What if Christianity is right after all?
>That's what I found myself pondering as the credits rolled at the end of Terrence Malick's breathtaking new film, Knight of Cups.
>Not necessarily the Christianity of the trinity and the resurrection. Or its institutions and doctrines. Or literal readings of supposedly inerrant scriptures. But the Christian anthropology that was embedded in Western civilization for the better part of two millennia, before a post-Christian secular worldview began to supplant it roughly two centuries ago.
>What does classical Christianity teach about human beings? That we are exiles, torn between competing and conflicting ends, at once prone to absorption in the world and its ways — and drawn beyond it, to something higher. That we are strangers to ourselves, unsure of our own motives, susceptible to self-delusion and self-subversion. That self-giving love, and not simple happiness, is our end — and that the path to reaching it runs through self-sacrifice and suffering.
>In a world that encourages us to deny so many of these precepts; in a culture that continually devises new and more seductive ways to distract us from thoughts of any end beyond the satisfaction of worldly desires; in a film industry that devotes vast resources and stupefying technological prowess to fashioning dazzling spectacles that overwhelm the senses but say nothing to the soul — in 2016 America it is astonishing that Terrence Malick has made a movie that offers its audience a compelling vision of an emphatically Christian outlook on reality.
>Knight of Cups explores similar theological terrain while highlighting the temptations and distractions that lead us astray during our journey through life.
Do you think he's right, /tv/? Is it a culturally Christian film? It would certainly explain why the faggy /co/cksuckers on this board hated it
http://theweek.com/articles/615904/terrence-malicks-profoundly-christian-vision
>>67811500
Sure
>>67811500
>It's not Christian in the sense that it's 'Christian' but it's still Christian.
Sounds like dude's projecting desu.
that's not christianity, just vague spiritual feelings.
>>67811603
Wait, what...?
desu Tbh tBh tbH DESU
Tee Bee Haych is filtered to desu...?
>>67811500
Is it true that Dan Harmon turns up randomly in one scene?
I thought that the Exotic Marigold Hotel was referencing the legend of St. Thomas in India, because each character was experiencing a crisis related to Doubt.
>>67811693
Yes
thank you malick
it truly is the knight of cups
>>67812223
Is that Bernie Sanders?
>>67811500
haven't seen the movie but this sounds a lot like what BvS does as well with how it christianity and death/rising myths
terry studied hegel, and this guy studied hegel as well. my grasp of BvS which i've been posting a lot here is in part influenced by this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C16eiQH06RE
>>67811603
Bale?
Perhaps no film in the history of cinema follows the movement of memory as faithfully, as passionately, or as profoundly as Terrence Malick’s new film, “Knight of Cups.” It’s an instant classic in several genres—the confessional, the inside-Hollywood story, the Dantesque midlife-crisis drama, the religious quest, the romantic struggle, the sexual reverie, the family melodrama—because the protagonist’s life, like most people’s lives, involves intertwined strains of activity that don’t just overlap but are inseparable from each other. The movie runs less than two hours and its focus is intimate, but its span seems enormous—not least because Malick has made a character who’s something of an alter ego, and he endows that character with an artistic identity and imagination as vast and as vital as his own.
As such, “Knight of Cups” is one of the great recent bursts of cinematic artistry, a carnival of images and sounds that have a sensual beauty, of light and movement, of gesture and inflection, rarely matched in any movie that isn’t Malick’s own.
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/terrence-malicks-knight-of-cups-challenges-hollywood-to-do-better
>>67812223
Fucking white people.
>>67812280
Well it aint called Knights of Cuck for no reason
>>67812281
BvS simply offers Christian imagery without any attempt at discourse, as if allusions to a deeper meaning through visuals will automatically give the movie subtext and depth. It's the definition of pretentious.
>implying it was explicitly Christian
It's a gnostic meditation if anything
>>67812223
>That bitch in the green dress doing t-rex arms
Do cracker ass crackers actually do this?
