Vatican’s list of films | Hacker News Reader

Vatican’s list of films

en.wikipedia.org

63 pointsrevolucien46 comments

From the sources on wikipedia, an archive of the Vatican's actual list: https://web.archive.org/web/20120422064928/http://old.usccb....

Interesting because it includes a short description (presumably highlighting what makes each film special to the Vatican) and also the "U.S. Catholic Conference classification" for each film: https://www.usccb.org/media/movie-reviews/cns-mpaa-movie-cla...

The only unrated film on the list is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vie_et_Passion_du_Christ and the "highest" rating is an A-IV given to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8%C2%BD

My only question is who exactly at the Vatican compiled this list?

> My only question is who exactly at the Vatican compiled this list?

The other reference on the Wikipedia article (besides the one that you link directly) answers that question (institutionally, if not personally): the Pontifical Commission for Social Communication

I wonder why some individual Catholics, including clergy, have issues with stuff like Harry Potter [0] for introducing people to the occult while the Vatican recognizes Noferatu as a great film on the basis of art.

I think this adds to the evidence that some Catholics are out of touch with the positions of their religion and we should really be wary of people using religion as justification for some seemingly unreasonable action.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_debates_over_the_Har...

Religious people in vast majority do not even read their holly book, but arrange their lives according to that religion. So go figure.

I’m neither Christian nor in the USA, but from what I’ve heard, Catholics from the USA also tend to have issues with the Vatican in general. But then the whole religious system in the USA also seems a lot more split in general.

Indeed, Catholics in the US are divided on whether the Vatican is too liberal, or too conservative. Also, Christians of all stripes are influenced by leaders and writers of all denominations.

I mean...many of the Harry Potter reviews in your link are positive.

Take any group of people, and some will like the books and some won't.

It isn't about liking books. It's about misusing authority and abusing the protections afforded to religions, whether that's an official exorcist of the Church saying something that is not backed by the Faith, or a company saying that their religious beliefs prevent them from providing access to health care when it's also not backed by anything specific.

> "...we should really be wary of people using religion as justification for some seemingly unreasonable action."

yah, after thousands of years, you'd think we'd have learned by now. jesus taught humbleness, immateriality, and service to others. instead, the catholic church (as merely one example) built a global empire and brought atrocity to countless 'heathens' throughout the centuries. pope francis is certainly refreshing, but the church has a lot to atone for (and 50 billion 'hail marys' ain't gonna cut it).

How wonderful that they've included "2001"!

One of the beautiful things about 2001 is it's easy to have both a religious and atheistic interpretation of it. Kubrick has said the "God concept" is at the heart of the movie, though not in the traditional anthropomorphic sense (see last answer on http://www.krusch.com/kubrick/Q12.html). All the pieces are there.. seeing a miracle, making a journey, becoming enlightened and at one with a higher being, etc.

One thing that immediately struck me is that the art category stops in 1968, while "values" and "religion" are a lot more recent.

I wonder if that is related to the more open interpretation of sexual themes and topics more critical of organized religion in more recent arthouse cinema.

> I wonder if that is related to the more open interpretation of sexual themes and topics more critical of organized religion in more recent arthouse cinema.

Probably not, because the entries in the “art” category mostly aren’t “arthouse” films to start with, it seems to be a catchall for things being recommended other than for religion or values (that is, its not a genre label, but a label for why it is recommended “as art” rather than “for religious contemplation” or “for lessons on values”.)

I would hazard that the Pontifical Commission just viewed that the “as art” basis of recommendation benefited from time and seasoning, while the religious/values basis were more readily assessable without that (note that the Church has historically viewed pre-publication evaluation of religion/values as not merely practical but a necessary task for it to do, but not so for artistic merit outside those bounds, so...)

Interesting that there are two Danish films in the religious category. Which both take place in a very protestant context.

Babette's Feast is also Danish, one of the most well-known and highly regarded Danish films of all time. The other 2 are Dreyer films—I've only seen Ordet so far, and I thought it was just amazing. Johannes is an unforgettable character.

It's a pretty great list, far as I can tell. Dersu Uzala (1975, not 1978) must be in my all-time top 5.[0] I loved Bicycle Thieves—The Bicycle Thief is a bad translation. Yes, it's important to the story!—but much preferred Umberto D. Liked On the Waterfront but vastly preferred A Face in the Crowd.

[0] It's my pet theory that Yoda in Star Wars is based on Dersu. There are many similarities. Seems very obvious to me but I've never heard or read anyone else mention the connection. The plot of the original Star Wars was after all based on that of another Kurosawa movie, Hidden Fortress. See e.g. https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20160104-the-film-star-w...

