MovieChat Forums > Evil Angels (1988) Discussion > apparently, you can't be a Seventh Day A...

apparently, you can't be a Seventh Day Adventist in a media-centric....

posted 18 years ago by multiplepov-1
3 replies | jump to latest

When I first saw "A Cry in the Dark", I had no idea what the plot was. But when I saw it, I was shocked at what it portrayed. When I saw it a second time in an Australian Cinema class, I realized a second point: communication issues. You see, when a dingo snatched Lindy Chamberlain's (Meryl Streep) baby, she and her husband Michael (Sam Neill) were grief-stricken but *didn't show it. As Seventh Day Adventists, they believed that God willed this to happen, and so they couldn't mourn it. But when people all over Australia saw their lack of sadness, everyone started believing that Lindy did it herself.

The point is, the wrong message got communicated to the public, and it turned people against Lindy. Even though this was a pure accident, it still happened. It may be one of the biggest disasters resulting from the existence of mass media, regardless of any media outlet's political views.

I was raised Seventh-Day Adventist. I think that another important factor explaining this miscarriage of justice was that being a minister's wife in the very insular world of Adventism had Lindy so used to being held in high regard that she was completely unaware that anyone could doubt her honesty, doubt her good character, or imagine her capable of anything evil. She just couldn't comprehend the need to explain herself to "the world." Meryl Streep captured that attitude marvelously well.

By the way, this movie was impressively accurate in its details... the 5-Day Stop Smoking outreach program (that used the mini-coffin prop), the Junior Missionary Volunteer pennants on the walls of the church auditorium, the horrified reactions to being offered beer by fellow campers, Lindy's stoicism.

The other movie based on a famous true story concerning an SDA (Sybil) just ignored her religion altogether.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Candy_star 16 years ago

and so they couldn't mourn it.

& THAT...is where lindy went wrong. im part 7day advent as well...also hae some jewish in me. & i know if i lost i child i would go into a depression or something. the only dif between my mourning & non-christian mourning would be that i wouldnt blame god for it. just cuz im religios doesnt mean i dont have feelings. god made those feeligns & so we have a right to use them...not in extremes (like oh im so mad im gonna kill someone) but still use them. lindy's not showing grief always annoyed me. i know she felt it yes...but i was she was a bit more....like the father. it helps to get it out & heal faster & then thast were god comes in...he takes care of it.

but anyway....i always thought she was innocent...just wished she'd show a wee bit more emotion.

And this is the car that Jeremy had chosen....because he's an idiot.~Top Gear

[–] MalContentUSA 13 years ago

I suspect that this is a common misconception amongst other Christian groups as well, taking the statement "Do not mourn as those who have no hope" to mean that one shouldn't mourn at all. As well, Lindy could well have felt that she had to remain strong in order to care for her surviving children. That said, I do think she came across as just a bit too clinical in describing a dingo's way of eating its prey as being "like you or I peeling an orange"--the "prey" in this case was after all her own infant, and it would not have been unreasonable to show SOME sense of horror at the thought.