Pan's Labyrinth

  • Thread starter Thread starter Riley259
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We watched this about a week ago, and I thought it was very well done and bittersweet at the end. I must not having been paying close attention because I don’t remember the priest at the dinner scene (where the wife was explaining how she met the captian, right?)
 
mlchance said:
Quoted for truth.

Folks watching movies/TV frequently need to get a grip. There are bad priests. There are bad nuns. There are bad laymen. Heck, there have even been a handful of bad popes. This idea that every single representation of Catholics in the media should be saintly and above reproach is just silly.

Yes, some Catholics, including priests, collaborated with horrible dictators in the past. Including one priest in a movie that isn’t about the Church for all of three minutes hardly constitutes an attack on Catholicism.

– Mark L. Chance.
Click to expand...
Bravo, Mark. I think it may even inflame some…we Catholics need to be more secure in our faith…those who attack the Church do not attack us…every member. Who made them the judge of us, anyway? (I know the argument, but I do believe it invites even more vitriol…I see things realistically…as Mark says…there are bad types everywhere. No human is perfect)😊
 
Well I for one absolutely loved the movie and plan to own it asap. I even blogged it. lol
**I completely agree with Mark about the humanity of the people in the Church. **
And for those nay-sayers about the director’s view of the Church I take heart in this:
I think: once a Catholic, always a Catholic. I think Hitchcock was a Catholic, and he was capable of imagining the most heinous murders. Buñuel was a lapsed Catholic – actually he was an atheist. He declared himself “an atheist, thank God.” And I think that that cosmology of it stays with you because that’s the way you articulate the world. When I was shooting Mimic, I was going through such a hell that I started reading about Taoism and I loved reading about it and the idea of just being but I didn’t adopt that cosmology or point of view. I’m still a lapsed Catholic - that likes Taoism. It’s an imprint.
Click to expand...
**Yes, once a Catholic, always a Catholic, it leaves an indelible imprint. It’s obvious that this man has been left with a deep impression if he can make a film like this, that is so very clearly about faith and markedly Catholic faith at that, without even trying to do so. **
Of course, I do not expect this to be the entire story and an accurate portrayal of the entire real life civil war. However, I do think it is an accurate portrayal of what brutal oppression is. Nothing was gratuitous, but nothing was prettied up either.
**Again, I think it’s one of the best movies ever.👍 **
Now, I’m going to have to put some of his other stuff in our netflix queue to see what they are like.
 
I have not seen this film. Can anyone who liked it comment on this review from IMDB?: I was looking forward to a moving, visually rich mythopoetic tale that would feed my spirit and inspire my imagination. What I saw instead was a bloody, disgusting, depraved, amoral, aspiritual, nihilistic, and ultimately pointless horror film that fried my nervous system, left me furious, and made me fearful for any culture that embraces this sort of psychotic trash as art.

I signed up with IMDb just now for the sole purpose of warning others like me away from this soul-abusive celebration of torture, blood lust, killing, and graphic ultraviolence. I’m so glad I didn’t see this in a movie theater, as it would have been severely traumatizing. Thankfully, this nightmare was a rental DVD from the local video store and I’m headed out the door to return it as soon as this review is posted. I don’t want this sadistic violation of my senses and my spirit in my home any longer than necessary.

If you are a sensitive person with a kind heart, a vivid imagination, and a rich inner life, do yourself a favor and do NOT expose yourself to this psychotic splatterfest.

There’s plenty more from others in the same vein. Now I know that most movies have reviews that span the spectrum from love to hate, and this one seems to be no exception; but when people start using words like “repellent” and “harmful” I start wondering about a film.
 
I read so many great reviews on this movie. I even saw this awesome interview with the director and the trailer looked amazing. With that said, this was probably the most horrifying and disturbing movies I have ever seen.

I saw no beauty. It was repulsive and I had to cover my eyes on more than one occasion! It was brutally and graphically violent. I had hoped to see a beautiful movie that inspired hope instead I saw bleak hopelessness and graphic violence.

Obviously I am the minority on this, and I’m no prude, I am neither sensitive and can take (or so I thought) alot. Personally, I never want to see it again. It was just way to real and extreme for my taste.

Maybe that’s the problem. I can see alot of violence on movies and not even flinch. Bottom line, this one was way to extreme for me.
 
I for one really like this movie, and can see how it has Catholic overtones. The redemption through suffering and blood is very Catholic, but yes, there are parts that can be scary and it’s definitally not a children’s movie.

I did find it spiritually uplifting and beautiful. I think that those people who can see the beauty through the blood of movies like The Passion of the Christ, who’s favorite mysteries are the Sorrowful, or who enjoy the Stations of the Cross will find a deeper meaning in this movie. Maybe not (there most definitally is a person who contemplates the Crucifixtion often but does not like Pan’s Labyrinth) but I’m speaking generally. What we all have to remember is that without the Crucifixtion there is no Ascension or Ressurection, so while maybe some people prefer to remember and meditate on these aspects (Ascension, Ressurection) of Our Lord, others might find more comfort in the Crucifixtion and Death. Neither is, IMO, more important or makes you ‘more Catholic’. We just need to know ourselves and our own spiritualities; the reason why our faith is so uniting and deep in the first place is because of it’s ability to hold us all.

