The Other Western Front

Our Western "Documentary" has turned out to be quite an exciting movie.  Of course, it continues with the theme of religious allusions, especially those of christ.  Two of the main characters are whipped and beaten and one also falls asleep for three days ( and also Brandon I have not forgotten about your question on my previous post about this topic Im currently formulating an answer).  Even without such symbolism though, this movie is very entertaining.  The actions scenes have been fairly accurate.  For instance when Munny is trying to kill the cowboy it takes him several attempts and in the end he only gets his liver, not some  unbelievable shot in the head or heart as you would expect from Hollywood.  We also learn that his partner doesn't have the nerves of steel you would expect from a former assassin.
      There has been some brutal beatings but not without a purpose.  Even the scene where the Schofield Kid ruthlessly murders a defenseless man, we see a lot of emotion between the two characters including the Kid's initial hesitation.  A moment he has been dreaming and bragging about all his life is presented to him and suddenly he has second thoughts.  This helps to portray him as both a coward and as a  sad excuse for an assassin.  It is because of the thought put into each individual scene, and the movies entertainment value in general, that Unforgiven has joined All quite On the Western Front as my two favorite movies in the class thus far.  Im looking forward to the final scene tomorrow which I have heard is great.

The Seventh Seal

          The Seventh Seal was the most visually impressive movie we have watched so far (Yea I said it!).  The camera work is flawless because, as Mr. Bennett mentioned, Bergman manages to make the camera "disappear" so that the audience is no longer focused on it.  The plot is also easy to follow yet full of symbolism and deeper meanings.  The entire chess game is not to be taken literally of course; it is showing the struggle of preventing ones inevitable death, which is quite hopeless in the end, as Bergman makes clear.  I think my only criticism of the film would be Bergman's view of not thinking to much about God and existence in general (as shown through the character of Jof).  I feel that it is only natural for everyone to be curious about their being.  I know that personally I ponder these things quite frequently so maybe I just personally can't see how someone could be able to keep it out of their mind regardless of their personal beliefs.
    I also wanted to mention a parallel between The Seventh Seal and All Quite On the Western Front (Mr. B had told us to watch for them early in the film and unfortunately I forgot to bring it up).  In one of the earlier scenes Block is shown growing more and more excited about his game with death.  He is depressed when that particular scene starts and he is confessing to death who he mistakes for a priest.  After his short encounter with death, he fells fully alive and with a smile on his face he  declares, "I, Antonius Block, am playing chess with death!"   A similar scene happens in A.Q.O.T.W.F. when Paul visits his dying friend in the hospital.  Paul runs from the hospital and is also filled with a sort of artificial joy and energy.  He can't seem to understand why he feels so full of life after his encounter with death.  Both of the characters share this same odd experience in two very different movies.    
          I also had just one question about the movie.  Block helps Jof and his wife escape while he distracts death by knocking the pieces over.  Death is only after Block's life right? So after Block helps these  people escape he then rejoins his other friends as they have dinner at their house.  So if Block knew death was following him why would he help people escape death only to lead death back to his other friends.  Maybe this is not meant to be questioned and is not really important but it just seems odd to me.  I also was absent Monday and missed a significant middle part of the movie so its possible I missed something that would answer my question. Ideas please...

