• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Film
  • DVD
  • Editorial
  • About ScreenFish

ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • Reviews
  • Interviews
  • News
  • OtherFish
  • Podcast
  • Give

sin

The Card Counter – Unforgivable?

September 20, 2021 by Darrel Manson Leave a Comment

Paul Schrader’s The Card Counter is the story of a solitary man hiding from the world. Or more precisely, a man hiding from the sin and guilt that he carries with him.

“William Tell” (Oscar Isaac) plays cards for a living. He’s very good at it.  He knows precisely the advantages the house holds in each game. He counts cards in blackjack (against the rule, but hard to enforce). He stays under the radar by never winning too big and by moving from one small casino to another. He lives in seedy motels. When he checks in, he covers everything with sheets to create a completely featureless world. His life is the personification of Stoicism.

Oscar Isaac stars as William Tell in THE CARD COUNTER, a Focus Features release. Credit: Courtesy of Focus Features / ©2021 Focus Features, LLC

His gambling skills catches the eye of La Linda (Tiffany Haddish), an agent who arranges for backers for gamblers. When the gambler wins, they split the winnings. If they lose, that loss will come out of future winnings. William isn’t moved by the promises of bigger winnings (and the chance of indebtedness). But there is an attraction between William and La Linda. William’s Stoic lifestyle, however, doesn’t have room for romance.

At a law enforcement convention (cops offer a good chance for William to win against them), William wanders into a presentation by Major John Gordo (Willem Dafoe) about a new software program. Also in the room is a teenager, Cirk (Tye Sheridan), who recognizes William and gives him his number to call.

Oscar Isaac stars as William Tell and Tiffany Haddish as La Linda in THE CARD COUNTER, a Focus Features release. Credit: Courtesy of Focus Features / ©2021 Focus Features, LLC

We need some back story at this point. William (PFC William Tillich) served at Abu Ghraib prison during the Iraq War. Under the tutelage of Major Gordo, William tortured the prisoners there. His guilt and moral injury consume him, even after spending eight and a half years in military prison for his actions. Gordo, as a contractor, walked away with no punishment. For William the time in prison was comforting, with its routines and certainties. There he began to read. The book we see him with is Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, a Stoic who became Emperor of Rome. After release, William sets about his life in casinos, perhaps as a way of hiding from his past.

Cirk’s father also served at Abu Ghraib. He ended up killing himself. Cirk is out to avenge his father’s death by kidnapping, torturing, and killing Gordo. He seeks William’s help in this plan, but William knows that such hatred devours the soul and tries to dissuade Cirk. He asks Cirk to travel with him as a sort of protégé. William also calls La Linda to start in on the circuit and make more money. As William moves towards the big payday of the World Series of Poker, Cirk become impatient, and William and La Linda generate some sparks. As is often the case in Schrader films, there will have to be violence before redemption is found.

Oscar Isaac stars as William Tell and Tye Sheridan as Cirk in THE CARD COUNTER, a Focus Features release. Credit: Courtesy of Focus Features / ©2021 Focus Features, LLC

In press notes, Schrader define his genre of films as “they typically involve a man alone in a room wearing a mask, and the mask is his occupation.” William Tell, whether in prison, his spare motel room (his personal prison) or in the midst of a busy casino is such a man alone in a mask. The man behind the mask we only really discover in his thoughts as he journals. Those thoughts are about the weight of the sin that he carries and the lack of the possibility of forgiveness for those sins.

Sin and redemption are key themes in Schrader films. (He directed Hardcore, American Gigolo, and First Reformed. His screenplays also include Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, The Last Temptation of Christ, and The Mosquito Coast.) There are no filmmakers better at dealing with those topics than Schrader.  Schrader’s Calvinist background is often present in his films. It is not explicit in this film, but it is present nonetheless.

Sin here is tied to unspeakable violence. William cannot forgive himself for participating. And we are subtly reminded that he was doing so in the name of America. Perhaps we are willing to look away and move on (without admitting the sin or the need of forgiveness), but the moral weight of what William did is a burden he continues to carry. Here is a man who knows guilt—not as an abstract, but as a daily presence in his life. Even when he was in jail, he was seeking more punishment in a search for expiation. Now he seeks to live behind his mask and be disconnected for the world.

