Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri

[dUSt]

So, I'm trying to get my money's worth for my $9.95/month MoviePass card. hahaha

I went to see "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri" last night. Besides one scene, an excellent movie. The scene in question is when the main character gives a dialogue relating Catholic priests to the Crips and Bloods gangs, saying every priest is responsible for the rape of children based on the fact they are in the same "gang". Sadly, this is the only scene which got an audible applause in the theater I was in. I guess some people really like stupidly ridiculous logic.

What caught my eye was during an opening scene a character was reading from a book by Catholic author Flannery O'Connor. I Googled, and apparently the director is a big fan and influenced a lot by her work. It shows in this movie.

Anyway--it's sad that that one scene had to ruin an otherwise brilliant film.

 

[havok579257]

well i wont be seeing this movie now.  i am tired of people thinking its so cool to run down God's church

[CatherineM]

Ditto

[Era Might]

If priests aren't responsible for the rape of children, who is? Jesus denounced the chief priests and scribes and pharisees and lawyers without distinction. I don't think it's a reason to avoid a good movie.

"Woe to you lawyers also! for you load men with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.  Woe to you! for you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and consent to the deeds of your fathers; for they killed them, and you build their tombs.  Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, `I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,' that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it shall be required of this generation. Woe to you lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge; you did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering." As he went away from there, the scribes and the Pharisees began to press him hard, and to provoke him to speak of many things, lying in wait for him, to catch at something he might say. 

--Luke 11:46-54

[Not A Mallard]

It's not a movie I'd rush out to see anyway, but a Catholic critic I follow really appreciated it

https://catholiccinephile.wordpress.com/2017/11/25/three-billboards-outside-ebbing-missouri/

Edited December 6, 2017 by Not A Mallard

[havok579257]

15 minutes ago, Era Might said:

If priests aren't responsible for the rape of children, who is? Jesus denounced the chief priests and scribes and pharisees and lawyers without distinction. I don't think it's a reason to avoid a good movie.

"Woe to you lawyers also! for you load men with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.  Woe to you! for you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and consent to the deeds of your fathers; for they killed them, and you build their tombs.  Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, `I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,' that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it shall be required of this generation. Woe to you lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge; you did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering." As he went away from there, the scribes and the Pharisees began to press him hard, and to provoke him to speak of many things, lying in wait for him, to catch at something he might say. 

--Luke 11:46-54

if a movie insults blacks, women, homosexuals, the lgbtuiadistvx.... agenda or any other group of people they go nuts and refuse to see it and demand it be removed from theaters. although whenever there is a movie that insults the catholic church people always say, so what, just go see it, its a good movie.  your being to sensitive about your faith.  its just a movie, so if they insult your faith who cares as long as its a good movie.  i am tired of listening to this people who make excuses for the last acceptable bigotry... Christianity. 

 

 also every priest is not responsible for the rape of children just as all black people are no responsible for the BLM extremists and all whites are not responsible for the KKK.

[dUSt]

I wonder if the director of this movie thinks that all movie producers are sexual predators like Harvey Weinstein since they are culpable via joining the producer "gang".

[Era Might]

13 minutes ago, havok579257 said:

if a movie insults blacks, women, homosexuals, the lgbtuiadistvx.... agenda or any other group of people they go nuts and refuse to see it and demand it be removed from theaters. although whenever there is a movie that insults the catholic church people always say, so what, just go see it, its a good movie.  your being to sensitive about your faith.  its just a movie, so if they insult your faith who cares as long as its a good movie.  i am tired of listening to this people who make excuses for the last acceptable bigotry... Christianity. 

 

 also every priest is not responsible for the rape of children just as all black people are no responsible for the BLM extremists and all whites are not responsible for the KKK.

Flannery O'Connor used the N-word in her stories. Have you ever seen Blazing Saddles? Context, context.

If you're easily offended by characters saying stuff you don't like, don't ever read Shakespeare or most literature, period. The idea that a movie is supposed to be a wholesome family affair is 1950s propaganda.