Responses Part 2

No I have never had a Jesuit education Kamil, and yes I was raised by Christian parents Ilya.  But of course, this is not the reason I believe the Bible.  They certainly introduced me to Christianity, but if I did not genuinly believe it and find it to be true in my own life, I would have broken my Christian ties long ago.  And yes, I do agree that suffering tests faith. This is evident in the account of Job if you are familiar. C.S. Lewis once said, "God whispers to us in our pleasure, speaks to us in our conscience, but shouts to us in our pains, it is his megaphone to a deaf world".
Now Mr Bennett...
         I agree that you can't prove the existence of God any more than you can disprove His existence.  Thats why there is such a thing as faith.  In the books of Hebrews and Romans faith is described as, "being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see... For in hope we are saved.  But hope that is seen is not hope at all,  for who hopes for what he already has".   This means that no matter what your world view is , whether it be Christianity, Buddhism, or E, it still takes a certain amount of faith for you to believe it because you can't prove it.  So the fact that Christianity relies on a "leap of faith"doesn't discredit it as a legitimate world view because all world views require faith.
        You are also incorrect in stating that Evil is a problem with monotheistic belief systems.  This is a common misconception and often the first response I get when I defend Christianity.  But evil doesn't contradict the view of an all powerful, all loving,  and perfect God.  On the contrary, it actually enhances it.  Let me explain.
       As humans, we CAN NOT fully understand evil or God because the concepts are simply to much for us to wrap our minds around.  I think we can all agree on that.  So, knowing this, how can we expect to understand God's motives and the purpose he has for putting evil in the world.  God often uses evil for a greater good.  For example, Jesus was unfairly mocked, lashed, tortured, and killed for crimes he did not commit.  The disciples watched his painful death in horror and unbelief.  They wondered if God had abandoned them or even if there was a God at all.  But God used one of the evilest, most unfair, and excruciating deaths in history, to give the gift of salvation for those who believed (the ultimate greater good).  We are much like the disciples, as we watch the terrible evil in our world unfolding right in front of our eyes and even in our own lives.  But we must remember that we are nothing compared to God and can't always fully understand his motives.  Who are we to say what the God of the universe can and cannot create and do? When we ask God to end all evil and suffering in the world we are calling for him to put an end to us.  We all have evil in us, so in order for God to take away all evil he would have to destroy man kind. Because of this, God is actually showing us mercy by not putting an end to evil.  This is why the dilemma of evil is certainly much more of a dilemma for an atheist to grapple with than a  monotheist.
 

In Response

Sorry but my mac still isn't allowing me to comment so I have to answer in a new post.
          In response to what you said Mr Bennett, I understand that E would not accept the Bible as a source which is why it would not be the only thing I would use if I were trying to prove God's existence to anyone whether they were an E or not.  I agree with the basic principles of what Anselm says but I certainly wouldn't say it is the reason I believe there is a God.  I don't think he meant it to be that way either, he was just speaking his mind about the condition of people who don't believe.  And of course people always like to use the term "leap of faith".  Augustine can say whatever he likes, but no where in the Bible, whether it be inspired by God or not, are we asked to have "blind faith".  In fact the Bible demands the opposite.  Paul, in his letter to the church in Corinth?, asks the people to do away with childish thinking and reasoning and to defend the faith with sound reasoning and doctrine.  When Paul spread the gospel he did it through reasoning of the scriptures not a call to blind faith and this is the reason his message had such an appeal to the often sophisticated leaders of the Roman Empire.  I find that the only way to maintain a strong belief in God is to back up our humanly conviction of a God with facts and "sound reasoning and logic".  For me it would require much more faith to not believe in a God then to believe in Him.

Existentialism

Existentialism has had a profound impact on humanity considering the fact that it has gained a rather large following worldwide.  Unfortunately, I think it is complete nonsense.  E contradicts itself on many levels.  It claims that acts of extreme violence are okay because everyone has their own reality.  In class, we discussed that things such as theft, murder, rape, and suicide can all be justified in certain positions and that they are "right" to do sometimes.  But in order to claim that even these things can be right sometime of the time, you must accept that there is some way to judge between what is right and wrong; some form of higher power or moral standard. This man Ravi does a great job describing what Im saying, take a second to watch     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7yNwEDtqjA&feature=related 
        One of the main points of existentialism is that there is no God.  It then goes on to state that this puts you in charge. You make the calls, because your opinion is the only one that matters. This means essentially that you have made yourself your own god.  Everyone, even E, have their own gods whether it be money, power, sports, women, or themselves.
        E also states that "you are free".  Nothing about E really sets you free though.  You are a prisoner to doubt, sin, loneliness and a general sense of meaningless your entire life.  God is what sets me free from those things.  In Him I have hope in the promises he has made us in the Bible.  And don't get me wrong, I don't think that people should just accept the idea of a God just to make themselves feel good.  I believe in God because I know there is sufficient evidence for his existence that any intelligent person can accept, God doesn't ask us to have blind faith.  But thats a discussion for another time.
        I would  like to close this argument with a video that I believe once again deals with the core concept of E very well. Once again it is Ravi talking about the idea of meaningless in the world.  Its quite short and well worth your time    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4e_AOqlllc&feature=related