http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005 by the authors Sat, 1 Nov 2003 15:22:26 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26383 Sorry, the second half of my comment is directed at andy (#1), not you. For you, why see the movie? Because it's a fun movie, and far more historically accurate that many other historical bio-pics. ;-) 26383@blogcritics.org Sat, 1 Nov 2003 15:22:26 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26381 For an atheist like me that's not really the question;-) Anyway, I've read about a lot of historical mistakes - which I can't recall here, because I'm everything but a history buff (in fact I hate history). The comment that made me thinking was from a Luther expert I saw on tv: If you watch this movie, get some other information, too (e.g. read a book). So, I'm thinking, why not read a book in the first place and skip the movie altogether? 26381@blogcritics.org Sat, 1 Nov 2003 14:38:21 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26379 Michelle - the statement is much-debated. Some say he never actually nailed the these to the church door (instead of sending them privately), some say he never said "here I stand..." and so on. Given the era and so on, there will be way to have a definitive answer one way or the other, but I happen to believe that the evidence support both events as true. Other disagree, but I don't know that we can say anything like "Luther never actually said" or did with any degree of certainty. Heck, some people disagree even on some of the stuff he wrote - claiming it came from others and Luther put his name on it. What can you do? But see the movie - it's excellent, even if Fiennes is considerably more attractive than Luther was. As far as the doctrines go, I don't know that I'd say holding to Luther's doctrines is a great prize, frankly. His 95 Theses contained much that was specifically aimed at the egregious practices of his day, practices that do not continue even in the modern Roman church post-Trent. While he was the "Father of the Reformation," he was by no means the most influential scholar thereof over time. Better, I think, to be close to Scripture than the Luther. 26379@blogcritics.org Sat, 1 Nov 2003 14:17:25 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26361 Naturally the films gets a lot of media attention here in Germany (I think it started on Thursday). Though, a lot of it isn't historical fact - for instance (as I recently learnt) Luther never actually said the words: "Here I stand. I can do no other." I didn't decide yet whether to see the film or not. I can't really imagine Joseph Fiennes as little fat monk. 26361@blogcritics.org Sat, 1 Nov 2003 07:21:14 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26349 But not the Missouri Synod Lutherans as I can attest to. 26349@blogcritics.org Sat, 1 Nov 2003 00:36:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/15/001825.php#comment-26245 I would say that Southern Baptists are probably closer to the doctrines Luther thought than the modern day Lutherans are though. 26245@blogcritics.org Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:21:49 EST