The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF version"There Be Dragons" review
by Sr. Rose Pacatte on May. 07, 2011
It is 1976. Journalist Robert Torres (Dougray Scott) is researching a Catholic priest, Josemaria Escriva, the founder of a Catholic group called Opus Dei, who had recently died amidst rumors of sanctity. Much to his surprise, Robert discovers that his estranged father, Manolo (Wes Bentley), grew up in the same village in Spain and even went to the same seminary. Robert travels from London to Madrid to find answers to his questions, but even after an eight-year silence, his father will not speak to him.
Manolo is a man haunted by his past. He was the child of wealthy parents while Josemaria's father owned a chocolate factory that he lost when times turned bad. Early on Manolo became envious of Josemaria because he could see that the Escriva family was filled with love while his own father was stern and even cruel.
After a year in the seminary, Manolo leaves. Josemaria (Charlie Cox) however, becomes a priest. He gathers a few young men who are interested in becoming priests and living holy lives. They teach and work in hospitals. After a few years, Josemaria asks permission of the auxiliary bishop of Valencia (Robert Blythe) to found a community that will include laity, both men and women who will live separately, and even married couples. Their mission will be to teach others to find holiness in daily life and work.
Meanwhile the Spanish Civil War breaks out in 1936. Manolo is sent as a spy among the socialists. He learns to kill. He falls in love with Ildiko (Olga Kurylenko), a young Hungarian woman who has come to fight with the revolutionaries. She notices Manolo's jealousy when she becomes attracted to their leader and is repulsed by his envy. Things come to a head when Ildiko becomes pregnant.
Josemaria, after trying to minister as a priest during the war that targeted clergy in particular, finally agrees to escape over the Pyrenees into France.
"There Be Dragons," written and directed by twice Oscar-nominated Roland Joffe ("The Killing Fields" and "The Mission"), is not a biopic of St. Josemaria Escriva. Instead, Joffe set aside the original script and wrote a fictional story based on themes of love and forgiveness that he gleaned from reading more about Escriva and watching video tapes of him speaking with people.
The good news about this film is that the cinematography is gorgeous, the art direction excellent, and the historical sequences, including the battle scenes, seem quite authentic. The visual parallel narrative structure, the subtleness of the religious imagery, works well.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
There are three moments in the film in particular, which stood out for me. One is when the manager of the chocolate factory, Honorio (Sir Derek Jacobi), teaches the young boys about the "patience, skill, hard work and love" that it takes to discover the divine taste of chocolate. Josemaria remembers these themes when he begins "The Work" that his mother will translate into the Latin, "Opus Dei."
The second moment is when Josemaria visits the dying Honorio in the hospital and discovers he is Jewish, and they pray together.
The third moment comes at the end when Josemaria is hidden among the mentally ill in a hospital before escaping into France. There he encounters a young woman who was raped and she talks to him about the reality of God's presence. But is she real, or is she a vision? Either way, it is a luminous moment.
There is yet another scene that I appreciated as well. During the war, one of the young members of "The Work" wants to start a pro-Church crusade, but Josemaria says no because this will only add to the hatred. They ask him why people attack the Church and he says, "Because they see us as part of a system that causes them pain." I thought this reflected the complexity of the Spanish Civil War very well.
The not-so-good news is that Joffe has structured the film as a Cain and Abel story, a dualistic structure that leaves little room for ambiguity. Josemaria is sweetness and light and Manolo is dark, brooding, and violent.
The acting is even, though Charlie Cox's portrayal of Escriva makes the priest seem too good, almost sweet, to be true; no one character really stands out for me except Ildiko; she's exceptional.
The forgiveness that Robert is asked to extend to his father is so extreme, to me, that it does not seem plausible, as is Manolo's violence. It is jarring. I can only imagine that a biopic of St. Josemaria Escriva might have been rather boring except to the initiated, because he is presented as so ordinary -- a hallmark of Opus Dei's mission. Thus, Joffe must have felt compelled to create such opposites to make the story interesting. I remember reading a 1952 book by Louis de Wohl "The Golden Thread: A Novel about St. Ignatius of Loyola." His life story was told effectively, and entertainingly to a teen reader, because of the way the adventures of the main character, a mercenary soldier, kept intersecting with that of Ignatius.
