• God's Not Dead - Official Movie Trailer 2
    44 replies, posted
[video=youtube;IrmBiLM5xjg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrmBiLM5xjg[/video] The first trailer to this was posted a while back, I just noticed this new one wasn't up yet so I figured "why not." This looks like goddamn satire I can't even comprehend it. The comment section is a goldmine as well.
I feel like the twist is going to be that god raped the teacher as a child
Kevin Smith makes me wander, is this satire? I'm not assuming he is an atheist but damn I was sure. I guess for equality this film has every right to exist but I think we should be reminding people of the human spirit rather than the worshipping of a god.
[QUOTE=whatthe;43532092]Kevin Smith makes me wander, is this satire? I'm not assuming he is an atheist but damn I was sure. I guess for equality this film has every right to exist but I think we should be reminding people of the human spirit rather than the worshipping of a god.[/QUOTE] [img]http://entertainment.blogs.foxnews.com/files/2011/10/kevin-sorbo-hercules.jpg[/img] Sorbo [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/3.4.11KevinSmithByLuigiNovi1.png/220px-3.4.11KevinSmithByLuigiNovi1.png[/img] Smith
What an annoying song. Also, I find this movie utterly pointless, just like this kind of debate. A non-religious person challenging the believes of a religious person is juvenile to begin with and ultimately lead nowhere in reality. If both parties have an agenda of debunking the beliefs of the other both parties are kind of dicks and the religious person will have to resort to religious arguments in order to defend their belief while the other might use a philosophical approach. True theological debates are even more cryptic and, for a third party spectator, boring to observe. But what ultimately dooms the concept of this movie for me is the fact that it is a movie, a written story and the writer already has an outcome to this argument laid out and only needs the duration of the runtime to get there. The title even strongly suggests it to begin with. It comes from one mind. A one-sided argument to begin with. Now unless this is clever advertisement and the real message and outcome of the movie is "actually noone has to defend their beliefs in any way other than because they choose to believe so and challenging them in an argument makes you kind of a dick because, ultimately you want to win an argument and egoistically force the other person to accept your superior reasoning" this is a shit idea, accomplishes nothing other than reinforcing the writers own beliefs and reassuring anyone who shares his. This kind of debate would be a chance to show that the exact nature of ones beliefs is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is whether you're a prick to people or not but I get the feeling that the person who made this is kind of a pirck themselves, if it really ends on JUP YOU GUESSED RIGHT GOD IS IN YOUR HEART AND HE LOVES YOU VERY MUCH TAKE THAT PEOPLE WHO DONT AGREE, much like if the title and the angle of the movie was the opposite with neckbeard "proud atheist" debates
[QUOTE=spekter;43532400][img]http://entertainment.blogs.foxnews.com/files/2011/10/kevin-sorbo-hercules.jpg[/img] Sorbo [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/3.4.11KevinSmithByLuigiNovi1.png/220px-3.4.11KevinSmithByLuigiNovi1.png[/img] Smith[/QUOTE] i was talking about the [URL="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3542587/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1"]bearded dude[/URL] as I had mistaken him for Kevin Smith. My above post was pretty stupid regardless.
The professor is not wearing a fedora. 0/10
I'm curious to see the movie, but i don't really like the strawman feel of it. No university religions teacher who is atheist would force their beliefs on the students. That duck call guy is awesome though!
[QUOTE=Nillor;43533024]I'm curious to see the movie, but i don't really like the strawman feel of it. No university religions teacher who is atheist would force their beliefs on the students. That duck call guy is awesome though![/QUOTE] Why? Why exactly would you want to see this? It's clearly going to be shit, even discounting the obvious fallacies shown in the trailer itself. And "God is dead" was coined by Nietzsche, and while I won't imply that I have read his texts or understand anything other than his major points, the way it's discussed in the movie has nothing to do with the real meaning (as far as the trailer shows at least). "God is dead" has nothing to do with whether God exists or not, it's actually not crucial. It's more about whether people believe in God or not - by not believing in God and not believing in the eternal life, God ceases to exists. Remember that (as far as I understand) Nietzsche believes God (and religion) to be a social construct made up by the slaves trying to gain power in society to overpower the masters. He actually seems to pity the madman (and the human race), as salvation is now impossible.
