Hindu clergyman urges boycott of imbecilic movie
Ed Driscoll caught a telling bit of earnest outrage at Hollywood. Rajan Zed, a Hindu chaplain, was offended by Mike Myers’ new comedy, which is supposed to be absolutely abysmal.
Myers portrays a fraudulent Hindu-esque guru in the movie, and I’m sure there’s plenty there to offend devout Hindus. And I’m quite sympathetic to someone’s desire to organize a boycott to oppose blasphemy.
But the wonderfully naive part is where Rajan Zed says this sort of thing might lead:
…the Hindu leader has suggested other religious groups should give the film, in which Myers plays an oddball guru called Pitka, a miss.
He adds, “Today it is Hinduism, tomorrow Hollywood might attempt to denigrate another religions.
Hollywood, denigrating religion? Oh, perish the very thought!
Of course, as Ed notes, there’s one religion Hollywood will never allow themselves to denigrate. They’re facing more than a boycott if they do.
____________
{Post by See-Dubya}
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Hollyweird
Ed Driscoll
» The University Archipelago
NewsBusters.org
» The War on Terror Made Him Do ItEd Driscoll
» First We Take Chicago, Then We Take BerlinNewsBusters.org
» Matthews on Ft. Hood Suspect Warning Signal: 'That's Not a Crime to Call al Qaeda, Is It?'Pundit & Pundette
» Westboro haters have enough to go around for everyoneTigerHawk
» Abortion and health care "reform"Weekly Standard
» The Federal Bureau of Non-Investigationprotein wisdom
» The One note song [Darleen Click]
Myers “sense of humor” is quite disgusting.
But his deficiencies of taste are only mildly offensive compared to his cowardice.
No way on earth would he dare mock the mohammedans in a comparable way.
And most disturbing of all, is that he would probably not find such a project appealing or humorous.
this isn’t offensive to hindus, muslims, christians, jews, buddhists, or any religion- it’s offensive to people with brains.
I want someone to make a similar movie about white guy who grows up in a madrassa.
Having studied and practiced a strain of Hinduism in the past, my first reaction to a trailer of the “Love Guru” was to step back aghast, with a sick feeling. In the religious tradition of India, a guru is a revered teacher, who often renounces much of the world’s pleasures in order to find God. He communicates his spirituality, his rich inner life, to his disciples and others who come to him for spiritual help. Such a denigration on film of the guru concept certainly is offensive to me, in a visceral way. I’m not one to insist that my sensitivities are all that important, yet this movie seems like a particularly egregious example of insensitivity to a religion that according to a google search is the world’s 3rd largest, next to Christianity and Islam, with a bit less than one billion followers. What’s next, porno stars dressed up as nuns? If it’s been done, I don’t even want to know!
You don’t browse the darkest corners of the interweb much do you? I used to do when I was much younger (I blame youth! I was young, dammit!) and porn stars in nun outfits was (and probably is) a common theme along with nurses and teachers.
Of course, I’ve since repented after coming to Christ, but still the fact remains that Christianity is severely mocked. Perhaps not in the pornstar-in-nun-outfit way, but in many different ways. Watch any Holywood production. See how frequently Jesus and Christ are used as swear words. Then count how many times Vishnu/Krishna/Buddha/Mohammad/Allah are used.
I will join Rajan Zed in boycotting that movie.
To learn of the beautiful spirituality of Hindu beliefs, I suggest reading “Autobiography of a Yogi” by Paramahansa Yogananda. It is excellent.
The cowards of Hollyweird are always crowing that their work represents “art” and Freedom of Speech and expression. I challenge them, if they are so proud of our Freedoms why haven’t the erected a memorial to filmmaker Theo Van Gogh who gave his life for those same Freedoms?
There is one in his own country – he didn’t “give his life” for American “freedoms”
Tomorrow has come and gone, my friend. They have attacked everything that is conservative. I can understand, though, his viewpoint. I find a lot of films out of Hollywood to be offensive to me, in one way or another, these days. They are either historically inaccurate to a fault, anti-religious, or anti morals/values.
I’ve visited the one in Amsterdam.
Maybe I misunderstood all the liberal celebration over the Supreme Court’s recent habeas corpus ruling. America’s freedoms are the World’s freedoms. /sac off.
If the movie turns out to be the turkey it is porported to be, Rajan Zed has no worries.
The problem with much of popular, or even in the case of this movie unpopular, comedy is that it is so gutless. The nightly monologues usually consist of a very well paid and smug person kicking someone when they are down. Then the members of the entertainment community give each other awards for ‘courage.’ When someone truly brave like Ron Silver shows up and really does “Speak truth to power.” they panic. At least in movies there is a bottom line. Lose money with a bomb and you lose credibility. For many reasons the feedback in television is murkier and cowardly hate speech can create and milk an audience for years. That is why The View can drag on.