The title "There be Dragons" refers to early maps of the world, where unknown geographical areas were labeled "Here be dragons." Joffe says that this title appealed to him because he would be going into unknown spiritual areas with this film and exploring love, forgiveness and reconciliation.
If you decide to see "There Be Dragons", approach it as a fictional story, without expectations of a biography of St. Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer, who was canonized in 2002. Two of the producers for the film are members of Opus Dei and an Opus Dei priest served as a consultant, so one assumes it passed muster. I don't believe the film will cause controversy because there is just not enough information about Opus Dei and the focus is on Escriva who comes off as intelligent, benevolent, and benign -- though he is shown flagellating himself at one point.
If you think you will come away knowing anything specific about "Opus Dei," you will be disappointed. Controversy has dogged the group for decades, coming to a head when they were inaccurately portrayed in the novel and film "The Da Vinci Code." If "Opus Dei" is a secular institute (it is; approved by the Church in 1950) to teach people how to become holy in daily life, I have to ask what is so exceptional about this? As Christians, we are all called to this goal. Therefore, I have to assume that either there is no more to know, or if there is something unique about Opus Dei, the information was not made available to Joffe.
Josemaria Escriva comes off as very ordinary in extraordinary times.
However, to give the story its due, you may be inspired if the violence does not put you off. Fidelity to one's friends (even if not reciprocated), forgiveness and reconciliation are for all seasons.
"There Be Dragons" opens in theaters May 6.
It seems to have gotten
It seems to have gotten terrible reviews - New York Times, Rotten Tomatoes. But your review makes it sound worth seeing. Thanks!
If the plan is to re-invent a
If the plan is to re-invent a new, fictionalized “saint”, that is in line with Christ’s teaching, I am all for it.
But underneath the veneer of Catholicism in OD, lies a Gnostic self-serving “theology of cheating”, mixed in with navel-gazing pantheism that has little to do with Christianity. Work is important, always was (cf St Paul), but not most important, contrary to Escriva’s dogma. Prayer is most important, as Christ taught Marta. Over 1000 years ago, St Benedict defined Opus Dei as the prayer life if the Church, in direct opposition to human work. Instead, OD gives it a new meaning: work, make money, and give it all to the “movement”, this is the only way to really become “holy”. In reality, and contrary to the film, forgiveness is not a high priority. According to Escriva “The standard of holiness that God asks of us is determined by these three points: Holy intransigence, holy coercion and holy shamelessness.”(“The Way, maxim 387”; where in the Bible does that come from??). For Escriva, vices now become virtues, as long as they serve the “movement” (by bringing $$$ and recruits). In Escriva’s upside down “spirituality”, chocolate making for the sake of chocolate making as long as all revenues go to OD, is more important then caring for another human. This is a good example of cult-like loading of language technique, where one changes meaning of established terms, to better control members to the cult’s advantage.
And what about this “holiness” accessible to “every one”? Again, as the reviewer pointed out, this is nothing new. Christ Salvation is for every one, the moment He died on the Cross. Ironically, Escriva achieved ordinary holiness, but not the way he intended. In 1983, the whole saint approval process was undermined by the removal of canons regulating the office of Promoter of Faith. This was the office that looked critically at candidates for sainthood. This was the year Cardinal Herranz (OD) was appointed secretary of the office of interpretation of legislative texts. Escrica’s beatification candidature was started the year before. Once the office of Promoter of Faith was removed, his beatification could go full steam ahead, unchecked. So thanks to OD, the whole saint approval process was downgraded, and the argument "...but, but he is a saint" no longer works.