Oscar Isaac stars as William Tell in THE CARD COUNTER, a Focus Features release. Credit: Courtesy of Focus Features / ©2021 Focus Features, LLC

Are William’s sins forgivable? We want to answer yes, but how can we say that without a severe price being paid? And if we see our own culpability in his sins, how can we not wonder the same about our guilt? The real question isn’t about the sin, but how do we find redemption? William sought to survive anonymously, but in the end it will take far more for his life to be redeemed.

The Card Counter is available now on Blu-ray and Digital with the bonus featurette “A High-Stakes World.”

Filed Under: Film, Reviews Tagged With: abu ghraib, Gambling, guilt, Iraq War, Moral Injuries, redemption, sin

Genius Ep. 7 – The Damage of Sin, Visualized   

June 8, 2017 by J. Alan Sharrer Leave a Comment

(National Geographic/Dusan Martincek)

Albert Einstein wasn’t in the greatest mood at the end of the sixth episode of Genius (Nat Geo; Tuesdays 9 PM/ 8 CT).  After seeing his life’s work on general relativity almost discredited due to an error on his part and his wife moving to Zurich with the kids, it’s easy to see why this might be the case. The question was a simple one: how would Albert react?

If you’ve watched the series thus far, the answer is a simple one: Albert simply plowed himself more and more into his work on the theory. He even went so far as to say, “General relativity is everything to me now . . . once I’ve solved it, the rest of life can rush in.” But he receives a surprise when he discovers a mathematician named David Hilbert (Adrian Edmondson) is trying to complete it first and claim credit for himself. Thus begins a rush to complete the computations . . . and Einstein loses the race.  However, Hilbert makes a mistake, allowing Einstein to correctly finish the theory.  There is even word a Nobel Prize could be in Albert’s future . . .

But director James Hawes reveals there are three other issues Einstein has to deal with.  One involves the other members of the Prussian Academy, who are asked by the German Army to sign a war manifesto committing them to helping the cause (see photo above). Everyone signs it . . . except Einstein. This becomes as issue when Fritz Haber (Richard Topol) creates a method to take out opposing forces using poison gas.  Einstein can’t justify Haber’s change of heart and has a falling out with him.  So does Haber’s wife, who kills herself.  Max Planck (Ralph Brown) lamented signing the manifesto when he discovers his son died on the battlefield.

The second issue involves Mileva.  It’s easy to see that Albert cares more about the kids more than her, but he still wants the divorce so he can finally be with his cousin Elsa. Mileva is incredibly stubborn, but she’s still trying to make ends meet for the kids by teaching piano (even though Albert is paying her monthly). Unfortunately, her health issues have caused Albert to visit—but the war is exacting its toll by closing the borders and denying Albert the visit.  Eduard is expecting his dad, but he never comes.

(National Geographic/Dusan Martincek)

A few years later, we see the long-awaited transformation of the characters to their older counterparts—Johnny Flynn gives way to Academy Award-winner Geoffrey Rush (Albert); Gwendolyn Ellis is replaced by Emily Watson (Elsa), and Samantha Colley’s fantastic portrayal of Mileva moves to Sally Dexter.  It gives Genius the feel that the events of the past have aged the main characters significantly (even if it feels jarring to the viewer).

Albert is finally able to get Mileva to agree to the divorce, but as he tells Elsa, “it comes at a high price.”  That price isn’t just in the form of money (including the significant sum earned if Albert was to win the Nobel Prize), but a permanent loss of seeing his kids.

Finally, Einstein’s theory is proven, but he has to deal with his own league of scientists, including Dr. Lennard, who, in the name of nationalism, attempt to discredit his work.  In a hilarious sequence, a major lecturer beats up on Einstein, not knowing Einstein is in the audience.  What the scientists will do next is for the final three episodes, but somehow Hitler will be involved . . .