I meant Ordet and Babette's Feast. The Passion of Joan of Arc is a french movie, even if it is a Dreyer film.

Ah.. ok sorry, right you are, I must watch that!

The Gospel According to Saint Matthew was made by an Italian communist. They’re pretty ecumenical in their choices.

Also the director of Nazarin Luis Bunuel was a communista and an atheist.

Edit: Probably he was not a communist. According to wikipedia "Buñuel joined the Communist Party of Spain (PCE) in 1931,though later in life he denied becoming a Communist"

The Church deserves criticism for many things over the ages, but its aesthetic sensibilities ain't one.

I haven’t seen any of the religious films outside of Ben Hur, but the art and values lists seem pretty solid.

Watch The Mission if you haven't, the soundtrack is very good

And the story is both touching and devastating, whether or not you're watching from a religious point of view.

The same is true for the earlier Robert Bolt film, too: A Man for All Seasons.

Agree on both scores!

The thing that stood out for me in The Mission was its dramatic depiction of the power of repentance (i.e. a genuine change of heart) which we saw when Mendoza (de Niro) finally put down his burden at the intervention of the very people he'd persecuted.

In A Man for all Seasons it would have to be the Thomas More's famous replies following Roper's “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7515521-william-roper-so-no...

Funny, though, we still think goodness can be manufactured by the passing of laws instead of by changes of hearts.

I'd say 'very good' is almost an understatement for this Morricone soundtrack. I never get tired of it.

Babette's Feast is amazing (and you need to take the "religion" categorization with a large pinch of salt).

Andrei Rublev is one of the supreme achievements of cinema. Just so moving and beautiful, and hopeful, too.

What films should be added to the list?

Art:

- The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

- Amelie (2001)

Values:

- Green Book (2018)

- The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)

- Life is beautiful (1997)

Religion:

This one is hard, because the Vatican may have very specific criteria for the category (e.g. I doubt they would want a production about non-Catholicism, and would actively discourage going against doctrine). If this was a more "general religion" category, I would argue for

- Sita Sings the Blues (2008) / Seder-Masochism (2018)

- Ida (2013)

- Timbuktu (2014)

To be honest, The Pursuit of Happyness is far from the "values" that most religious orders want to give (well, at least from an ethical point of view).

Revolving around the deeply American concept of money and "success" as the solution to everything is a Hollywood cliché that is seen with some suspect by most European viewers nowadays.

Obvious answer: Spotlight https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotlight_(film)

Terrence Malick's To the Wonder and A Hidden Life. To the Wonder is a more "typical" Malick film, but Javier Bardem's character is wonderful. A Hidden Life is a more more straightforward film (for Malick) which focuses on the life of a Catholic beatified for his resistance to the Nazi regime.

Uh, why not The Tree of Life?! One of the most incredible movies ever made. I thought To The Wonder was comparatively nothing at all.

Point taken. The other movies are a bit fresher in my mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Gods_and_Men_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_Fields_(film)

Groundhog Day (1993).

If we are adding comedies, surely Life Of Brian deserves to be on the list? Highlighting the absurdeties of dogmatism in both religious and secular contexts.

Romero. 1989. The story of Salvadoran Archbishop Óscar Romero, who organized peaceful protests against the violent military regime, eventually at the cost of his own life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romero_(film)

What does this mean?

It's a list of the Vatican's favorite films. It's like asking me to make a lost of thinkingemote's favorite films.

The list was made several years ago and has not been added to, what should the Vatican add since then?

That's what it means.

Funny to me that they chose 2001: A Space Odyssey, which posits (more or less) that aliens gave people intelligence, not god. I bet the Vatican really liked the visual association of the fetus with the rebirth and life in the final scene of the movie. Still a strange choice!

I suspect the Vatican would have no problem if that story turned out to be true: "Ah, but who gave the aliens the power to give humans intelligence? Surely only god could do that."

The most recent movie on this list is 28 years old. Boring.

The list was compiled in 1995?

Are you suggesting that these movies are boring? Or just that you've seen them all?

Because there are some absolute classics on here that are better than many of the _regular_ modern films. Not to say there aren't good movies worthy of the list, but I don't think emitting them makes the list boring. And if you don't want to watch these films because 'they are old/boring' then I guess that's on you but you are the one missing out.

That is not very surprising, given the list was assembled in 1995, thus 26 years ago.

That being said: many of the films on the list are considered classics for a reason.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com