oh, wait, in "Dangerous Habits," he DID find another con. A brilliant one, to boot!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a nitpick, and not really relevant to the discussion, but when you say "Christians and Catholics", Matadoor, what you'r talking about are "Protestants and Catholics". Both of which are "Christians".

Not if you're a bigoted Protestant fundamentalist. According to them, Catholics are not really Christians.

 

Well, Mataboor is from Orange County, isn't he? 8-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, if he cons god it's merely a dodgy adaptation.

 

It may not be the comic, and I'm sorry for that, but it's a good film in its own right.

 

:rolleyes:

 

 

I might just agree with all that.

I'll get back to you when the bootleg man has been into the pub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, now I have seen that promo DVD thing.

 

Several points I need to raise.

 

I feel vindicated in my support for Keanu.

It really is as if they made an american replica of John Constantine and put him in this film. Not his motivations etc (more of that later) but his manner and his 'tude.

That in itself is enough to lighten my heart as the Day of Redemption approacheth.

Except for that UGLY "This is Constanteen, John Constanteen - asshole !" line.

And the secret origin of what if the kid from Sixth Sense saw demons - UGH!

 

Chaz is more tolerable than I expected, but they have expunged all his irritating lines from this trailer. So he still sucks the monkey of dumb.

 

Hell looks good.

 

Demons look good in close-up, not so keen on the action shots.

The film trailers and promos that I have seen really DO play up the action scenes.

 

So, the motivations etc.

Of the four producers who speak, Lauren Shuler Donner is the only one who pretty much says "we had to change stuff for the movie". One of them does the old "comics have simplistic ideas of good and bad" line, saying that Constantine is darker, but failing to point out that's from the comic.

 

Akiva Goldsman says "It's a movie about Redemption" and "he has to try and find faith".

Francis Lawrence says "He in a way thinks he's sort of building up Brownie points with God to buy his way into Heaven". Notice that's NOT "He appears to be ..." or "we think that he is ..." So Matadoor can do all the retroactive plot-hole-filling he wants, but we're right. He is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Francis Lawrence says "He in a way thinks he's sort of building up Brownie points with God to buy his way into Heaven". Notice that's NOT "He appears to be ..." or "we think that he is ..." So Matadoor can do all the retroactive plot-hole-filling he wants, but we're right. He is wrong.

 

The writers intent were about LEVERAGE. That is the purpose/motivations behind his actions. END of discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you all read the very good, insightful article about Constantine at Club Keanu? It contains interviews with many involved and deals with the writing and production. Good read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Lawrence says "He in a way thinks he's sort of building up Brownie points with God to buy his way into Heaven". Notice that's NOT "He appears to be ..." or "we think that he is ..." So Matadoor can do all the retroactive plot-hole-filling he wants, but we're right. He is wrong.

 

The writers intent were about LEVERAGE.  That is the purpose/motivations behind his actions.  END of discussion.

 

You truly are thrush incarnate.

 

"he has to try and find faith".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Lawrence says "He in a way thinks he's sort of building up Brownie points with God to buy his way into Heaven". Notice that's NOT "He appears to be ..." or "we think that he is ..." So Matadoor can do all the retroactive plot-hole-filling he wants, but we're right. He is wrong.

 

The writers intent were about LEVERAGE.  That is the purpose/motivations behind his actions.  END of discussion.

Are you the writer than you can speak of his intentions? If they weren't clear enough in the script for the director to pick up on, perhaps he's not as goosd a writer as all that, since his intentions aren't clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...