There should be a free market solution that both protects free speech and allows people genuinely and personally slandered or threatened to sue for damages. In other words Mike Myers should be protected but Michael Moore should not be.
OMG! Prepare for the massive, violent riots in which will surely result in deaths and burned churches or embassies…
Oh, no, wait a second… I was thinking of another “religion”…
I do not find it difficult to boycott & avoid Mike Myers movies. Actually I think it has been several years since I’ve seen any movie. John Wayne died.
Between their ever leftward tilt and generalized filth there is not much to see.
OK I’ll take Rajan’s advice and boycott the movie.
Paul-Cincy (#3)–you are very right on the correct use of “guru”. However, the term, especially in the late 60s-early 70s got watered down considerably to a pale, and somewhat sleazy, version of the real thing. I also note that “kahuna” also got watered down and used for other things, although without the sleaze factor: in the Hawaiian religion, a kahuna is the equivalent of a priest.
alamedaman (#2) said:
I agree completely–most of his movies are.
I’m a firm believer in make fun of everything or fail. He has every right to be offended. It’s when he shoots people who go see the movie is where he fails.
I don’t think he notices how much Hollywood makes fun of Christianity, Judaism, Paganism, Buddhism… pretty much every belief but Scientologists and Muslims. Funny that.
Heres an idea, why doesn’t Mr. Hindu just let this weak movie go straight to video and then it will be dead on its own ? Once again the thinness of the skin is telling.
Heh what does Congress and The Love Guru have in common?
The first thing that popped into my mind was “Welcome to the party pal!” Hollywood has been slamming Christian values for decades. We will more than likely boycott the movie too as we do most movies playing in the theaters today as they are just not worth the cost and our valuable free time. It would cost us over $100.00 for my wife and I to drive to Boise to watch a movie when you include gas, the tickets, and any snacks (which we rarely indulge in anymore). The last thing I want is to be pissed off the entire drive home for wasting so much of our rapdily shrinking disposable income on a poorly made movie.
Have you ever heard of Christians protesting a movie that distorted their self image? Annoyed about some kind of code related to some artist? Nah! Only Muslims and Hindus.
Eh ? The Little Gay Mathteacher is awake ! Hi loser……………
I wish you would PLEASE shut your pie hole about Christians. We may protest a movie but we do not kill people for cartoons and movies that are blasphemous. I know, now I am picking ou yor precious religion – Islam.
Do you ever get tired of being an idiot?
lgm said:
I agree Christians are like damn sheep and they should have sent the Inquisition after those deadbeats who produced the The Golden Compass and boiled them in oil.
If Christians were real Christians they’d take child molesters, cattle thieves, and killers and have a good ole’ fashioned hanging right after Sunday mass. Now that’s Christian!
And further more someone oughta reform those damn Episcopals!
I think I have to go now and check my blood sugar…
The reason that the muslim religion is out of bounds is that THEY WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
America is a weak country because of foolish multicultural political correctness.
The muslims have no problem cutting off body parts if they are pissed… and they have cut off our balls.
lgm,
Ever heard of “The Last Temptation of Christ”? That one got serious boycotts, which weren’t all that effective.
How about “The DaVinci Code”? That one also got a Christian response. However, this time, the response was heavy scholarship rather than boycotts.
It’s a movie, if you don’t like it don’t go see it.
If Mike Myers does something to offend you, it is your problem not his.
When did we all become a bunch of sensitive babies?
Political correctness is killing this country. I mess the days of Archie Bunker.
I know there are quite a few Christians on these boards. Could someone please explain to me why The Last Temptation of Christ was so blasphemous.
I was taught in Sunday school and my parochial religious classes that Jesus could easily have taken himself down off of the Cross and that, since he is not just divine but human, it would have been extremely tempting for him to save his life and live in domestic bliss with a wife and children…away from the pain of suffocation and wrist wounds.
Why did this offend so many Christians? Doesn’t it highlight the ultimate sacrifice Jesus made for us? He died for our sins when He could have walked away.
I never really thought about this new movie in that way, but I wasn’t gonna go see it either. I’ve been boycotting Hollywood films for about a year now. The only one I saw was Indiana Jones. I’ve been boycottting because of the sheer stupidity of the movies they’ve been releasing and the high price of a ticket. It costs $12 a ticket around here for a movie. I can buy a DVD at Best Buy or Target for $7-10. And I don’t have to deal with crowds. You do the math.
