The movie “2012,” an all-out, physics defying, gratuitous festival of apocalyptic disaster, has been reviewed unfavorably thanks to its lack of plot.
It has also been objected to on the basis of the on screen bias in the destruction of Christian monuments; never mind the annihilation of entire continents and billions of people.
In the trailers, it shows the dramatic demolition of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel splitting and the crumbling of the Christ the Redeemer Statue in Rio de Janeiro.
The Muslim holy site, the Kaaba in Mecca, is shown intact, yet the destruction is only implied.
Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who regularly defends Catholic interests in the media, complains that, “When we got word recently that the movie ‘2012’ depicts the Vatican being blown up, along with the famous statue from Rio, Christ the Redeemer, we were unmoved. Why? Because this occurs during the end of the world in a massive destruction. This kind of sensationalism, we reasoned, is standard fare for director Roland Emmerich: He is the guru of the ‘blow ‘em up’ genre of movies. But now we’ve learned that while Catholics get theirs, Muslims are spared. Out of fear, of course.”
Donohue goes on to suggest Hollywood filmmakers have a bias against Catholics because they abuse Catholic images and characters so frequently on screen. This is problematic for Catholics because it implies that their faith is dependent on certain symbols, and they are not worthy of the same respect accorded to every other religion.
While anti-Catholic bias is not universal in Hollywood, it is still widely acceptable. Hollywood walks a fine line between artistic license and gratuitous bigotry.
While the wholesale destruction shown on film implies that monuments of every religion and nation get destroyed, the ruin of the more famous ones has a greater visual impact.
It would be hard to get Americans, the majority of whom are Christians, to care about the destruction of Muslim, Jewish or Hindu monuments. Of course many would have sympathy for their friends of different religions, but the destruction of the symbols that are significant for you is more poignant than the symbols of those that are foreign.
However, I suspect that the film’s director Roland Emmerich had motives that were less than elevated when he spared the Kaaba on screen. He commented, “I wanted to do that, I have to admit. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have … a fatwa.”
After the Mohammed cartoon controversy of 2005, he was probably being prudent. Muslims do not take even the imaginary destruction of their symbols lightly.
Some might say Emmerich is a coward, but I really cannot blame him.
However, Emmerich is not a friend of any religion. He says he is against organized religion, so destroying religious monuments may have been entertainment in his imagination.
But he is wrong to think that the destruction of Christian symbols would also mean the destruction of faith.
Any religion should be able to live beyond buildings and statues and the breakdown of natural and social order. If the believers are true, their faith will survive everything, even mass destruction and even the end of the world.
There is not any need to boycott the movie. The critical reviews will take care of that.
Hollywood has rarely been stellar in its depiction of religion though, which is usually as accurate as its physics. And it should be encouraged toward accurate depictions.
Catholics are not all guilt-ridden secret sinners bent on world domination. Jews are not all rich. Muslims are not all terrorists. Evangelicals are not all narrow-minded, nutty preachers in ‘80s suits.
However, that is the subject of another editorial.
The fact remains that Hollywood does not respect religion or religious people and still has to learn the fine line between taking artistic license and employing malicious mockery.
Regarding the end of the world: If you ask the Maya, no, the world is not going to end in 2012, as they do not use that calendar anymore.
In addition, the Bible itself declares that no one can know that date.
Enjoy the horror and special effects of “2012.” I will seek out lighter fare.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
dio 2 years, 6 months ago
Another christian rant in The Abortion Daily... Awww, and by the way, the bible itself also declares that the Earth is flat.
Cambrian 2 years, 6 months ago
This ridiculous column just makes me want to see 2012 even more. The author doesn't seem to have their mind made up. At first they claim that destroying religious monuments will not offend them because it can't destroy the religion, and then they go on to say how they won't see the movie because it offends them.
As someone who grew up in a Catholic household, I am not offended by the destruction of the Vatican. In fact, it will be kind of like a really good high to see it destroyed in movie form. It's kind of like retribution for all those wasted hours in sunday school.
mfhayes 2 years, 5 months ago
I thought this movie looked ridiculously stupid, but your "article" made me want to see it!
