Posted by fainelli at spider-tk021.proxy.aol.com on December 23, 1999 at 02:04:53:
In Reply to: Dogma posted by fainelli on December 22, 1999 at 02:59:42:
There are several challenges to my criticism of dogma embodied in this and other responses. I will answer each of them one by one.
1. You focus on the pejorative segments of the film. Dogma actually inspires people to renew their spirituality.
It is true that the universe of Dogma borrows several Christian themes. Jesus is acknowledged, as well as the existence of god himself. But Instead of a serious artistic treatment of theology, Mr. Smith resorts to the trademarks which have made him successful- fast dialogue, incessent profanity, and course humor. He doesn't weave his blasphemy subtley. On the contrary, the only way he can get his venemous message across is by inserting diatribes about Catholicism into the mouths of his foul-mouthed characters, the tell-tale sign of a bad writer. If anyone is inspired by this drivel, it's because they are so starved for a meaningful film about religion. I'm angry that an intelligent director who really understands Catholicism, even if doubting some of its tenets, didn't come forward to make a penetrating film. And regardless of the film's spiritual themes, Mr. Smith's outright condemnation of Catholicism, in the abusive rantings of the muse, treat Catholicism like a fool's conspiricy. He gives nothing more than a pat dismissal of the Church, an institution which has retained some of the most brilliant men and women in history. These rants discourage intelligent thinking more than anything else.
2. Dogma encourages people to keep an open mind, as do I.
Dogma toys with many outlandish ideas, clearly intended as farce, but the film consistently pounds on the church and the implication is unmistakable: Catholicism is an outdated, outmoded, stale philosophy promulgated by men out of touch with modern society. The entire plot revolves around a "loophole" created by a self-aggrandizing priest who hasn't a clue about theology. Every Catholic in the film, even the nun, is confused about the grounds for his/her faith. The muse assassinates the Church in her diatribe, accusing the Vatican of conspiricy and of torturing people out of their faith. All the attacks are made, not with the sharpness of an intelligent skeptic, but with the ugly bluntness of a bigot. So what if Mr. Smith was once Catholic. It is patently obvious in the film that he has grown to despise his former beliefs. America has a long history of hostility toward Catholics which has manifested in discrimination, papal conspiricy theories, and venemous propoganda like this film. Dogma shamelessly tugs at those old hatreds.
3. Mr.Smith is just a man trying to come to grips with his spiritual identity and he expresses himself through this film. What's wrong with that?
While expressing his warped view of Christianity, Mr. Smith singles out Catholicism and bashes away like a vandel. The church has no shortage of critics, but Mr. Smith's relentless assault on Catholicism betrays the workings of a hateful mind. In the film, Catholocism is an unmitigated evil, whose self-serving leaders lie to the people and spread a dogma that threatens to destroy the entire universe. This isn't intelligent satire- it's blunt-minded bigotry.