[dominicansoul]

I guess Jesus and the apostles were responsible for Judas hanging himself

[havok579257]

37 minutes ago, Era Might said:

Flannery O'Connor used the N-word in her stories. Have you ever seen Blazing Saddles? Context, context.

If you're easily offended by characters saying stuff you don't like, don't ever read Shakespeare or most literature, period. The idea that a movie is supposed to be a wholesome family affair is 1950s propaganda.

blazing saddles was not using the n-word to denigrate the black audience.  this attack on priests and the catholic church and was used to denigrate them.

 

i always like the comments about if your so easily offended blah, blah, blah.  What do you think God thinks?  Seriously?  Do you think he is laughing at the joke?  Do you think its ok when people denigrate  God's church?  It always amazes me how people will justify things that they like even though it offends God.   

[Era Might]

3 minutes ago, havok579257 said:

blazing saddles was not using the n-word to denigrate the black audience.  this attack on priests and the catholic church and was used to denigrate them.

 

i always like the comments about if your so easily offended blah, blah, blah.  What do you think God thinks?  Seriously?  Do you think he is laughing at the joke?  Do you think its ok when people denigrate  God's church?  It always amazes me how people will justify things that they like even though it offends God.   

You're assuming that what a character says is the meaning of a movie or story. Do you think that people aren't viscerally angry at the church? And why shouldn't they be? It's just a character who reflects reality. The church (and by that, I mean the priesthood) has done more damage to the world than this movie ever will. God himself condemned whole groups of his own people precisely because if judgment is to begin, let it begin with the house of God. Yes, the whole church stands condemned, and let it always be so. Does the church want to protect its respectability in the culture, or is it interested in truth and righteousness?

[havok579257]

2 minutes ago, Era Might said:

You're assuming that what a character says is the meaning of a movie or story. Do you think that people aren't viscerally angry at the church? And why shouldn't they be? It's just a character who reflects reality. The church (and by that, I mean the priesthood) has done more damage to the world than this movie ever will. God himself condemned whole groups of his own people precisely because if judgment is to begin, let it begin with the house of God. Yes, the whole church stands condemned, and let it always be so. Does the church want to protect its respectability in the culture, or is it interested in truth and righteousness?

the priesthood has done more good for the world than any more ever could a billion times over.  i also assume correctly that what this character says comes from the writers which means it is a view point they hold.  so again, why should i support or better yet, you support a film which insults God's church?  its their a valid reason that insulting God's church is ok as long as the movie is good?  i would love to hear the rationale for that one.

 

there were less than 1% of priests who did these things.  but sure, let's condemn the whole lot of them. 

 

who's truth and righteousness? anti catholic's? extreme liberals? protestants? homosexual with their agenda? Catholics who think they know better than 2000 years of history?  cause the church is not about truth and righteousness for those agenda's if that's what you mean.  although if if your talking about God's truth and righteousness, its been doing that for 2000 years.

[cruciatacara]

There may have been less than 1% who actually did abuse children, but there were just as many who covered it up and moved priests around, which allowed them to continue their pedophilia. And these people were the leaders of the Church.

I think if a character in a movie says something like this, it is because the crime (and sin) of this horror hits deep at the soul and cries out for some kind of response. Even Jesus condemned those who hurt the 'little ones'. 

While it is true that the whole Church should not be condemned for the evils of some (including those who covered it up), it should accept total responsibility for allowing such things to occur - especially as it has always presented itself as the 'moral authority'  and because it was also the spiritual authority of millions, demanding a higher level of behavior from it. The Church collectively should feel guilt that such evil was allowed to continue for decades (and perhaps longer) simply because of the mystique of the priest and the total control of the hierarchy over people's lives. We, as Catholics, should feel bad about this. We should also want to atone and make reparation, even if only spiritually through our prayers and attitudes.

It's no good getting mad at people for reacting in a totally visceral way to the abuse of thousands of children. If this were done by another group, we would be the first to condemn them. Accepting responsibility is the first step to ensuring that it never happens again. 

