Movies saying that Atheism is true.
- Thread starter IamQ
- Start date
Recommended Videos
But isn't the 'God' of the books suppost to be just the first angel rather than a god and that there are not gods?Asita said:
Anywho OT: All the ones I can think of have been said. Most films that have come from novels that have had the theme of 'there is no god' are usually toned down on film and made to be much more ambigus.
Sorry, I didn't read through every post in this thread, but I've been thinking on this since Movie Bob posted his rant on movie stereotypes. A couple of his points talked about atheism in movies and they got me thinking about how we don't even notice it anymore because we see it as just normal instead of preachy.
The last movie I watched was Source Code. After reading Bob's post, I realized that this movie broke three of the stereotypes he complained about, two of those were religious in nature. Specifically, a character has a near death experience; there is no tunnel, no light, no vision telling him their is a plan, just empty nothingness before he awakes. This character is given another chance at life and he decides to live it out.
The difficulty in finding an "atheist movie" is that atheism is a belief there is no evidence of divine intervention. The atheist does not need to point out every time there is a lack of evidence of God because that is all times in his/her mind. To find atheist movies, look for scenes where a lack of God is conspicuous or auspicious. Disaster/apocalyptic movies, war movies, horror movies all do a decent job at leaving the viewer feeling abandon by any supreme being that might have helped.
Another thing to look for would be movies that give a definite alternative to God. Avatar comes quickly to mind. There, the planet takes the place of God. Beyond that, James Cameron throws the idea at us that we "already killed [our] Earth Mother." This is only one of many movies that suggest that the Christian God should be abandoned to the worship of nature, money, entertainment, government, etc.
The last movie I watched was Source Code. After reading Bob's post, I realized that this movie broke three of the stereotypes he complained about, two of those were religious in nature. Specifically, a character has a near death experience; there is no tunnel, no light, no vision telling him their is a plan, just empty nothingness before he awakes. This character is given another chance at life and he decides to live it out.
The difficulty in finding an "atheist movie" is that atheism is a belief there is no evidence of divine intervention. The atheist does not need to point out every time there is a lack of evidence of God because that is all times in his/her mind. To find atheist movies, look for scenes where a lack of God is conspicuous or auspicious. Disaster/apocalyptic movies, war movies, horror movies all do a decent job at leaving the viewer feeling abandon by any supreme being that might have helped.
Another thing to look for would be movies that give a definite alternative to God. Avatar comes quickly to mind. There, the planet takes the place of God. Beyond that, James Cameron throws the idea at us that we "already killed [our] Earth Mother." This is only one of many movies that suggest that the Christian God should be abandoned to the worship of nature, money, entertainment, government, etc.
I tend towards the 'not mutually exclusive route' myself, though that's probably due in part to how I've never understood how the faiths using angels managed to convince themselves that they were monotheistic considering that they usually present angels as what any other religion would have considered lesser deities...but that's a rant for another time. My main reason for identifying the series as I do is that within the books the various religious figures are shown to unequivocably exist. The Authority? He's there. Rebellion of heaven? Led by Xaphania (and as Napoleon famously pointed out, the victors write the history books). Metatron? Orignally a man called Enock. As I said earlier in the thread, the question in the books is never whether these beings exist, but whether they are worthy of the worship bestowed upon them.DSQ said:
Carboncrown said:
only if you think "Sorry for the inconvenience" is what you'ld call a serious approach.
Well the film was very much an aetheist POV while the book was pretty much the opposite.ravensheart18 said:
In the film, the signal was from another intelligence (not God) and in the book there was a signal from the Creator hidden in Pi.
In the film it was everybody else who was into God and the main character was an atheist and the only half mention of faith from the main character is when she's travelling through space and says "They should have sent a poet."
And then the alien was her dad.
It's open to interpretation. I interpret it as an atheist philosophy.
The strict definition of "atheist" is someone who doesn't accept the existence of god(s). The more common, broader definition is someone who doesn't accept the supernatural/paranormal without evidence (at which point it becomes natural/normal). That still leaves a wide array of ethical ideologies atheists can subscribe to.
Soviet Communism was an officially atheistic ideology, so by definition any film that was produced by the Soviet Union is atheist.
Objectivism is an atheist ideology, so The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are atheist films.
But most Western atheists who openly identify as atheists are probably secular humanists. And what is there to say about that? Any film that promotes people being decent to each other without appeals to gods or religious authorities is essentially a secular humanist film.
More common are films that explicitly critique religion, but don't necessary take on the existence of god(s). It's much easier and more effective to demonstrate that God is irrelevant or his servants deluded or dangerous than to disprove a non-falsifiable premise. A more recent version of this might include Kingdom of Heaven, where a bunch of secular humanists on both sides of the Third Crusade try to maintain peace and honour in the midst of all the violently ignorant theists around them.
Soviet Communism was an officially atheistic ideology, so by definition any film that was produced by the Soviet Union is atheist.
Objectivism is an atheist ideology, so The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are atheist films.
But most Western atheists who openly identify as atheists are probably secular humanists. And what is there to say about that? Any film that promotes people being decent to each other without appeals to gods or religious authorities is essentially a secular humanist film.
More common are films that explicitly critique religion, but don't necessary take on the existence of god(s). It's much easier and more effective to demonstrate that God is irrelevant or his servants deluded or dangerous than to disprove a non-falsifiable premise. A more recent version of this might include Kingdom of Heaven, where a bunch of secular humanists on both sides of the Third Crusade try to maintain peace and honour in the midst of all the violently ignorant theists around them.