One of the biggest takeaways of the episode involves the damages sin can cause.  The scientists’ decision to support the war effort resulted in significant loss of life—especially with Haber’s poison gas cloud.  Justifying that it saved lives still doesn’t diminish the fact that people were killed to make it happen. Haber lost his marriage (and his wife) in the process. Einstein also lost his marriage–and a whole lot more than he bargained for–as a result of his escapades. Even his cousin Elsa had to endure the humiliation and stigma of being singled out during the divorce proceedings by the judge. Sin can be hidden only for so long, but it will eventually be exposed (see Joshua 7 regarding Achan).  And the consequences can be significant.  It is best, as James 5:16 notes, to confess our sins to God (and others) so we can be restored.  After all, Jesus came to die and forgive us of all our transgressions to the Lord and others.  It doesn’t mean there won’t be aftereffects to deal with, but at least one’s consciousness can be cleansed for the future.

Filed Under: Current Events, Reviews, Television Tagged With: Achan, Divorce, Einstein, Elsa Einstein, Emily Watson, Fritz Haber, Genius, Geoffrey Rush, Gwendolyn Ellis, James, Johnny Flynn, Max Planck, Mileva Maric, National Geographic, Philip Lennard, Price of Sin, Relativity, Richard Topol, Samantha Colley, Science, sin, WWI

How the Shack Wrestles with the Problem of Evil (and You Should, Too)

March 3, 2017 by Jacob Sahms 7 Comments

A decade ago, I read Paul Young’s novel The Shack, and became intrigued by what I might ask God if I were face-to-face with the Almighty Creator of the Universe. If we’re honest with ourselves, seeing loved ones suffer and die is often the greatest challenge to our faith. For Young, the story revolved around a middle-aged father of three, who loses his youngest daughter to murder and finds himself revisiting the crime scene at the invitation of God. While this story was fascinating to me in its exploration of the problem of evil and forgiveness on many levels, I filed it away as something akin to C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia or J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, with less fantasy elements. But I walked away wrestling with how I could better to forgive, and how personal a relationship God longs for with us.

This week, as The Shack hits theaters (thanks to the backing of Lionsgate) and I find myself again standing in the middle of a conversation about Young’s ideas about God. For some, it’s an epic story of incarnational love; for others, it’s an inadequate picture of God that falls into the realm of heresy. And, while I first read the novel at the request of others, I find myself asked personally and professionally to weigh in on what I think about the cinematic version of The Shack.

So I did something I never do: I watched The Shack twice in three days, taking deliberate notes and mulling over the theology that the film proposes. (My initial review is here at ChristianCinema.com.) Here is my humble ‘take’ on the film for those who question its worth and for those seeking a pastoral, theological take. A disclaimer: this should be considered to contain spoilers about the plot of the film. I encourage you to see the movie (and/or read the novel) first.

The Introduction to the Story of Mack Phillips

Creatively rendered, the film starts with Willie (Tim McGraw) narrating the early childhood of Mack Phillips (Sam Worthington as an adult). We see that Mack’s father is an elder in his local church, but he’s also an alcoholic who is abusive to both Mack and his mother. Setting the stage for a later visual depiction of God as a large African American woman, Mack’s only ‘advocate’ in the early stages is a neighbor (played by Octavia Spencer, who also plays ‘Papa’) who shows him love, tells him to talk to God who is “always listening,” and comforts him by saying, “Daddy’s aren’t supposed to do that to their kids; it ain’t love.” This humble, patient faith is showed in opposition to Mack’s father, who beats his son outside while a storm rages, forcing him to repeat Colossians 3:20 (“Obey your parents in everything so that it pleases the Lord“) while his mother looks on.

As Mack loads his father’s alcohol with rat poison, penning a note asking that one day he be forgiven, Willie’s voice-over says, “Pain has a way of twisting us up inside and making us do the unthinkable. The secrets we keep have a way of clawing their way to the surface.” Ironically, this is an important plot point that I didn’t remember as I watched the film – and which I know many don’t recall in examining the story later.  Still, it’s an important idea to the main thrust of the film in that it set the stage for a lifetime of guilt and sadness over the way a worldview has been determined by Mack’s abusive father and the actions Mack takes to set that world right.

Fast-forward thirty years, and we find Mack on a camping trip with his children. We’re told that Mack’s wife knows God and calls him Papa; Mack relates better to an understanding of God reflected in the stain-glassed window depicting an old man with a big white beard. And then the Great Sadness falls on Mack’s family, as his daughter is kidnapped (and presumed murdered) by a serial killer. We don’t see Mack’s whole life fall apart, but we know he becomes partially estranged from his wife and kids before God sends him a note, inviting him to the place where his daughter Missy was killed.

