Caught Apocalypto last night...

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by YOhio

Considering your distaste for the film, you will be pleased to know that when the movie came out, the brother of the Deseret Morning News new editor, Congressman Chris Cannon, said something to the effect that every Utahn should watch the Patriot. He caught a lot of heat for that couragous statement because it was rated R.

My former bishop was in the 2nd Quorum of the Seventy, and he was assigned to South America somewhere. We got their email updates, and in one of them, he talked about seeing the Patriot (outside the US, so no MPAA rating) and recommended it as a "must see" movie. I'm sure he wasn't aware of the R rating in the states.

So, I once had a General Authority recommend that I see a rated R movie.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

I would avoid asking this question of the "Moors."

The Moors are among the good guys. The term "Moors" generally refers to the Islamic people who conquered and occupied Spain for over 600 years in the Middle Ages. The Moors valued educatation and were tolerant of Jews and Christians, although they required a "heresy tax" of those that did not convert. Many historians credit them for helping to save Western Civilization because they copied and preserved mountains of writings from the ancient Greeks and Romans about everything from making glass and medicine to philosphy and epic poetry. During the Rennaisance these were discovered and re-translated into the European tongues that had emerged. Their mosques are to this day some of the most beautiful buildings in the history of the world.

The golden age of the Moors ended with Christianity's successful reconquest of Spain. Still the Moors' contribution to Spanish and larger Western culture was immense. With the Christian "reconquista" came a lot of bad stuff like the inquisition.

Some historians from the Nineteenth Century used the Moors as a basis for arguing that Islam is a more nuanced and tolerant and intellecutual religion than Christianity. Nobody claims that anymore. It was more fashionable among intellectuals to attack Christianity then than even now. What the 19th century historians overlooked was that it was the Greek influence over Moorish culture that gave it many of these admirable traits. They came from lands, like Judea, once conquered and settled by Alexander, and during much of the time that the Moors controlled Spain Byzantium was a super power. Thus the Moors' achievements are in a sense another manifestation of the primacy of Greco-Roman culture which is the foundation for our own.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

The Moors are among the good guys. The term "Moors" generally refers to the Islamic people who conquered and occupied Spain for over 600 years in the Middle Ages. The Moors valued educatation and were tolerant of Jews and Christians, although they required a "heresy tax" of those that did not convert. Many historians credit them for helping to save Western Civilization because they copied and preserved mountains of writings from the ancient Greeks and Romans about everything from making glass and medicine to philosphy and epic poetry. During the Rennaisance these were discovered and re-translated into the European tongues that had emerged. Their mosques are to this day some of the most beautiful buildings in the history of the world.

The golden age of the Moors ended with Christianity's successful reconquest of Spain. Still the Moors' contribution to Spanish and larger Western culture was immense. With the Christian "reconquista" came a lot of bad stuff like the inquisition.

Some historians from the Nineteenth Century used the Moors as a basis for arguing that Islam is a more nuanced and tolerant and intellecutual religion than Christianity. Nobody claims that anymore. It was more fashionable to attack Christianity then than even now among intellectuals. What the old historians overlooked was that it was the Greek influence over Moorish culture that gave it many of these admirable traits. They came from lands, like Judea, once conquered and settled by Alexander, and during much of the time that the Moors controlled Spain Byzantium was a super power. Thus the Moors' achievements are in a sense another manifestation of the primacy of Greco-Roman culture which is the foundation for our own.

SU, I think you mean the moops.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

SU, I think you mean the moops.

Oh, was it the moops who El Cid fought? Pardon me.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Oh, was it the moops who El Cid fought? Pardon me.

See, if you had a television you'd recognize the obvious Seinfeld allusion.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

See, if you had a television you'd recognize the obvious Seinfeld allusion.

You got me on that one. I'm clueless.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

I would avoid asking this question of the "Moors."

Your version doesn't really make for a good movie, though, does it?

Yes, one must always beware the moors.

Freaking lycanthropes have ruined vacations for so many people.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

My primary problem was the type of thing that Gibson's films have taken a lot of heat for lately, and I identified it way back when it came out. His demonization of the British was outlandish and unhistorical. He portrayed them as much like Nazis. There's no evidence they did anything like herd civilians including children into a church, nailed the doors shut and set it on fire. The British colonization of America was characterized by benighn neglect. They also taught us about representative government. There's a strong case to be made that all they wanted was the American colonies to pay their fair share of winning the French and Indian war, for the substantial infrastructure the British contributed, and to keeping the shipping lanes safe. If anything they fought the war with insufficient brutality if they planned to win it. There's nothing wrong with poetic license. Ben-Hur is one of my favorite movies all time. But I think in a historical epic something like the essential moral character of the villain country needs to be defensible from a historical perspective. Across the arc of world history the British are by and large among history's foremost "good guys." Gibson's hatreds run deep and this movie was a manifestataion of a vein of such hatred.

Also, I thought the movie was poorly written. A lot of silly, cheesy modern turns of phrases like, "Sounds good!"

Gotta agree with SU on this one. It is almost embarrassing to watch it with the kids given its lack of historical veracity and over-the-top portrayal of British atrocities.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

SU, I think you mean the moops.

Bubble boy!

While SU is writing his novels on midieval history I am home laughing at George Castanza.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I thought Patriot was a fine movie. Plus, after watching it, I don't need to read books (ugh) about the Revolutionary War. Considering your distaste for the film, you will be pleased to know that when the movie came out, the brother of the Deseret Morning News new editor, Congressman Chris Cannon, said something to the effect that every Utahn should watch the Patriot. He caught a lot of heat for that couragous statement because it was rated R.

Ah yes, this is the kind of great courage and leadership we can expect from Chris Cannon. Go on record to endorse the cheesiest film ever made by Mel Gibson.

Kind of sad that he replaced Bill Orton.