RELIGION has inspired some memorable films over the years, and if there is any wisdom to be drawn from the oeuvre it is that resulting eruptions of devotion may run in inverse proportion to those flicks’ quality. Take Ben Hur, for example, a fine film which probably did more for rowing, chariot racing and little leather centurion outfits at the Mardi Gras parade than Christianity, despite the neat plot device that sees the hero’s leprous mother and sister restored in the final scenes to full health by the alleged Messiah.
Then there is The Innocence of Muslims, a sample of which (below) suggests one of the most inept productions ever put in the can, as those cinematographic luvvies like to say. Here is a little taste of the movie that, so far, has inspired attacks on two US embassies, the murders of an ambassador and at least three others, and big mobs of bearded blokes swearing Allah’s further vengeance on Jews, Copts, Americans and, well, fill in the blanks because there is never any shortage of people with whom the Prophet’s disciples are not eager to take umbrage.
Mind you, any flick that inquires after Muhammad’s disinclination to wear underpants is worth at least a cursory glance. Oh, and that Divine inspiration delivered via a chatty ass is worth noting, too.
Watch it while you can. Stupid, ridiculous, laughable, inept – none of those things will stop our culturally sensitive authorities demanding that it be banned, as Andrew Klavan explained after another recent episode of Musselman mayhem.
Good to see you back Prof, though sorry to hear about your circumstances.ReplyDelete
A bottle of St Hallett's Shiraz, described in today's Dan Murphy's email as "explosive", sounds a good way to ease back in.
Nice humour on Ben Hur - good to see you can function in this important way.
Can I sneak in a condolence and hope the best for you and your family? Best wishes.
Life must be lived. It is a precious gift and no matter the day or sorrow, press on. Easier said than done, especially when one is not dealing with your sadness, but I'm sure you would be there for us dear readers in the same way.
T E Lawrence gave an interesting assessment of the mindset of these people in his book Seven Pillars Of Wisdom.ReplyDelete
His observations resonate today.
Let me be among the first 10,000 to welcome you back!ReplyDelete
Well Prof, give me Lawrence of Arabia any day for my cinematic Islam. And Exodus or The Life of Brian for something a bit more cinematically interesting if religion is a must. This pap is lamentable nonsense and the anguished and murderous response to it is totally beyond belief (any belief). What more can one say?ReplyDelete
Does anyone really know who made this?ReplyDelete
Most people might not have worn undies in those days, but they definitely didn't wear bath robes.ReplyDelete
Welcome back Bunyip.
My very dear Prof - As a child of Africa I say simply: "Siyakhala Nawe".ReplyDelete
With that necessary introduction, let me say that your post is so relevant and so very true.
I am engaged in discourse with my (teenager) sprogs at present on exactly this subject - And hope that teaching them to think critically about these matters will not cause them to be failed in their HSC papers for "Speaking out" against the great pinko groupthink that permeates our education system on these (and it must be said other as important) matters!
So much the pity that things should come to this current disingenious and risible circumstance.
Ahhh, the religion of peace. Outrage. Revenge. Murder.ReplyDelete
Welcome home, Prof. (No comments indeed!)
St Halletts? Wow. Friend at work has a poster of prizewinning wines I was checking it out the other day.
I noticed the St Hallets and made a comment about a blended port I bought many years ago which was excellent.
Pity the drunken boyfriend and his mates got into it.
Welcome back Prof!ReplyDelete
Condolences for your loss.
The Irish Lion
I think Tim Blair got it in one with this headline ........ "Four Die in Film Review"ReplyDelete
Good morning, Professor - my congratulations on your return and my most sincere condolences on the circumstances surrounding your absence. Time is the great healer - but, oh! How slow that process is! I hope the genuine expressions of sympathetic regards from the many friends you have never met beyond these pages will be of some small consolation in your difficult time of mourning.ReplyDelete
The movie - what can you say? The only other movies I can recall of similar clumsy, amatueristic and overwhelmingly cheap constituency were the weekly B Grade (Z Grade?) howlers that used to be shown on grainy black and white, late night TV by the inimitable Deadly Earnest - they don't make TV hosts like him anymore, do they? And what ever happened to "Claw", by the way? Still scrabbling and scuttling about in a dark, dusty, dingy TV storeroom somewhere, angrily seeking another throat to squeeze? If Claw had religious inclination - I do believe I could guess to which one it would be attracted.
But I digress. This unremarkable little thespian effort by Sam Bacile (Imbecile?) is simultaneously truly remarkable - because, yet again, the collective, unthinking, murderous, barbarous brutality inherent within "the religion of peace" has been oh-so-easily unleashed on sundry kaffirs and unbelievers. Yet again we see wild-eyed, spittle-flecked muslims on TV flailing their AK-47-equipped limbs about uncontrollably and promising death to anyone who insulted Mo's memory.
The movie was merely a shocker - the subject religion is the true horror - and the world's muslims yet again show that they, too, are - all of them - Deadly Earnest.
Gobsmacked of Gippsland
A question Professor: If you were seated in court and a thousand people were brought before the bench, all of whom testified to being eye witnesses to the primary evidence of the case, all of whose stories corroborated; would you still say that evidence was 'alleged'? Or should it now be judged as fact?ReplyDelete
Call ten thousand more witnesses, all of whom provide secondary evidence to back up the claims of the main issue. Still alleged?
Ben Hur was a very silly movie, but please don't confuse fiction with a scientific approach to history.
Good to have you back.