I remember the priest at the table, but I’m sure there were bad priests during the Spanish Civil War who believed that “God had saved their souls, who cares about their bodies?” (paraphrased obviously). I’m sure there are still priests who preach that. One bad priest however, does not a slam against The Church make. It might just be a convenient character. The fact that the doctor was good and helping everyone as often as possible (despite his ‘mercy killing’, I notice we’re not discussing that) doesn’t mean every doctor, then or now, is a good and strong man.
 
Cranch said:
I have not seen this film. Can anyone who liked it comment on this review from IMDB?:

There’s plenty more from others in the same vein. Now I know that most movies have reviews that span the spectrum from love to hate, and this one seems to be no exception; but when people start using words like “repellent” and “harmful” I start wondering about a film.
Click to expand...
Completely misses the point. It’s violent and bloody, yes – del Toro’s camera isn’t shy. But the violence isn’t gratuitous, just as I keep hearing the violence and gore of The Passion of the Christ was absolutely necessary. At one point Ofelia’s adoptive father, a Spanish army captain, smashes a suspected rebel’s face in with a bottle, crushing it into him over and over and over, and the camera just watches, never once turning away. It’s not violent to be violent: it’s violent to show that sometimes, the world of fairytale is highly preferable to the real one.
 
Mirdath said:
Completely misses the point. It’s violent and bloody, yes – del Toro’s camera isn’t shy. But the violence isn’t gratuitous, just as I keep hearing the violence and gore of The Passion of the Christ was absolutely necessary. At one point Ofelia’s adoptive father, a Spanish army captain, smashes a suspected rebel’s face in with a bottle, crushing it into him over and over and over, and the camera just watches, never once turning away. It’s not violent to be violent: it’s violent to show that sometimes, the world of fairytale is highly preferable to the real one.
Click to expand...
I agree. Whoever reviewed the movie on IMDB was most likely expecting a complete fantasy movie, and was disapointed. This movie was so much deeper than a mere fantasy movie. Yes, it was a very violent and at times brutal movie to watch, but it had to be that way. It’s in some sense part War movie. It showed the horrors that went on.
 
Galandriel said:
I read so many great reviews on this movie. I even saw this awesome interview with the director and the trailer looked amazing. With that said, this was probably the most horrifying and disturbing movies I have ever seen.

I saw no beauty. It was repulsive and I had to cover my eyes on more than one occasion! It was brutally and graphically violent. I had hoped to see a beautiful movie that inspired hope instead I saw bleak hopelessness and graphic violence.

Obviously I am the minority on this, and I’m no prude, I am neither sensitive and can take (or so I thought) alot. Personally, I never want to see it again. It was just way to real and extreme for my taste.

Maybe that’s the problem. I can see alot of violence on movies and not even flinch. Bottom line, this one was way to extreme for me.
Click to expand...
I thought i was the only one who didn’t like this film…but i’m glad at least someone else agrees with me…sorry, but the movie didn’t do anything for me. There were some parts that I liked, but overall, I didn’t care for it at all. I can put up with a lot of violence so that wasn’t really an issue, but the whole movie just gave me an overwhelming feeling of hopelessness and misery…and the ending, while I know was supposed to make me feel better, it didn’t…but I guess the movie was trying to convey hopelessness and misery so it did succeed in that aspect, but it’s not my cup of tea personally. I guess I like movies that aren’t depressing for 2 hours straight 🤷

Oh, and I didn’t think the movie was anti-Catholic…there are good people and bad people in life, including priests…the movie didn’t make a point to show that the whole Church was corrupted or anything, just displayed one corrupt priest for a brief scene.
 
I too enjoyed the movie! Scary images – but I found myself sympathizing with the young girl’s imaginary recreation of her own world of sadness and ugliness. My wife, recently, presented a paper on the importance of God-images in the play age of young children. The imagination is fertile ground for formation of conscience of our growing moral appreciation for the true and the beautiful. I guess that’s why I have such vivid mental images of OT heroes from my childhood.

[drumdoc.blogspot.com]
 
Honestly, this has nothing to do with “preferring the Ascension” vs the Crucifixion. I enjoyed the Passion and Apocolypto and most movies. I also don’t think it was anti-Catholic nor does it have “Catholic overtones.” That is totally my opinion but I couldn’t watch those horrific scenes.

I even stated “EWWWWWWWWWWw” really loud in the theatre when he was stitching up his cheek really loud without realizing it and the whole theatre gave this nervous laugh. It was quite funny in an unfunny moment.

What I did like about the movie was the faun. That faun made Narnia’s faun look like Mickey Mouse.
 
‘Those scenes’ aren’t there to be laughed at or enjoyed in the typical horror-movie sense. They’re supposed to horrify the viewer, to drive home the point that the Captain is an inhuman animal – and in my opinion, they’re extremely effective that way. Sounds like you got it too 🙂

And yes, the faun was great!
 