Dealing with the Problem of Evil, Suffering, and Pain

In the shack, Mack meets Papa (Octavia Spenser), Jesus (Aviv Alush), and Sarayu (Sumire). Over the course of the next few days, Mack interacts with the three persons of the Trinity together and separately, each member of the Trinity conversing with Mack about the same thing but in different ways. All of them recognize that he is deeply wounded by the loss of his daughter; all of them recognize that he blames God for her murder. With that in mind, consider the conversations below – and recognize that cinematically, they are displayed against the movement of Mack’s exploration of the shack (especially the kitchen where Papa cooks), the lake where Jesus’ fishes and woodworks, and Sarayu’s garden.

The first remarkable comments occur when Mack and Papa bake together, as we might imagine that little Mack baked with the neighbor who taught him the goodness of God.

Mack: You’re wearing a dress. I always pictured you with a white beard.

Papa: I think that’s Santa. After what you’ve been through, I didn’t think you could handle a father right now.

Right away, the issues for some are raised because we’re addressing that God the Father appears as a woman. (Never mind that he will later appear as a Native American man!) For some, the endangerment to their understanding of God’s gender is problematic, and the rest of the film/novel is lost to them. [Please don’t be one of those people!] Instead of dwelling on the depiction of God the Father on screen – which doesn’t seem any less creative than the Sunday School posters we have hanging around our churches of Jesus as an Anglo-Saxon man – let’s focus on what comes next, as Mack and Papa discuss the problem of evil.

Papa: You may not believe it but I am especially fond of you. I want to heal that wound that has grown inside of you that is between us. There are no easy answers that will take your pain away. Life takes a bit of time and a lot of relationships.

Mack: You’re the almighty God, right? You know everything. You’re everywhere at once. You have limitless power. Yet, somehow, you let my little girl die when she needed you most. You abandoned her.

Papa: I never left her.

Suddenly, any misconceptions anyone had about the sheer ‘entertainment value’ of the film have been cleared up, right? But this isn’t a pop culture take on Trinitarian values and the problem of evil, there’s some thought out progression as it continues.

Mack: If you are who you say you are, where were you when I needed you?

Papa: When all you see is your pain, you lose sight of me.

Mack: Stop talking in riddles. How can you say you’ll help me when you couldn’t help her.

Papa: The truth sets everyone free. Truth has a name and he’s over in his woodshed right now covered in sawdust.

Mack: You left him too. Seems like you have a track record, turning your back on those you supposedly love. He said, My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?

Papa: You misunderstand the mystery [Papa shows Mack the nail mark in her/his wrist]. Don’t ever think that what my son chose to do didn’t cost us both differently. Love always leaves a mark. We were there together. I never left him, I never left you, I never left Missy.

The flashing lights and sirens you see and hear are the sounds of critics screaming that this is a brand new case of modalism (or Patripassianism if they can pronounce it). Modalism says that the three members of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) aren’t really different persons but rather three different perceptions an individual has of God and there are no substantial differentiations one can make of the three. This is because of the mark God the Father/Papa has on one wrist – failing to recognize the differences between the persons Young and the film’s screenwriters present the Trinity with. They couldn’t be more individual if they tried!

What one might instead see is that the Father’s empathy – an aspect the film is carefully trying to boldly proclaim – is strong and that sending Jesus to die on the cross was not done lightly or without cost to Him. This further accents the efforts Papa makes to help Mack understand how Papa feels the pain of losing Missy. Rather than causing me consternation theologically, I hear echoes of the popular poem “Footprints in the Sand” where the author clearly goes out of her way to show how God is with us even when we can’t see it. Again, the script isn’t focused on explaining the mystery of the Trinity three-in-one but in showing us how God worked to “crawl into life” (an explanation from the book, or the Incarnation!) with us.

At this point in the film, Mack isn’t ready to accept or acknowledge what Papa is trying to communicate because his pain is still unresolved, understandably. But he joins the Trinity for dinner. There, he sees the way that the Trinity longs to be in conversation, and he recognizes that he is in community.

Investigating Sin and God’s Wrath

Mack asks Papa, “Is there anyone you’re not especially fond of?” and suddenly the two are knee-deep in a conversation about the “Old Testament God” that Mack is still wrapped around. Rather than trying extricate the two, the dialogue picks up where the dough-threading conversation left off: Papa doesn’t need to stress punishment when he’s still trying to explain grace.