This is the most shit movie I have ever seen :suicide:
[QUOTE=Beluntz;43533603]This is the most shit movie I have ever seen :suicide:[/QUOTE] whoa is it out
[QUOTE=Beluntz;43533603]This is the most shit movie I have never seen :suicide:[/QUOTE] ftfy [QUOTE]Release date: March 21, 2014 (USA)[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;43533542]Why? Why exactly would you want to see this? It's clearly going to be shit, even discounting the obvious fallacies shown in the trailer itself. And "God is dead" was coined by Nietzsche, and while I won't imply that I have read his texts or understand anything other than his major points, the way it's discussed in the movie has nothing to do with the real meaning (as far as the trailer shows at least). "God is dead" has nothing to do with whether God exists or not, it's actually not crucial. It's more about whether people believe in God or not - by not believing in God and not believing in the eternal life, God ceases to exists. Remember that (as far as I understand) Nietzsche believes God (and religion) to be a social construct made up by the slaves trying to gain power in society to overpower the masters. He actually seems to pity the madman (and the human race), as salvation is now impossible.[/QUOTE] Spot onish. I was lucky enough to study Nietzsche because I did philosophy at university, and what you've said as far as I understand is generally correct. That said, I wouldn't wholeheartedly say that Nietzsche was an atheist. He's a confusing man. What he came up with was a convincing explanation as to god's "existence" as a moral force. Whether or not he believes god as an entity even exists is aside from his philosophy. And yeah, at a few points in his writing, Nietzsche is pretty terrified as to what will happen with the fall of religion derived morality. There's a whole discussion about science replacing it, but he doesn't regard that as being any better, just as another form of the ascetic ideal. (If I remember, could be totally wrong). Oh oh quick point, god and religion isn't a social construct made up by the slaves, quite the opposite. Nietzsche believed that there was a fundamental sense of misgiving that powers '[I]ressentiment[/I]'. The slaves hate their position in life because they basically suck, the nobles are superior to them in every way, and they hate that. There's a whole point about them creating a 'new language' so that they can free themselves from using the noblility terms (weakness becomes meakness, humility etc) (Nietzsche believed that the nobility had created a language that the slaves had no choice but to use. The position of the slaves is [I]so bad[/I] that they do not even have a way of expressing their existence positively. They're weak, they're stupid. Using noble terms these are nothing but negative, but coined in a certain way, they become positives through the slave revolt and the change in language powered by [I]ressentiment)[/I]. But there is a thing in his picture of the world called the priest, who directs the frustration of the slaves inward, rather than causing a revolt. Instead, the priest says that the slaves are responsible for their own weakness, because they are fundamentally evil beings (original sin etc), and that beyond this life of suffering there is one that will be infinitely better and free from toil (life after death). This way, the slaves direct their frustration inward, blaming themselves for their weakness, and they no longer believe their suffering is fruitless, because there is another life that will be better that this is merely the leadup to it. Yaddya yaddya, slaves no longer revolt because they don't blame the nobles for their position. Oh also, he believes that a 'bad conscience' is something invented by the slaves as well. But that's another discussion entirely.
This extra looks over at the camera briefly, why did they put this in the trailer? [img]http://i.imgur.com/rNJPtJI.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43533633]Spot onish. I was lucky enough to study Nietzsche because I did philosophy at university, and what you've said as far as I understand is generally correct. That said, I wouldn't wholeheartedly say that Nietzsche was an atheist. He's a confusing man. What he came up with was a convincing explanation as to god's "existence" as a moral force. Whether or not he believes god as an entity even exists is aside from his philosophy. And yeah, at a few points in his writing, Nietzsche is pretty terrified as to what will happen with the fall of religion derived morality. There's a whole discussion about science replacing it, but he doesn't regard that as being any better, just as another form of the ascetic ideal. (If I remember, could be totally wrong). Oh oh quick point, god and religion isn't a social construct made up by the slaves, quite the opposite. Nietzsche believed that there was a fundamental sense of misgiving that powers '[I]ressentiment[/I]'. The slaves hate their position in life because they basically suck, the nobles are superior to them in every way, and they hate that. There's a whole point about them creating a 'new language' so that they can free themselves from using the noblility terms (weakness becomes meakness, humility etc) (Nietzsche believed that the nobility had created a language that the slaves had no choice but to use. The position of the slaves is [I]so bad[/I] that they do not even have a way of expressing their existence positively. They're weak, they're stupid. Using noble terms these are nothing but negative, but coined in a certain way, they become positives through the slave revolt and the change in language powered by [I]ressentiment)[/I]. But there is a thing in his picture of the world called the priest, who directs the frustration of the slaves inward, rather than causing a revolt. Instead, the priest says that the slaves are responsible for their own weakness, because they are fundamentally evil beings (original sin etc), and that beyond this life of suffering there is one that will be infinitely better and free from toil (life after death). This way, the slaves direct their frustration inward, blaming themselves for their weakness, and they no longer believe their suffering is fruitless, because there is another life that will be better that this is merely the leadup to it. Yaddya yaddya, slaves no longer revolt because they don't blame the nobles for their position. Oh also, he believes that a 'bad conscience' is something invented by the slaves as well. But that's another discussion entirely.