Mirdath said:
‘Those scenes’ aren’t there to be laughed at or enjoyed in the typical horror-movie sense. They’re supposed to horrify the viewer, to drive home the point that the Captain is an inhuman animal – and in my opinion, they’re extremely effective that way. Sounds like you got it too 🙂

And yes, the faun was great!
Click to expand...
Agreed, they were extremely effective. The whole movie was visually stunning and we watched it about a month ago and still talk about it. Absolutely breathtaking in some of the violence and some of the bizarre beauty.
 
I love near the end how she saw her parents and was invited to sit next to her father. Very moving. Hard not to think of sitting at the ‘right hand of the Father’. —KCT
 
‘Those scenes’ aren’t there to be laughed at or enjoyed in the typical horror-movie sense. They’re supposed to horrify the viewer, to drive home the point that the Captain is an inhuman animal – and in my opinion, they’re extremely effective that way. Sounds like you got it too 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree. I’ve seen it three times so far, and love it- it’s a complex, beautifully told story. The violence is supposed to shock and disturb, and not to be ‘cool’ and comic-book-y.

There were bad priests. Some of them collaborated with Franco’s regime. Doesn’t bother me- the dinner scene was obviously a gathering of very corrupt people, who were there to pay homage to a brute.

I loved the ambiguity about the reality of Ofelia’s fairy world, and I loved the contrast between it and her daily life, where she had no power and was constantly terrified.

I think I pointed this out in another PL’s thread- when the faun asks her if she’ll give him her brother, because he needs the blood of an innocent, in the English version she says “No”, but in Spanish she says, “I sacrifice myself!”, which is why she wins the third, and hardest task. She chooses to die rather than kill.

Fascinating movie.
 
Lissla_Lissar said:
I think I pointed this out in another PL’s thread- when the faun asks her if she’ll give him her brother, because he needs the blood of an innocent, in the English version she says “No”, but in Spanish she says, “I sacrifice myself!”, which is why she wins the third, and hardest task. She chooses to die rather than kill. (bold is mine)

Fascinating movie.
Click to expand...
No, she doesn’t. She says “Me niego” - “I refuse”. But the point still stands.

It’s a great movie. Just the ending itself is absolutely beautiful… and dare I say it, allegorical? :hmmm:

And the theme song! I love it. It just won’t leave my head (fortunately)!
 
Great movie! Terrible representation of history. Notice that the good guys were communists.

I still liked it.
 
I found it to be a wretched pro-communist movie.

In real life Franco and his nationalist soldiers were saviors of Spain. They fought for the Church, the nation, and the Spanish people. However this movie makes them out to be sadistic butchers. How wrong!

The movie also glorifies the communist forces, who were thugs in real life.
 
RomanCrusader said:
I found it to be a wretched pro-communist movie.

In real life Franco and his nationalist soldiers were saviors of Spain. They fought for the Church, the nation, and the Spanish people. However this movie makes them out to be sadistic butchers. How wrong!
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the numerous accounts of them committing atrocities are simply lies, or that these atrocities were somehow justified for the “greater good.”
The movie also glorifies the communist forces, who were thugs in real life.
Click to expand...
I’m with you there. As far as I can see both sides were pretty nasty, and people who have ideological reasons to sympathize with one side or the other try to pretend that their favored group was really OK.

I’m with C. S. Lewis on this one (responding to Roy Campbell, the convert to Catholicism who made the same argument you just did, though I believe he admitted later that he had been wrong):

“Who cares
What kind of shirt the murdering Party wears?”

And yes, I know Tolkien thought this attitude of Lewis’s was motivated by anti-Catholic prejudice, or at least by an uncritical acceptance of the anti-Catholicism of the British press.

Edwin
 
I have some major problems with this film, namely:
  1. Why did she have to kill the frog? Why is she not fazed by killing it?
  2. Why does she pay no consequences for having touched the apple?
  3. Why is she wearing a dalmatic at the end? [Related question: why did advocates of women priests adore this film?]
  4. Why is the third chair of the trinity empty? And why is a woman at the right hand of the father?
There’s a lot of not-so-subtle heresy in this film. And yes, it’s intentional. Look at this section from the director’s interview:
You know, people say it’s a miracle if the water turns into wine, but the real miracle is not a material one. I believe that you can fabricate magical things and magical occurrences in your life but they don’t have to be shockingly apparent. Ofelia’s faith saves her. She will live forever, whereas the Captain won’t. The fascists die that night and Ofelia is reborn, and that’s the difference. I can be shot and dying, I’m alive if I choose not to care.
Click to expand...
His Eucharistic theology is way, way off; he has passed judgment on the Captain, whereas the Church has never declared a single human being in hell; and it’s not about how “not to care” at the moment of death – some bizarre combination of Taoism and bushido – but the grace to have the name of Jesus on one’s lips.

While obviously a talented filmmaker, del Toro’s lapsed Catholicism seeps into his films, and I for one will not expose myself to them again. If you’re the kind of viewer who can shake off the temptations of heresy, praise God. As for me, that kind of iconoclasm just gets my jets going.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top