another one full of religious symbolism of any belief system is "La montaña sagrada" ("The Holy Mountain") by Alejandro Jodorowsky. also an extremely weird movie for which Friede and I have a special liking due to the opening scene

 

Two clear winners IMHO

 

Greeeeeen Man and Jésus de Montréal (which got my vote)

 

======================

 

Jean, when I saw that Jodorowski movies (along with the rest of his filmography at a festival a couple of years ago, I thought of you two.

+Antichrist & Wicker Man (although I guess the three first has had a stronger impact on my life) are all among my favourite films ever, I can't really vote for one of them over the others. 

I'd add the 1922 movie Haxan if it was my poll.

*Guess i would have paired it with Melancholia as I consider it Von Trier's take on Book of Revelation/Apocalypse of John - to an extent. And also a favorite of mine.

And Tony Curtis, whose mellifluous Shakespearean locution is unparalleled in cinema:

"Spah-ta-cus, take me to da castle of my faddah!"

A couple of other films.

PC and DM's ultimate satire and comedy is very strong and almost takes the title as the best of them all ... the lines themselves are incredible and the whole thing is very well written ... and you must pay attention to the ending and the whole St Peter thing ... it's totally on it, and so with it!

Kinda difficult to choose one, and specially in this list would have been a lot of LUIS BUNUEL, although a lot of his work is mostly referential and "atomic", but things like NAZARIN, SIMON OF THE DESERT, and of course the famous last supper scene, more than make it for him. And dig the incredible dig on religion in the last film ... it's amazing, and specially so at the time it was done.

It really brings up the image of the GOYA painting that he illustrated in the film ... even if in that image it is not a religious thing, in the end ... it is the same thing and feeling.

LUIS, was never "against" religion per se ... as his friend states (a Dominican Friar!) ... (paraphrased) Luis likes to tease you and make sure you know and understand why you believe what you believe ... that is what his films are about! He's merely making sure I know what I am believing!

But even Nicolas Roeg has done various things dealing with religion and faith in his films, and has had several biblical pieces (I have never seen them!) done as well. Seems off kilter here, but I doubt it, since a lot of his work was looking for something "deeper" in life.

I think EL TOPO is a much better and interesting film than THE HOLY MOUNTAIN. However, like a couple of his other films, these are a bit on the weird side of things with great images all around, which sometimes are simply a take on various religious/spiritual themes, which my thoughts are sometimes that it is mostly not satirical, but a sort of ... what if ... kind of thing which makes it interesting.

Hard to not mention also that there are several films that deal with the dark themes, and at least a couple based on Dennis Wheatley's novels. (Look them up DarkElf ... Christopher Lee is in two of them!)

Ingmar Bergman is an interesting dilemma for me. I like him and I don't like him. There are several things that are "overdone" for me, and I always thought that the symbolic nature of "The Seventh Seal" was over done and over "bearing" for me, just like his living room and family dramas. My father wrote many reviews about his films, that were truncated and cut up by Portuguese sensors, though most of the stuff they censored was about the American and English films and of course folks like Fellini and Bunuel.

There are some nice things out of his work though ... one of his sons (Daniel) made a film ... SUNDAY'S CHILDREN that was very much about the family thing and then they would break for church on Sunday, and of course, they did not match. It was a bit of a slow film that relied on dialogue (like Bergman), and I caught it on the Film Festival. I think that the film would make more sense for me now if I saw it and was able to compare it to his father's work better.

Another person that also made a film that does not specifically deal with "religion" is Sven Nykvist's (the cinematographer) THE OX, which deals mostly with the character being ashamed of what he did and not being able to deal with it. It is visually stunning!

but I would mention The Greatest Story Ever Told with Max Von Sydow and King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter.

England 1979

It is not easy to review this film, specially in light that it was co-written by one of the folks that was associated to G. I. Gurdjieff, and the immediate thought is that its content is very close to the story of the man that create the writings that made this film.

I tend to think of this film as much more than just a film, although why, is harder to explain. There is a certain feeling of clarity and understanding within this film, and its dialogue, and specially the visual side of its scenery and eventual ending, which is rather stunning and different. It is not a conventional story, but its illustration is not specific to what we imagine, but at times, what we see and what/how we discern from it.

The story is that of Gurdjieff and the part of his life that is in search for some meaning. That meaning eventually comes to be seen in the film in the form of dance, and how it affects a person is my assumption. To this end, a lot of his work, has bits and pieces that are very useful in the study of acting and even directing, which Peter Brook has taken to an extensive degree and incorporated into what might be considered the experimental theater and film work that he has done over the years. It is no surprise that later, Peter Brook did a film called "THE TIGHTROPE", that is not a story, but essentially an acting exercise which is very similar to a very important part of the story and a visual stunning moment in the film when Gurdjieff has to cross a bridge. The important part of the exercise, is the attention to it and its detail, and thus the "meaning" is created. And that it gets taken even further afar, so you can see the ending part of the film with the dancers, although seeing that, you and I, will probably wonder ... that in itself is the meaning? 

And that would say ... we missed the point and failed the tightrope/bridge?

It is the process that creates the inner peace that makes it possible to move on, and add meaning to one's life, it seems like, something so basic that we do not always consider it, and how important each and every moment really is, that we take for granted. But do we know how to live with that kind of depth and detail? I don't know and the film is not telling you, and I tend to feel that the books themselves by Gurdjieff, do not exactly tell you, because it is such an individual experience all along for all of us. 