Great list. I'd add Kurosawa's Rashomon to films that critique religion. At the very end of the film, having sat through 2 hours of human deception, treachery, and self-serving sycophancy, the three men sheltering at the ruined temple discover an abandoned baby. The amoral merchant steals the baby's blanket (its only possession), reasoning that it will be dead soon. The Buddhist monk can only bemoan the sinful and depraved nature of humanity. But the poor woodcutter takes pity on the child and takes it home, even though he already has half a dozen of his own to feed. It's practically a socialist message: the capitalist preys on his fellow man and the cleric offers only despair and platitudes, while the labourer helps out the downtrodden despite his own destitution.karamazovnew said:
Not sure I agree. I'd say Dr. Manhattan basically becomes God by the end of the series.Custard_Angel said:
You are most definitely wrong and I shall correct you. There are some creationists who believe this as well as believe the earth is 5000 years old.Wait...What said:
Now this is an extreme minority of them. No where in the bible does it say that dinosaurs didn't exist. It also doesn't give a date for the creation of the earth and actually gives no basis for determining the age of the earth. In order for some extreme creationists to come to this end you have to make some pretty big assumptions that are not explicitly stated in the bible.
I have met hundreds of Christians in my life and I have only met one person who believes that there were no dinosaurs and the earth is only 5000 years old.
Atheism is not believing in God to put into a sentence and both of these franchises do not have gods of any true kind and the force serves as an afterlife in Star Wars or by ascension in Star Gate. None of this is true a particular belief or religion(It could be argued it is in Star Wars though). So by having no true God or deity and basically saying they are real it does have an atheist slant.Jacob.pederson said:Let me just say, that as an atheist, I don't see StarGate or Starwars to be atheist shows at all. Both feature religion prominently. Stargate, in the form of ascension, and Star Wars with its all powerful forceGlademaster said:
Perhaps not an atheist show, but Mal from Firefly regularly shows open disdain for religion.
Also, Bones, stars an openly atheist character, although the writers often like to teach her a "lesson."
It's not really possible to prove there is no God (absence of proof is not proof of absence). So the closest possible would be a movie that shows that there is some kind of God but it's so far away from any religion's concept of what God is that its existance means God as we know God doesn't exist.
None come to mind.
None come to mind.
I tend to disagree, while not the best movie I have seen it was still decnent and had a new concept (which is more than you can say about most movies nowadays). the movie makes you think what would happen if no one ever lied.OutrageousEmu said:
Also what is there to think about? if no one told you about god, would you believe there was one? ^^
Well, with religious movies, it is because they give the audience hope and are uplifting. To make a movie with the entire point that there isn't a god, it isn't making anyone's day, or helping them. It becomes the director just hating for the sake of hating. I can understand if a character is broken, feeling that hope will come, that god will help them, but they don't do anything to help themselves and another character would tell them to get off their ass, god or no god. Would make for an interesting scene, but nothing to put millions of dollars into.
And as far as the whole His Dark Materials trilogy goes, when I read it, I didn't feel it was as atheist as it was just telling a story. Do you have an interesting concept? Go for it, it doesn't necessarily HAVE to mean anything deep and profound. The concept that god is THE GREAT TRUTH ANSWER and whatnot, made for the character in the book to have a great cover for what he really was. It twisted belief in a form that even if you haven't read the bible (I haven't) you understand the concept fully and it was interesting. I don't see why christians had to boycott the movie, I mean, its fiction. Science fiction is fiction too. Movies are interesting when they challenge a way of thinking, or at the very least, tell a story with a few things that you may not have considered before. Even people that love the country they live in can enjoy a movie where it becomes totally evil and corrupt. No reason to get so defensive about a fictional story.
And as far as the whole His Dark Materials trilogy goes, when I read it, I didn't feel it was as atheist as it was just telling a story. Do you have an interesting concept? Go for it, it doesn't necessarily HAVE to mean anything deep and profound. The concept that god is THE GREAT TRUTH ANSWER and whatnot, made for the character in the book to have a great cover for what he really was. It twisted belief in a form that even if you haven't read the bible (I haven't) you understand the concept fully and it was interesting. I don't see why christians had to boycott the movie, I mean, its fiction. Science fiction is fiction too. Movies are interesting when they challenge a way of thinking, or at the very least, tell a story with a few things that you may not have considered before. Even people that love the country they live in can enjoy a movie where it becomes totally evil and corrupt. No reason to get so defensive about a fictional story.
Damn I would want watch your version. That would be pretty cool. Love the thought you put into it.OutrageousEmu said:
Yes, there's a few. 'Sunshine' filrts with the idea, even having a character whose insanity manifests as religious fundamentalism. 'Watchmen', both the book and film, frequently offer atheistic perspectives on the world, denying religion and implicitly siding with atheism. Monty Python's 'The Life of Brian' never explicitly denies the existence of God, but it mocks organised religion, dogma and zeal. 'Paul', surprisingly, has a whole sub plot thing about evolution vs creationism, and enlightenment through knowledge etc. Can't think of anymore at the moment.
'I don't think there is a god, Janey. If there is, i'm not him' - Dr Manhattan.Falseprophet said:
Just because a book/movie has god as a character, it doesn't mean the material isn't atheistic. Dr Manhattan is actually a critique of the notion of gods. Not only is he a product and embodiment of science, his immortality and elevated perspective has left him completely detatched from humanity, unlike the gods of the abrahamic religions, who are expected to care about the human race. He sees people as a real god might, as trivial curiosities. To put it as Adrian Veidt did, 'which do you prefer, red ants or black ants?'