MovieChat Forums > Paul (2011) Discussion > Questions or Comments

Questions or Comments

posted 10 years ago by king_of_bob
4 replies | jump to latest

On March 11th the Welcome to Planet Bob podcast will be recording our Paul episode. Are there any questions or subjects you think we should discuss? If so, comment here and I'll try to work your questions and comments into the discussion.

We're still pretty new at this, so the whole show is a little rough around the edges but we have fun with it. Anyway, I look forward to whatever feedback this post may generate.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

[–] hadmatter 10 years ago

I loved this movie, and came to the board unprepared for the wiggy religious backlash. Did that figure into your enjoyment of the film at all? I thought it was hilarious and that the send-up of a peculiar American brand of Christian fundamentalism was well-observed and a completely appropriate topic for a couple of outsiders to focus on.

I am the sod-off shotgun.

[–] king_of_bob 10 years ago

I loved this movie, and came to the board unprepared for the wiggy religious backlash.

I had the same reaction at first. It's like some Christians can't see that Wiig's character is meant to be on the extreme end of Christianity. She clearly doesn't represent Christianity as a whole.

Did that figure into your enjoyment of the film at all?

How do you mean? To me she was a caricature of fundamentalist Christians. Meant to point out the absurdity of objecting to the theory of evolution entirely on the basis of it conflicting with ones religious beliefs.

But personally I really enjoyed her character and thought she grew significantly by the end of the film.

I thought it was hilarious and that the send-up of a peculiar American brand of Christian fundamentalism was well-observed and a completely appropriate topic for a couple of outsiders to focus on.

Absolutely. Did her character need to exist in order for the film to work? Not really. But she does bring a different point of view to the table from our two main characters. Which is its own justification.

I'll be sure to mention the controversy the film and that character in particular generated. I know my wife isn't religious and I'm pretty sure my other co-host isn't either. So we may not really be able to explore both sides of the issue, but we'll be sure to bring it up.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

[–] hadmatter 10 years ago

How do you mean?

I just meant that from these boards, it mostly seems like Wiig's character makes or breaks the movie for people. Now I suspect that the folks who are outright rejecting this movie are probably the type to be offended by virtually anything and actively look for reasons to be upset, but I could be wrong.

The key piece of evidence for me is that they seem to invariably take her character and then extrapolate that the entire movie is some huge attack on Christian values, and I really cannot see how they get the idea that Wiig is supposed to be representative of Christians in general.

Absolutely. Did her character need to exist in order for the film to work? Not really. But she does bring a different point of view to the table from our two main characters. Which is its own justification.

Exactly. It did not have to be this character, but the narrative did sort of require a character who represented some kind of extreme point of view. Simon and Nick are quite accepting and buddy-buddy with Paul; somebody in that RV needed to have a negative response. Otherwise all of the conflict would have been external.

I am the sod-off shotgun.

[–] king_of_bob 10 years ago

I just meant that from these boards, it mostly seems like Wiig's character makes or breaks the movie for people. Now I suspect that the folks who are outright rejecting this movie are probably the type to be offended by virtually anything and actively look for reasons to be upset, but I could be wrong.

At least going from my previous experience on this board, that's not too far off from the truth.

The key piece of evidence for me is that they seem to invariably take her character and then extrapolate that the entire movie is some huge attack on Christian values, and I really cannot see how they get the idea that Wiig is supposed to be representative of Christians in general.

Indeed. But these are the same types who seem to get offended whenever any character associated with Christianity does something negative in a film, the entire film is not only suddenly all about that character, but also an blatant attack on the whole of Christianity.

Exactly. It did not have to be this character, but the narrative did sort of require a character who represented some kind of extreme point of view. Simon and Nick are quite accepting and buddy-buddy with Paul; somebody in that RV needed to have a negative response. Otherwise all of the conflict would have been external.

One small point, Nick is actually the last to accept Paul. But that's due to his being jealous rather than an unwillingness to believe aliens exist.

I think the line Paul delivers in the film sums it up pretty well actually. His existence doesn't disprove the Christian God, only a literal interpretation of the Bible. Which is disproven by basic science anyway.

I also feel like it had to be a fundamentalist Christian character anyway, because they seem to be the only group of people who actively reject the concept of evolution en mass.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!