[/QUOTE] I should probably have been a bit more clear - what I'm saying is that the slaves are creating a discourse - a social construct - that discerns not between "good" and "bad", but "good" and "evil". The slaves gain power over the nobility through this moralization, and as I understand it, God (or Gods in general) are simply projections of the current society, and as such a "weak" God would fit the discourse pretty darn well. But really, I'm only in the last year of high school, so I'm really not qualified to say much about this. It's my general (though narrow) understanding of Nietzsche.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;43533765]I should probably have been a bit more clear - what I'm saying is that the slaves are creating a discourse - a social construct - that discerns not between "good" and "bad", but "good" and "evil". The slaves gain power over the nobility through this moralization, and as I understand it, God (or Gods in general) are simply projections of the current society, and as such a "weak" God would fit the discourse pretty darn well. But really, I'm only in the last year of high school, so I'm really not qualified to say much about this. It's my general (though narrow) understanding of Nietzsche.[/QUOTE] Well, depends what you mean. The moralization that exists with the slaves is a negative one. Essentially, in the nobles, their morality was entirely affirming, it is defined by positives. Power. Strength. Badness is not in being a certain way, but it is in a lacking. The slaves have nothing positive to affirm, so they must affirm the negatives. Brutality. Viciousness. They create a system where you are evil if you act like a noble, and you're good if you act like a slave (brutality vs meekness). The slaves create a system where they are the good guys out of bitterness. It's less about gaining power over nobility, Nietzsche makes it clear this isn't really possible for the slaves. The nobles are just better than them. They're stronger and smarter. What the slaves create is a way to see themselves in a positive light, they direct their bitterness and lack of self-worth towards creating a system where they feel like the good guys. They don't gain power per say over the nobles, but rather they [I]survive[/I]. Nietzsche makes it clear that the slaves, as they were, could not have survived. Discourse is a good term, but I prefer the term 'language' myself. It makes it seem larger. Also worth remembering that his discussion of the ascetic priest and religion is related to, but not entirely encompassed by his beliefs about of slave morality. He writes about the priest in a different section of the Genealogy, but I'm no expert on it. Don't worry about it, Nietzsche is absolutely fascinating, I did a talk or two about him in high school and then did him some more at university level. Wish I'd done my dissertation on this stuff to be honest. Oh don't go quoting me on any of this, I could be utterly wrong. I'm recalling lectures I had about a year and a bit ago, so I could be remembering incorrectly.
I would actually watch this, I suspect it will be full of stawman fallacies and Argumentum ad baculum but its always good to get the other side of the argument.
"OMG, GOD ISN'T REAL!!!" "BUT I KNOW HE IS BECAUSE I FEEL HIM" "NO, YOU ARE WRONG!!" "HERE, I AM RIGHT, YOU ARE WRONG!!" "DAMN!!" There, i gave you the plot. The completely laughable, unironic plot.
but guys SCIENCE SUPPORTS HE EXISTS!
Why do we need any religion, you can live pretty good without beliving in something. Also professor fails - if he says "God is dead", he means it existed.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raerE_zUfCA[/media] Thread is dead, hallelujah!
i literally started watching this thinking it was a comedy movie.
I kind of want someone to make a parody called God's (really) Dead, in which a young man in a religious school is told to proclaim his belief in God and refuses. Then there can be a cheesy debate and the professor cries and admits he really knows but was angry about it and in denial. Simply to see the reaction of people.
This movie is like those webcomics that are made simply to spite people that disagree with the writers. The writer creates a self-insert that is some perfect being who is never wrong and always overcomes the bad arguments they gave the opposing side intentionally to make them look like some bigoted, disgusting brute.
Even that student says "The science supports his existence!" I wonder if they elaborate on that in the movie.
damn superman dropped low
I hope this plays when the professor enters the room. [video=youtube;5KbftJIY7sk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KbftJIY7sk[/video]
First thing that came to mind. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhhOU5FUPBE[/media]
This movie is really very unnecessary and it comes off as such a joke because it's making this giant threat out of a tiny thing. Like yeah there is a lot of atheism in higher learning but it's not a threat to Christianity. I mean shit look at Jesuit schools. It's just such a joke conflict it hurts.
Someone posted in the thread for the first one with a (probably) spot-on summary of how the movie's gonna go, it was something like: The professor reveals in a sad scene that he lost faith in God after a loved one died, the student convinces him to move on and that it was part of God's plan, then at the end of the movie the professor is teaching a new class, and in a book end to the opening, asks them to write in their books "God's not dead" then that song from the trailer will start playing, cut to credits.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.