Not to be able to criticize the church for the wrongs it does (while also lauding the good it does), puts us back again at the time when priests and the Church could do no wrong - setting the scene for such behavior to happen again.  The Church did wrong. Acknowledge it, accept the repercussions of people's feelings and attitudes about it, and then do everything in your power to make sure it never happens again. Then  maybe people will start trusting the Church again. But this won't happen if we pretend that more than just those priests who actually committed the offences were involved or culpable.

Criticism leads to self-reflection and hopefully, change where necessary.

As for  those arguments that other groups don't hold their members accountable for what a few have done - this too is wrong. The film industry is sick, and that is why so many abuses occurred, even though (of course) not all in the film industry did them - there was an atmosphere that allowed it to happen. The same goes for many organizations where power is great. And yes, if you are a member of a gang that does evil, you are partially responsible for that evil even if you didn't commit the crime. It is only common sense.

 

Edited December 7, 2017 by cruciatacara

[dominicansoul]

I tend to agree when someone who despises the Church starts up on the pedo scandal and tries their best to get under my skin about it.  They don't know what to say when I tell them, "I agree with you."  

 

We deserve all the criticism.  But we also reserve the right to avoid such criticism especially from Hollywood.  They cover up even worse cases, and I'm sure the percentage of child abuse, sexual harrassment, rapes and other ungodly happenings is sooooooooo much more scandalous.  They've only uncovered the surface with Weinstein's outing.   I wouldn't doubt they are involved in sex slavery and drug trafficking as well.   For them to act all high and mighty and point fingers is laughable.  

Edited December 7, 2017 by dominicansoul

[Era Might]

1 hour ago, dominicansoul said:

I tend to agree when someone who despises the Church starts up on the pedo scandal and tries their best to get under my skin about it.  They don't know what to say when I tell them, "I agree with you."  

 

We deserve all the criticism.  But we also reserve the right to avoid such criticism especially from Hollywood.  They cover up even worse cases, and I'm sure the percentage of child abuse, sexual harrassment, rapes and other ungodly happenings is sooooooooo much more scandalous.  They've only uncovered the surface with Weinstein's outing.   I wouldn't doubt they are involved in sex slavery and drug trafficking as well.   For them to act all high and mighty and point fingers is laughable.  

Hollywood isn't an institution, it's an industry of many people with their own interests. If a movie can't have a character who criticizes clergymen, it sure can't  have one who criticizes "Hollywood." Part of what lead to sexual abuse in the priesthood was the idolization of the priesthood as an institution. You didn't questions priests or the church, period. Priests were part of the general propaganda of a well-ordered society. Father knows best, in the church and in the family. Of course, you would have never heard a line like this in a movie in the 1950s, but there's a lot of things you wouldn't have heard. We're seeing the same thing now with Harvey Weinstein...he had a network of protection, because he was a powerful name in Hollywood, and all the little people had to keep silent or they would face his wrath. What happened in the Catholic church wasn't just some strange phenomenon of 1% of people. It was part of a deep institutional corruption, careerism, power dynamics. Priests held real power over millions of people, millions of dollars, prime real estate, and (in the eyes of Catholics) he held power over their eternal salvation. That idolization of the priesthood was shattered, hopefully forever, or maybe it hasn't been...priests are still professional clergymen. A line like this in a movie like this is GOOD for the church, because the church needs to break its own worship of itself. People in the real world don't live in theological bubbles where they ponder the abstract "honor" of the church. People live in real worlds, they still talk to this day about getting cracked on the knuckles by nuns and how you didn't question the church. Dante put Popes in his circles of hell...should we not read Dante because he besmirched the sacred office of the papacy? Taking offense at one line in a movie does nothing to improve the church, because the church has squandered any credibility it had. It has nobody to blame but itself, and it's time for the church to speak frankly about itself, and not hide behind a culture war and try to stake its claim as another oppressed victim. This is what makes Flannery O'Connor's stories so powerful, she didn't write about some respectable world. She wrote about gimps and freaks and snake oil salesmen and self-righteous Christians. The church needs more of that, not hagiography.