Papa admits that he gets angry with his children (“because what parent doesn’t”) but downplays wrath. Instead, he sounds a lot like Romans 6:23 (“For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”) when Papa says, “I don’t need to punish people. Sin is its own punishment. I’m in the middle of everything you see to be amiss, working for your good. That’s what I do.” [We just heard Romans 8:28, too, didn’t we? “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.”) Later on in the film, Papa will tell Mack that “no one gets away with anything,” answering another criticism – that The Shack doesn’t deal with sin in a traditional way, or allow for punishment for sin.

And then we get this gem from Papa in response to Mack’s claims that Papa can’t be working good while allowing suffering to occur, “You’re trying to make sense of your world based on a very incomplete picture. The real underlying flaw in your life is that you don’t think I’m good. I am, and if you knew me and how much I love you, even when you don’t understand, you would know that I’m at work in your life for your good, and you’d trust me.” But Mack’s response is straight pain: “My daughter’s dead. There’s nothing that you can say that will ever justify what happened to her.”

For someone who interacts with people wrestling with their grief, pain, shame, and anger on nearly a daily basis, I can assure you that their struggle is greater in dealing with the problem of evil and God’s grace than Patripassianism…

The Spirit Interlude

Immediately after this exchange, Sarayu leads Mack into her garden, showing that she’s connected with Papa but approaching Mack’s distrust from a different perspective: “Just to be clear, we’re not justifying anything, we’re trying to heal it.” She explains how some of the the things growing in the garden are harmful but balanced with something else growing in the garden, they provide healing. While we’re not shown a glorious metaphorical apple, we might hear inklings of Genesis 2:15-17: “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” Not everything in the Garden is for Mack, but everything in the Garden has a purpose (or, some might say, is good).

Sarayu debates Mack over what “good” is – he’s very practical about his approach but not very nuanced. Sarayu tells Mack that his approach is many more people than he ever imagined. Sarayu pushes back, “So pretty much you’re the judge? Have you ever been wrong or changed your opinion over time? There are billions like you, [clashing and warring] determining what is good and evil because all insist on playing God. You weren’t meant to do that on your own. This was always meant to be a conversation between friends.” Sarayu’s ‘take’ is less aggressive but more soulful, more spiritual – not unintentionally. But then we get the follow-up to a discussion Mack had previously begun with Jesus.

Jesus & the Rowboat

Earlier that day – although time is fairly obtuse on screen – Mack and Jesus spend some time together near the lake. In one of the more informative dialogues, Mack admits he’s more comfortable with Jesus than the other two members of the Trinity even as he’s growing to realize they’re all connected. Jesus’ response: “I’m the best way to relate to Papa and Sarayu. When you see me, you see them. Sarayu is creativity, the breath of life, my Spirit. We want to be in relationship with you. You are in the center of our love and purpose.” He goes on to tell Mack that he wants everyone to have a relationship with Papa, that it’s his purpose to point toward Papa.

Later, as we revisit images that one can find in Matthew 14, as Peter tries to extend his faith in a physical way, Mack flees a sinking rowboat into the hands of Jesus, who tells him, “Trust me, none of this can hurt you. Keep your eyes on me.” Interspersed with powerful visuals involving walking (or running) on water, the two discuss how Jesus isn’t concerned with rules, working on being a good Christian, or religion. This is the ultimate debate not everyone will like because it’s the debate religious leaders haven’t liked since the time Jesus showed up teaching in the synagogue. It’s the argument Jesus presented for his gospel in John 3, about being born again and accepting God’s love for the world instead of focusing on law-following and sin-counting.

The Cave of Wisdom

Then the film gets really interesting, as Mack explores Young’s version of the Cave of Evil from Dagoba in The Empire Strikes Back. Instead of encountering some twisted version of himself, Mack meets Sophia, or Wisdom, personified. Sophia tells him that the day is full of serious consequences involving judgment; she accuses him of believing that God isn’t good.