>>67812281
>myths
Ok Adullah
>>67812281
Kill yourself pleb
Never compare art like this to videogame movies like BvS
>>67812357
Fuck off with this inauthentic critic
>>67811500
>Not necessarily the Christianity of the trinity and the resurrection
So basically not Christianity at all
![Knight.of.Cups.2015.1080p.H264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.09.12_[2015.12.31_01.11.57].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/jUYBo6Q.jpg "Knight.of.Cups.2015.1080p.H264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.09.12_[2015.12.31_01.11.57].jpg")
>>67811693
Joe Lo Truglio too
>>67812414
its just people having fun
I've been waiting for a cinema screening to watch this but I'm finding it difficult to hold out. Some of this is shot digitally right? How does it look?
>>67812491
lel that's Harmon's ex wife that cuck'd him, he must be happy Malick recorded them together with a bunch of dudes she probably let run a train on her for posterity.
>>67812400
fair, but what happens in the movie?
exactly what is described by zizek in the video i posted
>anxiety of big terrifying enigmatic other
>tension resolved through love
>what dies on the cross is precisely the guarantee of the big other
>what dies on the cross is the idea god that guarantees meaning
>what dies in the movie is the idea itself of a savior god
the fact that it does this through a product of pop culture is actually very consistent
I really liked this movie. I can't explain why, I hardly ever watch art movies. Many of the scenes felt like they were somehow connected to me despite me never having experienced anything like the events of the film.
>>67811500
Knight of cups is precisely about the opposite though.
Not a single christian thing to it.
IN fact it's the life of someone far away from christianity and so far gone that he has no chance of redemption.
That's why no matter what he decides to do, he always ends up living the same fucked up things over and over and over again.
>>67812621
But how is that in any way intelligent? You take a powerful figure and do a Christ-like death by the numbers but it means nothing. There's no worthwhile context. If anything it's immediately shit on when superman is treated as a soldier in death. That simply highlights that Superman died so that life may go on and not for som ideology or message. Superman is not slain by judgement, Doomsday is an animal, mute like a force of nature and Superman's death is unnecessary when Wonder Woman could have handled the spear without harm. There's no allegory or message to the story, just imagery cribbed from pietas
>>67812425
>inauthentic
cuute
>>67812945
i never made the claim that it is intelligent, my claim is that it sounds like the movies have similar gestures in how they treat christian ideas
superman died to actualize the ideal of hope externally, shown explicitly through bruce wayne who becomes an apostle of hope, the movie logo tells us this as well
doomsday represents all the doubt fear and cynicism in the face of hope, while also being what you described, he's all of it
wonder woman never knew about the spear, and at the precise moment superman get's the spear she's fighting the beast, she is even shown as enjoying the fight, superman is the one who leaves the fight to save lois and get the spear
how doomsday and superman kill each other is a visual ouroboros, signaling the negation of the conflict and the new thesis of a hope external to superman that can be held in common, this is signified through both bruce and through 'if you seek his monument, look around'
i take the movie's use of cultural art as a move to try to trigger as much free association as it possibly can
>>67813159
Superman, if anything, is an antichrist figure. A false God.
For all the memeing, I doubt most people saw a single film by him
>go check out when it's preniering here
>it doesn't
>>67813217
>Superman, if anything, is an antichrist figure. A false God.
yeah, that's the message of the movie as well
literally in the trailer "false god"
my ultimate reading of the movie is that it kills the idea of an external savior god that comes from above. much how like zizek says that jesus' material death is good news, the movie signals that hope is something carried internally by choice
Just finished it, great piece. Few reviewers, or viewers for that matter really get it, but this guy, Brody, sparse others. Hoping that priest guy that reviews films, like A Serious Man, get to this.
>>67813437
>mfw I saw it here a month ago
>mfw it fucking sucked
>>67813635
nice reaction image goober
>>67813724
Same to you, retarded faggot.
>>67813635
your opinoin sucks your a piece of shit
>>67813724
is that an obama phone??
>>67811674
Check out this newfag redditor
>>67813437
>>67813724
>>67813855
>Foreign samefag assburger sperging out when he hasn't even seen the movie
Do us all a favor and end your fucking third world life.
