Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Coverage of what is truly interesting in the film world

TOP STORY:

15 Films that Offended Religious Groups

Christopher Campbell
By Christopher Campbell posted 1 year ago
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Reddit
  • Ma.gnolia
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon

This week we have two big-time offenders: Mike Myers’ The Love Guru, which has brought concern from Hindus, because the comedy seems to be making fun of the Hindu religion; and Ron Howard’s Angels & Demons, the “sequel” to The Da Vinci Code, adapted from Dan Brown’s bestseller. Earlier this week, the Vatican banned the latter production from all Catholic churches in Rome. The following statement from Father Marco Fibbi, spokesman for the diocese of Rome, was a favorite quote from the story: “Usually we read the script but in this case it wasn’t necessary. Just the name Dan Brown was enough.”

Of course, these days, religious organizations taking offense to a movie seems so commonplace that news like this is hardly even considered bad buzz. Neither The Love Guru nor Angels & Demons will be too aversely affected by the protests or boycotts. Both films will merely be added to the following list of major offenders (in alphabetical order so as not to offend anyone who thinks one is more offensive than another), as almost a genre cataloging than an inventory of condemned.

  • Brokeback Mountain - Because of its promotion of “the homosexual lifestyle,” many right-wing Christian groups protested Ang Lee’s film. Most famously, it was pulled last-minute from a multiplex owned by Mormon businessman and Utah Jazz owner Larry H. Miller, though his motivation was not necessarily claimed to be religion-based. Despite there being hundreds of gay films throughout the years, because of its popularity, this one was the worst offender.
    …Read more

Theo Van Gogh’s ‘Interview’ — Clip of the Day

Karina Longworth
By Karina Longworth posted 2 years ago
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Reddit
  • Ma.gnolia
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon

If you’re in the habit of visiting websites, you’ve probably seen ads for Interview, Steve Buscemi’s remake of a Dutch film by the same name, which stars Sienna Miller and which opens in limited release this Friday. Buscemi’s Interview is the first in a series of three films (the others are to be directed by Stanley Tucci and John Turturro), in tribute to the director of the original Interview, Theo Van Gogh. In 2004, Van Gogh was murdered by a Muslim extremist, who was acting in response to Submission: Part One, a ten minute film about the oppression of women under Islam, made by Van Gogh in collaboration with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. That film is embedded above.

I haven’t seen Van Gogh’s Interview, but I’ve just returned from a press screening of Buscemi’s, and in terms of style, content, weight and intent, it’s about as far away from Submission as you can get. Van Gogh has become something of a martyr since his death; a famed free-speech advocate in life, his body was found with a 5-page “jihad manifesto” attached to his chest with a dagger. His murder has since been used by some members of the Dutch government, as supporting evidence in their quest to limit immigration.

Put simply: the idea that the best way to pay tribute to that guy is to have three American actors remake his films is somewhat baffling. And after having seen Interview … well … am I the only one struggling to see how the solipsistic fantasy that Buscemi has committed to celluloid could possibly be seen as a proper tribute to anything?