The film has very nice moments and details that are probably very close to the life of the man himself, and it also features some other bits that are unusual ... like casting Terence Stamp who has been known to quit acting in order to undertake meditation and a path of the inner side. 

It is a very spiritual film, but it does not hammer anything at you. It just shows some moments in one's life and how things progress and moves along, and in the end, it allows you to make your own call and understanding, which is the hard part that makes the film be a bit of an oddity for you ... you have to figure it out for yourself!

Beautiful film, and probably one of the most spiritual film ever made, but a film that does not push its vision and try to print it on your head. The ending is as much as a far out bit as it is a release, though dance/dancing is not shown in the earlier parts as being that important until the ending sequence. And even then, it is something that we would probably ask ... dance? ... since we are used to something that has an interpretation of our own lives a lot more than something, that has an invisible link that we can not see altogether. 

I suppose that we think that is the case in most of our lives?

Directed by Peter Brook

Written by Peter Brook, G. I. Gurdjieff and Jeanne Salzmann

Music by Thomas de Hartmann adapted by Laurence Rosenthal

Cinematography by Gilbert Taylor

With Dragan Maksimovic as Gurdjieff, Terence Stamp as Prince Lubovedsky, Mikica Dimitrijevic as the young Gurdjieff, Athol Fugard (well known playwright in the English Theater scene!) as Professor Skridlov, Warren Mitchell, Fahro Konjhodzic, David Markham, Natasha Parry

I would have thrown in "¡Viva la muerte!" ("Long Live Death!") by Fernando Arrabal and "Zardoz" by John Boorman.

"Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes" and "De vierde man" (I prefer to use the original titles of movies) are two of my all time favourite movies; normally my vote would go there. But "La montaña sagrada" needs a vote.

I once saw a triple feature of "La montaña sagrada" (the original title of "The Holy Mountain"), "¡Viva la muerte!" and "Zardoz" on acid at a local cinema. Somehow the acid merged these three movies into one super long and super weird movie.

My favourite books by Umberto Eco are "Baudolino" and "La misteriosa fiamma della regina Loana" ("The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana"). The latter is in my opinion an attempt of Eco to describe what will happen inside the brain shortly after death. Extremely fascinating.

Stunning, I tell you

"Elmer Gantry" is my favorite.

Notice one of the last scenes. Fate. Accident. Big Bang?

We see a sign that reads, "NO SMOKING", but a guy flickers his cigarette, and because of all the straw/hay, the place catches on fire. Everyone (except Sister Sharon) goes by instinct, and gets the hell out of there, despite Sister Sharon telling them this is the apocalypse/rapture, some message from the heavens. She's the only believer. And that's religion for you. Just like every President has to suddenly pretend he loves the bible.

It's business, and Lancaster's character demonstrates this in every way, but finally "grows up". 

A couple more ...

Barrabas (with Anthony Quinn)

The Devils (Ken Russell's)

All in all, a magnificent list ... but me voting on it is gonna be tough.

Of all these, I think that "Bedazzled" (the original with PC and DM) is probably the one film that I would think is the best, despite folks not appreciating some of the incredible twisted humor, specially the last 15 minutes, which is SO TRUE TODAY. George Spigott kept his promise ... he went out and created a mess!

BTW, I remember when I first saw "Jesus of Montreal" and how stunned I was ... it is an incredible film, although I think that some "Christians" won't like the hippocrisy so wide open in the film!

"Life of Bryan" also deserves some outstanding kudos for some wonderful writing, and not just clever ... 

This is a great film that has not been mentioned. And the ending has a superb twist with a popular musician.

There's quite a few titles I haven't seen or don't remember very well. 

Just about all of his films have a religious theme or undertone. my particular favourite being "The Fountain".

Will: With multiple options included in each vote, perhaps you might have done two or three polls.

Others I'd add to the list (though you've done an amazing job, Will, and mine might be stretching the "religious" or "spiritual" theme):

A very disturbing film. 

Ennio Morricone - The Mission

Is "The Gospel According to St. Matthew" the Pasolini's one?

Hi,

I wanted to mention this one, but I left it behind, as I could not exactly make out my thoughts about the film. I think there is a side of it that is a blatant attack on the Roman edition of everything, and how the folks on the street really see it and actually interpret it, rather than believe what they are told, which is worse than a childish story and was written way later by folks that were obviously trying to create some kind of ideal that was related to how Summerian religions looked at deity ... NOT HUMAN ... which was a theme that had been visible as well through the Greek stories, that were all b*****dized into concepts that are still a problem today, ridiculous to say the least ... and our schools keep on "teaching" the stuff instead of putting on the proper human thought at work. The Greek "chorus" was the perfect example of a system trying to change the mores of the time and place into some kind of social control and direction. It bothers me, that in theater, this is revered, instead of ridiculed.

A great example is how Medea's story is rewritten to make her look like a witch and a malevolent person ... nothing like hating women and consider them evil! It just gets old!

Sadly, PPP is not exactly clear and is certainly confused on how to portray women in both the Decameron and the Canterbury Tales, many times not making them honest. So, in my book, his idealism was as confusing as his ideas in "Empirismo Eretico" ... which, while an interesting study in the history of the Italian language, in the end, makes it a mess of confusion and ideologies, though it is possibly the best book on that particular history! But the linguistic studies can not make any dent on the religious material any more than it can on the political and social norms! Thus, for me, his "religious" themes are just an idea, and more than likely an intentional attack against the social orders in relation to religion. 

This, lowers the film for my tastes. Sadly enough. A great idea ... kinda lost in its own illusion. Monty Python might have done this a lot better!