OD tried to spread their “holy shamelessness” when in power during Pope JP2. This “shamelessness” explains in large part attitudes that permeated the Curia and allowed abuse of children to also go unchecked. Yes, granted, OD members, to their credit, were only very rarely directly implicated in cases of abuse. But instead, this “shamelessness” protected those that brought “good fruits” (e.g. $$$), like Fr Maciel, as powerful OD members looked the other way, during the reign of JP2. For example:
1) Navarro Valls repeatedly blocked question about Father Maciel from Harford Courant reporters Berry and Renner in 1997.
2) Cardinal Herranz, who was head of the interpretation of legislative texts (Vatican attorney general), said in an interview to the New York Times in 2002, that he was against Bishops reporting abuse, and that this was all media sensationalisms.
3) Over the last 18 months, OD prominent members made repeatedly retrograde comments about abuse, including Fr Wauck, Navaro Valls (again), Mr Gotti Tedeschi. They were even out of synch with the Pope’s much more contrite statements.
4) Just a few months ago, OD thinker Vittorio Messori said about the Berlusconi scandal, which involves underage prostitutions: “A politician that uses prostitutes, but makes good laws, is surely better then a good Catholic who makes laws contrary to the Church.”
This reflects the priorities of OD spirituality: keep $$$ and “influence” coming, at all cost. When relatively moderate theologians like Sobrino spoke about the option of the poor, these were immediately shut up. Yet, even though Escriva’s “theology of cheating” is as un-Christian as the most extremes forms of left liberation theology, he got to be “a saint”. People like Maciel, who just plagiarized, got a pass for ½ century, Kiko “secret catechism” in Spain, got a pass, just because these scientology cult-like structures bring $$$. These new extreme right “theologies of cheating for the rich” are being forced down the throats of all of us, as “new traditions”, by the current Vatican crew. This new version of casuistry explains in large part the mess the Catholic Church is in now (is it a surprise that Pope Innocent XI was removed from the Vatican recently, how sad?).
Not sure why JP2 was in denial regarding abuse, but the largely “conservative” curia culture under him, with a powerful OD presence, was, and still is, involved in the cover-up and now, covering of own tracks. This film is just one part of this tactic, a smoke screen.
If the Church is going to function by “Faith and Reason”, how about starting by restoring the office of Promoter of Faith, instead of paying for a clever $35 million “saintfomercial”?
Lets hope OD and all of us start thinking that: “The standard of Holiness that God asks of us is determined by these seven Virtues: Holy Love, Holy Faith, Holy Hope, Holy Prudence, Holy Justice, Holy Temperance and Holy Fortitude”. Christian virtues are neither liberal or conservative, just true.
comments from IMDb that say
comments from IMDb that say it all:
Waiting on a film, 25 March 2011
Author: Geral
The problem with this film at IMDb is to know the real and final score. Right now is eight (8). 119 users of 147 voted ten (10), 14 voted nine (9), 6 voted eight (8). The others users voted lower than six (6). Well, or this is a spectacular film or we have a problem here. This score seems to me a little unreal and unbelievably.
Knowing Opus Dei since 1980, I think these 119 users are probably Opus Dei voters only and want to keep the score so higher as possible.
Why does this matter? Because a score should be representative and product of neutral or spontaneous voting. Well, I can barely believe this is the case. Let's see what happen in the next months.
And what about the film? Well, if somebody wants to know about Escriva and his Opus Dei, this film does not tell too much.
This is a very light film without any real information and questions like: How Opus Dei as organization was actually built since 1928? Why Opus Dei is in a very deep internal crisis since ten or fifteen years ago? Why a lot of people are leaving Opus Dei in the last years (in Spain, Mexico, Argentina, etc.)? Why is not so easy to leave Opus Dei? Yes, it is not easy but a lot of people fight for. Is it true that Escrivá declared whoever leaves Opus Dei will suffer a lot in this life and his eternal salvation will be in danger? Why so many celibate members suffer from depression? Is it possible that Opus Dei psychiatrists do not keep the professional secrecy and inform to Opus Dei superiors if a member talks about leaving Opus Dei? Yeah, that is a tough question to be made. How is possible that Escrivá became saint mainly because the testimony of his confessor? Why celibate members have to make a will (pro Opus Dei) like monks do before the perpetual incorporation? Why celibate members have to give their salary away like some monks do? Why lay members have to request a pardon of departure (dispense) to leave Opus Dei (like monks do) only need in the case of sacred vows? Is that because without knowing they really are bounded by some kind of sacred vows? Why lay persons have obligations - without knowing and without consent- that the Code of Canon Law established only for a consecrated life? Is there any kind of deception in all of this?
