MovieChat Forums > Silence (2017) Discussion > God/Christ's voice - did it ruin the mov...

God/Christ's voice - did it ruin the movie?


What do we think about the inclusion of Christ's voice towards the end of the movie?

Was it necessary and would the faith message be stronger if there was ambiguity around the existence of God?

Christ's face appearing in the water, which at the time I interpreted as a delirious hallucination of Father Rodrigues, was also literal I assume.

I believe the message would be stronger without these elements - what exactly would a person go through to show their faith in something they have no proof exists and what would their physical/mental breaking point be?

*************

I was however pleased to see Father Ferreira safe and well after being taken.

reply

Why would it be literal? Rodrigues heard the voice of Christ, saw the reflection in the water. Who can say from where they came?

reply

Why would it not be literal? The writer/director can present anything they wish as factual and real as it is a work of fiction.

In the book there is a strong argument to be made for a literal interpretation, as we have by that point switched to an omniscient third-person narrative.

In any case, my point was that I felt the movie lost an opportunity to explore and question the limits of spiritually and faith by throwing (perceived) proof into the mix.

The final scene where we see Rodrigues holding a small crucifix seemed unnecessary - obviously he still believes and therefore still prizes Christian symbols, he's on speaking terms with Jesus.

reply

[deleted]

I believe that was a crucifix he received when he first arrived in Japan. He was holding it at the point of his death, as is traditional in Catholicism.

reply

The movie's 'theological adviser', Reverend James Martin, was interviewed on the subject:

A long-debated question about the novel has resurfaced. Is it even God’s voice that Rodrigues hears, or is this relief conjured from the priest’s desperation? The novel doesn’t take a side — “it’s maddeningly vague,” Martin says — but Scorsese’s movie gives a cleaner conclusion: Rodrigues spends the rest of his days in Japan apostatizing until the final frame, when he’s buried as a Buddhist with a hidden cross.

reply

Rodrigues saw the image of Christ and heard His voice. The Japanese never did. And it was obvious that his wife placed the crucifix in his lifeless hand at the end, before he was burned.

Television is a vice; film is an addiction.

reply

The voice was his conscious justifying his decision to surrender the faith in his heart.






http://www.imdb.com/list/_OaGg-zdQKo/

reply

I could be wrong- but God's voice sounded like Liam Neeson's voice. Perhaps it was supposed to be Ferrera's influence (he was Rodriguez's teacher). Now that Ferrera had apostitized Rodriguez knew he might go down the same path his teacher did.
Just a thought...

reply

If it was meant to be taken as the actual voice of God/Christ, then, for any non-believer, it turns a very serious and thought-provoking film about the nature of faith into a ridiculous joke.

That God actually talks to people is not something that is supported by reason. For one thing, if that's the case, He seems to have made great sport by telling different people different divinely inspired truths, leading to just the sorts of atrocities portrayed in this film (including a hell of a lot by Christians).

Belief that God speaks to people is a textbook example of something that can only be accepted as an article of faith, which is to say, belief unsupported by objective fact. It has to be that way in this movie.

Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.

reply

It sounds like it was a joke to you already, so what difference does it make?

reply

The voice of God wasn't a joke to me. It was a hallucination, like the one Saul of Tarsus obviously had on the road to Damascus.

Again, if that was actually a divine revelation, then you have to write off every other religion's divine revelations as hallucinations. What makes Christianity's version exempt? They all seem to be equal in character. (Well, except for Mormonism, which is less credible than the competition.)

So, you need an argument that Christianity is the one true religion. But it's actually much easier to make the opposite argument.

1) It's the only major world religion whose supposed divinely inspired scripture conflicts with the historical record, and in important ways. For instance, healing on the Sabbath was a Pharisaic innovation, so the Gospel portrayal of their condemning it struck contemporary Jewish readers as an obvious lie. That's the actual reason Jews of that era rejected Christ as Lord and Savior: they knew that the Gosepls were full of anti-Semitic claptrap.

Bet you they didn't teach you that in Sunday School.

2) It claims that its belief system (which isn't a justifiable theological doctrine to begin with, but that's a different story) is the only way to reduce sin, but modern psychology tells us that it would have just the opposite effect -- being brought up with the Christian belief system could be expected to make your moral behavior worse. All the available data confirms this is true. Or did you think it was just an accident that all of the Mafia are devout believers?

Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.

reply

It sounds like it was a joke to you already, so what difference does it make?

reply

In the book our protagonist also heard the voice of God. You can't blame Martin for including that detail from the book in the movie

reply

The question to me isn't did Rodrigues hear God's voice but did he perceive himself as hearing a literal voice/revelation. You can say that the idea of hearing the voice of God is crazy but that doesn't change the fact that many people perceive that they have. FWIW To me him hear God telling him to public betray his faith is a far more startling idea and challenging to belief generally and church teaching specifically than the idea of him not having heard God.

reply

It was Ferreira's voice talking to the protagonist. It wasn't god.

reply

The voice overs in the film take several forms. Scorsese has taken this approach before in his more popular films-Goodfellas, Casino-but here it is used to create a different tone while creating the same experience of an intensely personal point of view. We hear it as letters to and from, internal thoughts/prayers, and towards the end we break to third person to reveal the historic nature of the film.

I don't believe hearing the voice of God is as important as what God actually says. He is speaking encouragement to Father Rodriquez to trample the image of Christ. Rodriquez begs to hear God the entire film and only in his moment of absolute bottom is he able to hear God, and all God can do is encourage him to give up his faith.

I believe Rodriquez was hearing the voice in his head to give himself the final push he needed to save himself from further persecution. He sees time and again throughout the film how those who denoiunce Christ are rewarded with money, shelter, or freedom.

I don't know if the voice he hears is God speaking to him or himself conjuring it in his mind in order to give him that last push. I do know it is the moment that he is able to denounce him, only after he's heard his voice. I think that's important somehow.

reply