Sophia: Today, you are the judge. Why are you surprised? You’ve spent your whole life judging everyone and everything, their actions and motivations, like you could really know them. You make snap judgments about them, from the color of their skin, their clothes, their body language. By all accounts, you are well-practiced expert. [Sophia then lists several types of people (murderers, drug dealers, terrorists, abusive spouses, etc.) and asks if they deserve hell.] What about the man who preys on innocent little girls? Is that man guilty? What about his father who twisted him? Doesn’t the legacy of brokenness go the whole way back to Adam? And what about God? Isn’t he at fault? He set this all in motion, especially if he knew the outcome?

Mack: Do you want me to say it? Absolutely. God is to blame.

Sophia: If it’s so easy for you to judge God, you must choose one of your children to spend eternity in heaven. The other will go to hell. I am only asking you to do something you believe God does.

Mack: It isn’t fair. I can’t. Take me. I’ll go instead of them. I’ll take their place. You take me. You leave my kids alone and you take me.

Sophia: Mackenzie, you’ve judged your children worthy of love even if it costs you everything. Now you know Papa’s heart.

Mack: I don’t understand how God could have loved Missy and put her through so much horror. She was innocent. Did he use her to punish me, because that’s not fair. She didn’t deserve it. Now I might, because…

Sophia: Is that how your God is? God’s not like that. This was not God’s doing. He doesn’t stop a lot of things that cause him pain. What happened to Missy was the work of evil and no one in your world is immune from it. You want the promise of a pain-free life. There isn’t one. As long as there’s free will … evil can find a way in.

Mack: There’s got to be a better way.

Sophia: There is, but the better way involves trust.

At this point in the film, as a father and a pastor, I am completely stunned. (Remember, it’s been a decade since I read the dialogue in the novel.) We humans spend the majority of our day judging others, from what they wear, to how they talk, to who they marry, to what they believe. And in this interplay between Sophia and Mack, all of our judgments of others are laid bare. Again, The Shack puts free will and the problem of evil at front and center of a fictional story, which in my mind, is a genius move blending fiction with the inner wrestling of the soul.

I could go on, and ruin the final fourth of the film. But I won’t do that. I will point out that the production team behind the film chose to focus on the theological change that takes place in the heart of Mack versus the blockbuster ending that wraps up the story of Missy’s killer in the book. But they are all plot points along Mack’s journey, not theological explorations that demand our attention if we’re going to “get” The Shack.

So What’s the Point?

The Shack has its root in Paul Young’s experience of abuse within a religious culture, and his wife’s recognition that writing down his story in fictional form would provide a powerful catharsis for Young and those who would read it. Ultimately, this is about recognizing the beauty and power of God even in the midst of our suffering, and about what forgiveness looks like when we extend it to ourselves. That’s the point of The Shack.

While we struggle with what it means to be human, and what it means for God to be omniscient, omnipotent, omni – everything and for us to have free will, The Shack shows up creatively and asks us to consider all of those ideas in the form of an Everyman. With the Everyman character in Mack, we’re able to see sin play out in his personal decisions and in what’s happened to him, and the way that God’s grace is absolutely overwhelming. It’s a parable, a fable, a metaphor for God’s unrelenting heart.

But if I’m going to push this point further, about what we can learn from The Shack and other narratives like it, it’s this: we must be aware that God’s grace and providence will strip our understanding of what God is in the world. If we are inclined to believing that we’re supposed to be seeking discussions that point people toward God, then The Shack is a decent place to start – especially if the person has questions about suffering, evil, pain, sin, forgiveness… Or to put it another way, John Wesley urged his hearers to “plunder the Egyptians,” and make use of any means possible to promote the gospel!

While critics have proposed The Shack lacks is a complete understanding of the Trinity or of salvation, they fail to understand the historical record of the Gospels (not to mention Jesus’ tangle with the Pharisees). Jesus forgave sins even if the person didn’t confess their sins (Luke 5:17-39), and healed without an acknowledgment of his Godhead (John 5:1-11); he told a story about God as a woman searching her house for a lost coin (Luke 15:8-10). Somehow, the power of the gospel exhibited in Jesus’ life exceeded a protracted dialogue about how the Trinity worked, or how repentance and atonement should be extricated from the story. It’s what made him butt heads with the Pharisees who wanted to say that they had a limited/exclusive take on how God worked! And yet, seeing the big picture through the lens of the cross, we can appreciate the power of God’s movement in each of those stories, and other incomplete/inadequate stories that still reflect the gospel’s light.

