20 June 2021
Fading morality in American Biblical film adaptations
For the first half of the twentieth century, American Bible film
adaptations strictly adhered to the conservative notion of Biblical morality by
using the faith-duality plot device. This plot device juxtaposes the virtues of
the Biblical god and the irredeemable wickedness of other faiths’ deities
(usually exemplified by generic paganism and idols), thereby reasserting the
former’s moral superiority. Three of the period’s most famous, and expensive,
films--Samson and Delilah (1949), The Ten Commandments (1923) and The TenCommandments (1956) all utilize this convention. The Ten Commandments (1923) has
the golden calf and the film’s main antagonist--the godless, capitalist
Danny--epitomizing the evils of a pagan faith. The first half of the film
highlights the sin of idol-worshipping by cutting off the plot thread involving
Moses and the Hebrews right at the iconic golden calf incident. The second half
then propels itself forward from this point, using the first half as a
cautionary tale to extol the virtues of the Ten Commandments. Likewise, the
film’s 1956 remake also puts great focus on the dichotomy between Jewish
monotheism and Egyptian paganism, but also adds to the reaffirmation of Biblical
morality’s superiority by having the pharaoh’s last words be: “[Moses’] god...
is God.” Samson and Delilah also uses similar tactics for the same end of
putting Judeo-Christian monotheism and its values on a pedestal. Instead of
punishing individual antagonists, however, it condemns all Philistines as an
evil, paganist collective. All Philistines, including Delilah and the primary
antagonists Ahtur and the Saran of Gaza, are ultimately killed by the film’s
hero--Samson.
The latter half of the 20th century, however, saw this faith-duality
plot device’s steep decline in popularity, as Biblical morality in Bible
adaptations gradually phased into more secular ethics. Two iconic films of the
genre belonging to this period--The story of Ruth (1960) and The prince of Egypt
(1998)--exemplify this trend. The story of Ruth in particular, provides is a
good analogy of this transitional period. It is the first time the book of Ruth
from the Bible, known for its theme of acceptance and benevolence towards
outsiders to the Judeo-Christian faith, received a cinematic adaptation. This
denotes a possible sign to the American film industries’ budding tolerance for
alternative beliefs. While The story of Ruth, like its predecessors in the
genre, still persecutes the majority Moabite pagans and only rewards Ruth for
her successful conversion to the Judeo-Christian faith, its emphasis is not the
dichotomy between faiths. The film ultimately focuses on compassion towards
others, especially foreigners over dogmatic loyalty towards Biblical law. In
doing in so, it also brings into question the rigidity of said law and calls for
flexibility in passing judgment. If The story of Ruth is still partially trapped
by the convention of demonizing non-Judeo-Christian beliefs, then The prince of
Egypt is entirely divorced from this trend. Faith and morality are addressed,
but nonetheless take a backseat to human drama. The Hebrews’ struggles and the
crumbling glory of Egypt are simply backdrops to the tragedy of severed familial
bonds and diverged paths between former brothers Moses and Ramses.
By
2000, not only have theatrically released films disappeared almost entirely from
the American market, ones that were made take on neutral to even negative
attitudes towards the Biblical aspect of Biblical morality. While some
theatrical productions belonging to the period from 1970 to 1999 still exhibited
at least ambivalence towards Judeo-Christian monotheism, those produced after
2000 either portray the Judeo-Christian god in an exaggeratedly negative light
or go out of their way to distance themselves from the Bible. They also make no
attempt at portraying morality but, like The prince of Egypt, use Biblical
themes to narrate human drama.
The newest remake of The Ten Commandments (2006)
by the same name and Exodus: Gods and kings (2014) exemplify the first trend of
portraying the Judeo-Christian god as a hostile, amoral entity. The Ten
Commandments (2006) shows how violent, unsympathetic and needlessly cruel God
can be. He punishes the innocent Egyptians, some of whom are Moses’ loved ones.
A controversial detail from the original Biblical story that is often omitted in
film adaptations is also included: God orders half of the tribe of Israel
murdered for refusing to follow Moses. Among the executed, the deaths of women
and children receive extensive focus. At the end of the film, Moses is banned
from entering the Promised Land in his old age, seemingly without explanation.
Likewise, Exodus: Gods and kings discusses little morality while emphasizing
this violent, even vengeful, aspect of God to account for the violence shown on
screen. It even attempts to secularize the protagonist’s motivation. Moses is
introduced as an atheist who is knowledgeable about the god of the Hebrews but
chooses not to believe in him at first. He is then forced into the task with
broken legs and a concussion. Ultimately, Moses liberates the Hebrews as a war
general (not shepherd) commissioned by God, but his actions are motivated by
basic compassion and a secular sense of justice, not religious devotion.
While it does not treat Judeo-Christian monotheism with contempt as the previous
two films, Noah (2014) makes efforts to distance itself from the religiosity of
its source material and even the world which we inhabit, then discusses morality
in entirely secular terms. Its world building is evidently meant to be
fantastical, with the word “God” replaced by “the Creator,” a cast in ethnically
and historically ambiguous costumes, and a landscape occupied by fantastical
animals. Noah then goes on to use its vaguely Biblical setting to discuss
environmental concerns and tell a story of ideological conflict, none of whose
opposing sides are religiously motivated.
Biblical morality can
be distinguished from the common sense understanding of morality in that,
instead of an innate sense of right and wrong, it is derived from the
Judeo-Christian god. Thus, ethics must go hand in hand with reverence towards
God in order to be Biblical. But mainstream American film adaptations of the
Bible have shown an evident decrease in this devotion since the latter half of
the twentieth century. Morality in these films as of recent years, is either
secular or omitted from the discussion entirely. This is likely the result of
the religious pluralization of American audiences after the end of World War II,
which has discouraged Hollywood studios from including the sort of religious
exclusivity for the sake of heralding Biblical monotheism known to Golden era
films. With this audience pluralization also came decreased Bible literacy. The
result is that in order to avoid alienating non-Judeo-Christian viewers,
Biblical elements in modern films are either used as mere backdrops for the
drama being told, treated with contempt or indifference. This is not to say that
Biblical morality has disappeared completely from this genre of American cinema,
as old conventions and a focus on religious reverence remain prominent in
independently produced productions. However, with the drastically low number of
theatrical releases by big studios and a shared apathy among them towards
Biblical morality, this trend in mainstream media will likely persist for years
to come.
[This essay was written by Vy Nhat Tran as part of her graduation
research at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University in Japan. The undergraduate thesis upon which the essay
is based received recognition as an Outstanding Thesis for the 2018 graduating
class.]
Labels:
Cinema,
History,
Religion,
Representation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.