It's great to have you return to the blogosphere, Professor. One step at a time.ReplyDelete
"Innocence of Muslims" is better than Ben Hur! It is bound to become a screen classic. Shot on location too in a documentary fly-on-the-wall style. I love the dramatic scene of the old woman, legs akimbo torn in half by a team the mad camels! Its in that clip if you have the stomach to watch it all. Had me in stitches. Four stars.ReplyDelete
Nice to see you back, Prof. I was getting worried about you. As horrid as bereavement is, it's good to know that it was only this, and not the Twits In Charge Of Us, that was silencing you.ReplyDelete
It's nice to see your biting wit back to the fore again.
If it helps Prof. the trout are beginning to stir. Nothing better empties the mind of all its tribulations, than a good dose of addressing the waters.ReplyDelete
The only snag here is, that riparian pursuits take you away once again. If ever we needed the Bunyip it is now. The Labor dirt file is has been dusted down and AbbottAbbottAbbott has been using the personal pronoun "she." This sort of muckraking calls for irony of the highest calibre.
Don't worry Mr Bunyip. I hear that the Islamic council of Victoria has released a firmly worded statement about how Islam is really a peaceful religion.ReplyDelete
That should make everything better.
Let me be the second. You were sadly mussed Prof. Sincere condolences.ReplyDelete
"Stupid, ridiculous, laughable, inept"ReplyDelete
No doubt. But is it accurate? You will find all those scenes in the Koran or Hadith (though written in a somewhat more serious tone).
Because Islam is so obviously ridiculous, ridicule is what Muslims fear the most. Hence their attempts to ban any criticism of old Mo. We should give them a lot more to be upset about.
While in the minds of the Westerner there is no distinction to be had between Allah and the God of, for example, the Australian Constitution... your problem with religion will grow like the exponential proliferative phase of any petrie dish 'culture'.ReplyDelete
It is as certain as your next New Moon.
Happy Rosh Hashanah. [Glad to have you back trucking the cyber freeway]
With utter predictability, Conroy has called for the offending film's removal from the internet. He thinks this will stop riots. In fact, it would ensure the next riot at the next, even more trivial, offence to the prophet. Thick as a brick is our leading book-burner, Conroy. I really doubt if this Gillard ministry could raise a hundred IQ points between the lot of them.ReplyDelete
Pedro of Adelaide
Well I would say that that film is probably guilty of several crimes against film making - it is cringe bad.ReplyDelete
It's so bad it is hard to tell if it is meant to be serious, a parody, a tribute or a cunning part of an Evil Overlord Plot to Thrust Deeply into the core of Islam to topple it from within, although I would hazard a guess the film makers were not talented enough for the last one.
However if anyone honestly believes if this was the sole cause of the murders and violence around the world this past week, then well, they must be pretty young and naive.
Welcome back Proffessore ,you have been missed. You are on time to get stuck into the Lying Pardee under its serial Lying"Leader" . Seeif you can goad rudd the dud into a challenge so the Lying bitch iwill call an election to stop him.strike while theislamofascist riots are still fresh.Lets free Australia from the untidy nashuns communist fascist rule.ReplyDelete
Excellent piece in The Big Q today Prof,take the rest of the week offReplyDelete
Ben Hur was just broadcast and ran for 4 and a half hours with ads. I might well want to behead someone too if I had to sit through that, a TV executive perhaps.ReplyDelete
This link should allow you to watch the Today Tonight forum aired tonight. Ignore the TT association, it's very watchable,
(sorry but we have to say it, condolences and great to see you back on your feet)
That was what got them so upset? Oh good grief.ReplyDelete
Welcome back Professor, and condolences for your loss.ReplyDelete
Regarding "that" movie, I would protest too based on its poor quality. If I was a Moslem and I saw that wooden American hippie playing Mo, or even playing his favourite camel, I'd go out and burn an embassy or two. Jusr wait till David Stratton and Margaret Pomeranz get around to reviewing it.
Strange as it may seem, the movie's content is historically accurate viz-a-viz the Qu'ran. Old Mo had a blood lust and some rather strange habits, but infidels (us "dirty Kuffar") aren't allowed to mention it.
The Bible indicates that this mob will acheive their gaol, i.e., domination of the whole earth, but only for a short time. Watch out for the black flags of al Mahdi's army.
I expect the wearing of underpants could be a little irritating in a sandy environment if they are continuously being removed and then later put on againReplyDelete
Who could disagree with this common sense measure ?
Related, the SMH today has headlining online: "Proof Jesus was married? A scrap of ancient papyrus the size of a business card has reignited the debate as to whether Jesus had a wife."ReplyDelete
Cardinal Pell is probably readying our flock now for some beheading protests on the weekend.
Is the SMH being provocative of Christians where it would never be provocative of Muslims?
The SMH article states:
"A previously unknown scrap of ancient papyrus written in ancient Egyptian Coptic includes the words "Jesus said to them, my wife," - a discovery likely to renew a fierce debate in the Christian world over whether Jesus was married."
Yet the SMH has misquoted the text. From the Harvard Divinity School, the text is:
"....." Jesus said to them, "My wife...["
The text is different from that the SMH was trying to promote, that Jesus was referring to His wife, as opposed to a statement beginning with "My wife..."
"My is a good cook"? "'My wife' is something that I'll never say, because I'm not married. Why do you even ask?"?
Perhaps it is a theologically correct opening:
"My wife [is the Church]...she will be able to be my disciple...Let wicked people swell up...As for me, I will dwell with her in order to...[reign in heaven and on earth.]
Problem solved. Easy.