I’d propose we allow the same for The Shack. With discernment and grace, we might learn something about ourselves through the wonderful providence of God’s inspiration.

Filed Under: Current Events, Editorial, Featured, Film Tagged With: Christianity, CS Lewis, Faith, forgiveness, God, Jesus, Jesus Christ, JRR Tolkien, Octavia Spencer, parable, Paul Young, Sam Worthington, sin, suffering, The Shack

In a Valley of Violence – Sin and Salvation in the Old West

October 19, 2016 by Darrel Manson Leave a Comment

“I’m not here to save you. I’m not here to save anybody.”

The Spaghetti Western is back! In a Valley of Violence harkens back to the films of Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood. From the opening credits we know a very close similarity to films like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Like those earlier Westerns, this is something of a demythologized West. There is no romance to this vision of the Old West. People and life are hard. There is little love to be seen. Through it all, there is a good deal of talk about sin and salvation.

In a Valley of Violence

On his way to Mexico, Paul (Ethan Hawke) and his dog Abbie come across a whisky priest (Burn Gorman) in the desert. He is told that over the ridge is the town of Denton, that is “full of sinners.” While Paul wants to avoid other people, he decides a stop in town would be a good idea. When he arrives in town, the first building is a boarded up church. Paul reflects, “God must have packed up and left with the rest of them.” Soon Paul has a run-in with Gilly (James Ransone), the local bully and son of the Marshal (John Travolta). Paul is happy to go on his way, but Gilly isn’t willing to let things go. Violence and vengeance escalate, and Paul, who is haunted by his past, must go back on the promise he made himself to not kill any more.

Added to this mix are two sisters, Mary-Anne (Taissa Farmiga) and Ellen (Karen Gillan) who run the town’s hotel. Ellen has connected herself to Gilly as a way out of the boring life of this community. Mary-Anne, whose husband has left her, sees her hope of escape in Paul. But Paul has a past that makes him not want any human connections. He sees himself as a sinner without hope of redemption. As such, he won’t allow himself to be loved, and so cannot offer love.

In a Valley of Violence

It is interesting just how often the ideas of sin and salvation come up in the dialogue between all these characters. They seem to be defined by the sins of their lives. Anger and hubris are very central to Gilly and his cohort. The Marshal just wants to maintain a status quo, even though he knows his son is dangerous. Ellen embodies vanity. Paul cannot let go of the sins of his past. That is the very reason he his drifting through the desert to get to Mexico. Only Mary-Anne has a claim to goodness. She spends her life taking care of others but feels as though she is punished for it. Salvation seems impossible to these characters. Paul just seeks solitude as an escape from his guilt. The rest seem to see themselves as residing in hell. It is Mary-Anne who is actively looking for something better—a redemption that she hopes she can find in Paul.

In A Valley Of Violence

Whether salvation can be found in this film is a question worth considering. But a deeper question is whether violence can be the medium by which salvation is accomplished. This is a story that is driven by revenge and violence. Does all that overcome the sinfulness that envelops Denton or by the end do we think that the evil that dwells there has come out victorious?

Photos courtesy Focus World

Filed Under: Film, Reviews Tagged With: Burn Gorman, Ethan Hawke, James Ransone, John Travolta, Karen Gillan, revenge, sin, spaghetti western, Taissa Farmiga, Ti Weswt, western

Primary Sidebar

THE SF NEWS

Get a special look, just for you.

sf podcast

Hot Off the Press

  • Shrinking: Laughing through Life
  • SF Radio 9.12: Behind the Walls of BABYLON
  • Infinity Pool: Drowning in Toxicity
  • GIVEAWAY! Advance Screening of 80 FOR BRADY!
  • Close – End of childhood innocence
Find tickets and showtimes on Fandango.

where faith and film are intertwined

film and television carry stories which remind us of the stories God has woven since the beginning of time. come with us on a journey to see where faith and film are intertwined.

Footer

ScreenFish Articles

Shrinking: Laughing through Life

SF Radio 9.12: Behind the Walls of BABYLON

  • About ScreenFish
  • Privacy Policy

© 2023 · ScreenFish.net · Built by Aaron Lee

 

Loading Comments...