You could have figured out "why".... with something you said.
"It would be hard to get Americans, the majority of whom are Christians, to care about the destruction of Muslim, Jewish or Hindu monuments."
The end. That's the reason. I doubt most Americans could name the Muslim monuments depicted in the film.
How would a movie full of the destruction of widely-unrecognizable monuments make $65 million on opening weekend?
JJanowiak 2 years, 6 months ago
I would pay good money to see Christian monuments blown up, for one.
mythman 2 years, 6 months ago
Emmerich destroyed the White House, US Capitol, Statue of Liberty, Hollywood sign, USS John F. Kennedy, Empire State Building, and all of New York, DC and LA. Does this make him anti-American?
Lansdallius 2 years, 5 months ago
Title misrepresents the story. What you meant was:
"COLUMN: Hollywood unfairly targets (Christianity) in movies, like ‘2012’"
Fixed. And your article fails.
PolishBear 2 years, 5 months ago
I succumbed to temptation and blew $5.50 on a matinee screening of "2012" yesterday afternoon ... and it was everything I feared. I really tried to turn off my brain and enjoy the movie on its own terms, but I failed. I didn't enjoy it. I thought it was crap.
Granted, the special effects were pretty damned interesting at times (though that's not saying much in the CGI era). But why oh why did such an extravaganza have to be overwhelmed by such an utterly stinky, cliché-ridden script? How can we expect one lucky family to continue to out-drive and out-fly one cataclysm after another while millions of other lives are being violently snuffed out?
If you were really interested in seeing "2012," chances are you have already done so. But if you haven't ... well, I don't know what to tell you. I thought "Armageddon" was one of the most ridiculous, brain-dead movies ever made, but a lot of people liked it. One person's trash is another person's treasure, as they say.
But what really bugs me most about "2012" is the whole "prophecy" thing. That people take all this Mayan calendar mumbo-jumbo seriously is downright embarrassing.
Why? Because there is no such thing as prophecy. Of course, there is such a thing as what we call “self-fulfilling prophecy” ... that is, a prediction that is so broadly-phrased that, given enough time, SOMETHING will occur that will fit the bill. Someone solemnly says, “One day a man will come who will lead our people out of bondage!” And given enough time, some guy may eventually come along who matches that description well enough. This is an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And of course it’s those rare prophecies that DO fulfill themselves that are remembered and celebrated for ages afterwards ... whereas the majority of prophecies that are NOT fulfilled are subsequently, conveniently FORGOTTEN.
But prophecy in a supernatural sense? No such thing.
mythman 2 years, 5 months ago
PolishBear, I apologize for being picky.
You are right that most (or all) prophecies are too vague to be reliable. But a "self-fulfilling prophecy" is actually a prophecy that comes true because it influenced people to make it true. It would be more like a prophecy that says, "Some day Israel will be a sovereign state again," which comes true only after people (who knew about the prophecy) worked their butts off to intentionally make the prophecy true.
What you've described may be closer to postdiction, or foretelling after the event, where you re-interpret a prophecy to predict an event after the event has happened.
qm 2 years, 5 months ago
"...but the destruction of the symbols that are significant for you is more poignant than the symbols of those that are foreign."
And that is how you nullified the rest of this article in one clause. Bravo.
Christians really need to stop whining about how unfairly targeted they are. It's still the religion of the majority of U.S. citizens. No one talks about genocide against them (like some do with Jews and Muslims); no one tries to limit their rights (like some do with Muslims); no one really does ANYTHING to them except question their beliefs. How traumatizing. I respect your right to believe what you want, but the gritching and moaning really grates on people's nerves. You're the largest religion in the U.S.; you're not being persecuted. Get over it.
Also, from what I understand, the Mayans of old only believed that a new cycle would start in 2012 (they viewed history as cyclical rather than linear). There's no prophecy, no apocalypse, maybe some natural disasters but nothing world ending. Some people saw it, misunderstood or tweaked the actual details, and created the apocalypse version of 2012 that has spread high and low. We Westerners just like a good end of the world story, apparently.