After these questions, you know a serious film about Opus Dei and Escrivá is waiting to be made.
Don't Bother unless you're a Catholic..., 28 March 2011
Author: klee-13-143104 from Fresno, CA
Now I'm not a Catholic, my wife is - and I got dragged to go see this film. Though it has some interesting (but short) actions scenes, the storyline is kind of confusing and boring if you know nothing about the Spanish Civil War or Canonization or Opus Dei.
I constantly had to have my wife explain to me what was going on in the film in relation to the Catholic faith. Looking at the (laughable) reviews here, I imagine most were written by Catholics or the marketing team for the movie.
If your a religious nut, this movie might be for you. If you want to see a good war movie, just rent Saving Private Ryan. Much better action and drama. If your not a Catholic, avoid this movie like the plague.
Yes, the reviews were bad,
Yes, the reviews were bad, but some of the negative reviews were more fair than other. The story is rather clumsy, no doubt, but I think the portrayal of St. Josemaria is excellent. I disagree with the importance of Opus Dei's mission of helping people live lives of holiness. What was revolutionary about Opus Dei is that for much of church history it was viewed that the clergy/religious life was a holier calling. However, our two greatest saints (Mary and St. Joseph) were lay people. St. Josemaria was one of the first to reorient our thinking about attaining holiness. The other point is that while yes we are all called to sainthood, it's very difficult to achieve with help support. It's kind of like trying to lose weight. Sure, you can do it on your own...you know what to do, but often people need programs like Weight Watchers to help them and provide a certain level of accountability. That's what opus Dei does. It gives you the tools to convert the desire for holiness into practice. I'm so grateful they made this film even though it has its cinematic flaws.
"St. Josemaria was one of the
"St. Josemaria was one of the first to reorient our thinking about attaining holiness."
That is simply OD propaganda.
Just saw this film today.
Just saw this film today. It's not the greatest movie, nor the worst. It's a very old-fashioned almost hokey type of movie, with battle scenes, love stories, heroism, swelling music, and all that.
And oddly flat. Somehow despite having all this dramatic stuff, and a very interesting story, it just doesn't hang together very well and never quite sweeps a viewer away in the way the beautifully shot scenes suggest we should be swept away. And unfortunately, Wes Bentley (Manolo) seems to wear exactly the same scowling expression throughout the entire film, whether his character is feeling infatuation, rage, jealousy or remorse.
And yet, it's absolutely worth seeing if only for the pleasure of seeing a big film in a cineplex that portrays Christianity, Catholicism and sainthood in such an unabashedly positive light. How does that happen? For that reason alone, it's worth seeing.
And more than that, it has a beautiful message of forgiveness, reconciliation, recognizing that we are all flawed human beings who despite the terrible wrongs we may commit still always deserve love, and that we are all called to holiness in our daily lives. I have no idea whether these were truly the messages that were promoted by St Josemaria Escriva or by Opus Dei, but they are good Christian messages which it never hurts to be reminded of. And to see them promoted in a Hollywood style film is an extraordinary pleasure!
I strongly recommend this
I strongly recommend this movie, despite agreeing with some of the professional critics' negative observations. The dialogue was stilted in places, the Spanish accents uneven, and the fictional storyline a bit formulaic. So the pure entertainment value, on which mainstream critics are paid to base their judgments, is less than stellar. But there is a lot going on at a deeper level, which makes it worth seeing -- more than once. It's one of those movies that I've found stays with me for several days after viewing it: scenes or lines will come to mind at what seem like random times, but when I think about it, I can see and actually use the connection. I would have liked Manolo to be a more balanced character so as to sympathize with his suffering and regret. Roberto and Leila, I thought, were annoyingly trite. But Charlie Cox's Josemaria was irresistible, which helped me to understand how he could have attracted so many people to his vision of the Christian life. I found it supremely refreshing to see Christianity and especially the Catholic priesthood portrayed positively in a Hollywood production. Reviews that criticize the movie for not being forthright about Escriva's support for Franco and Opus Dei's secret power-grabbing schemes seem prejudiced: maybe they don't come through because they are, in fact, not true. I think it's interesting and also a shame, that whenever something is put forward in a favorable light, someone behind it is assumed to have a self-serving agenda. Yet when something is put forward in an entirely and vehemently negative light (such as Tom's multiple reviews, above), many will accept it as objective.
As Josemaria said, "God's world is so full of goodness"....even when there is war and suffering (and crazy, unsubstantiated accusations). Other movies I've seen this year took me out of my life for a couple of hours and made me feel good; this one took me more deeply into my life and gave me inspiration to actually be good. Speaking for myself, I'd rather pay $13 for the later.
Finally saw the film.
Finally saw the film. AMAZING!!
And like Horonio explained there is no fault in not understanding, but only in scoffing at what we do not understand. I found deep meaning through out this film. Or maybe I should say deep Truth. I pray that more people get the chance to see it and understand it.
Did not see the movie. If
Did not see the movie. If you want to see a great movie about a saint, get Maria Goretti. Watch it in English (originally it was in Italian) and with the subtitles off. You won't regret it. It is entertaining, exciting, and awesome. Better than Therese, in my opinion. Saint Maria Goretti, please pray for us.
I found "There be Dragons" to
I found "There be Dragons" to follow the general conventions of a hagiographic film, like "A Man for all Seasons" (about St. Thomas More); "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" (about St. Francis and St. Clare of Assisi); "Entertaining Angels" (about Dorothy Day). I appreciated learning more about St. Josemaria Escriva because short of him being the founder of Opus Dei (and therefore either beloved or reviled) I honestly knew next to nothing about him.
As I wrote at the end of my own review of the movie, what I'll be most interested in is how "There be Dragons" will be looked at 5-10 years from now. I'd be interested in that because the movie portrays Escriva as being someone who rejected Church patronage, despised "careerists" and since he knew something of poverty himself was someone able to understand the point of view of the Communists in the Spanish Civil War.
The movie, if truthful, reminds me that the founders of religious movements were often more open than the movements that they inspired.
Fr. Dennis Kriz, OSM
http://frdennismoviereviews.blogspot.com/2011/05/there-be-dragons.html
Just to answer your last
Just to answer your last question
~If "Opus Dei" is a secular institute (it is; approved by the Church in 1950) to teach people how to become holy in daily life, I have to ask what is so exceptional about this?~
The exceptionality of this is rooted in the context of the time and on being Catholic at the time. It was the general view at the time that only those called to contemplative life (priests, monks, nuns) could be holy; for the lay people, holiness was almost beyond them. Josemaria struggled hard to get this message to be accepted within the Church; in fact there is a person who told Josemaria that his idea was way ahead of its time.
I am not a member of Opus Dei, but have had dealings with them for almost thirty years. I do respect them and hope that one day, I could make it as a member.
Strong, At first do not
Strong,
At first do not understand at all,im not that religious but i see this movie in general,in one way or another it did stike me so deep all of us has a dragons to deal with,, i have so many,kept it so silent within me after watching this movie i felt happy so light,, so i was not alone after all, Even the most bad person are qualified to be forgiven.That what matters most.In our journey to this so called life we commit so many wrong turns, but as we grow old we reflect and look back and say sorry , i wish i can be forgiven.. i wish..
Post new comment