Thought the Pope himself gave Mel Gibson’s production a thumb’s up. It was the Jews who had felt it was a bad portrayal of their religion.
The Jews also got mad at the Borat flic. The scene where Borat was throwing dollar bills at the cockroaches to ward off the ’shape changing Jews’ comes to mind.
This one is disturbing:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2008/06/poster-boy-for-gang-rape.html#readfurther
From the religion that “elevates” women.
Rusty,
I never saw it, and it’s been a few years, so I can’t give full details. But the bottom line is that it portrayed Jesus as very different from who he actually is. Furthermore, it took the most negative possible interpretation on things which the Bible actually says.
For example, at the Last Supper, Jesus called the bread he passed to his disciples his body which was broken for them. This was intended to be highly figurative, with the bread being used as an analogy to describe what was actually going to happen. (Jesus used analogies a lot.) The movie had the bread literally turn into bloody, repulsive meat. Catholics believe the wafer somehow turns into a part of Christ’s body, but even they don’t think it turns into actual bloody meat. The point Jesus was making is that just as bread gives us sustenance for us to live, so his death gives us eternal life.
On-my-soap-box said (#21):
When you stop sliming Islam. Mine is an allergic reaction to your irritation.
Mel Gibson’s movie:
The Passion of the Christ (Biblically based)
Scorsese’s movie:
The Last Temptation of Christ (Scorsese’s Hollywood “life style” based)
Yeah, yeah, poor misunderstood Islam. What with the rioting over a fake story about dropped in the toilet Koran, the Mohammed Cartooons, the trial runs of terrorists on airplanes, the celebrating of terrorist attacks in America and Israel, the death threats against Salman Rushdie and anyone else who threatens “the dignity of Islam”, the beheading of Daniel Pearl.
I wonder why people in wussy Hollywood won’t criticize them. Hmmmmmmm……
Oh and I forgot, the actual terrorist attacks. because we all know that no regular Mosques ever, ever celebrated terrorist attacks right??? Right??????
Right thanks for the clarification.
First day of summer and lgm has already been in the sun to long.
The Christian March on the Universal Studios’ lot was the first time that I had ever seen Christians actually protest with legs on the ground…
Universal did not make $$$$$ on their Hollywood style ( shaking around) Jesus.
RE:
Scorses’ Last T Of C
PSS:
If you haven’t seen Mel Gibson’s;
The Passion of the Christ ….You have missed a great movie.
lgm said:
Why do you stick up for the religious types who’ll cut your head off and dangle it for the world to see like a trophy? Got news for you lgm your a weak infidel in their eyes.
I know lgm is just mad at life he isn’t CEO of Gillette or on the PGA tour so he turned to liberalism to justify his shortcomings.
Stick with the concrete math not the abstract math dude.
LGM, I thought you claimed to be of the Jewish faith? Perhaps you are a coward and fear the Religion of Peace. Or perhaps your like the Jews who in Nazi Germany tried to go along to get along and not fight back and found yourself shocked to be loaded on a train somewhere. Years ago I used to have a man who has since passed but survived come and talk to my class. He would talk about people like you, the go alongs to get alongs and how they would persuade others to do the same. He discussed their shock when it came to an end. Yet in your world Christians and the US Military are the forces of evil. But you’re allowed to say all the disgusting things you want but that sure won’t help your looks.
SHould be “you’re” not your. I probably should not feed the troll.
That sounds like quite an amazing talk!…
Christian Soldier said:
I did see it CS, great movie. I didn’t see Scorce’s [sic]. The last couple of great movies I saw were both foreign films, Pan’s Labyrinth and The Lives of Others. Check em’ out; will not disappoint.
The Passion of the Christ was such a piece of crap. A subpar snuff film. Unwatchable dross.
I have never laughed harder at a so called serious movie than when Jesus died and the temple literally split in half. That’s the most obvious figurative turn of speech in the entire Bible and Mr. Gibson seemed to think that a temple literally split in two when Jesus died.
Also, bonus points for making Satan look like some disaffected goth kid.
I asked about the Last Temptation of Christ because I have never seen it. If the movie shows bread literally turning to meat, then, yeah, that’s a bit weird. Not really different from the Passion’s temple split.
Could the difference be that people are uncomfortable with the human side of Jesus? That would be my best guess. But His human side is what makes His story so powerful.
I agree about The Passion.
A Christian friend of mine went on and on about this movie. So I got a copy and watched it.
It was not a movie I would recommend. It left me with as many questions about the film-makers as it did any thing else. On the while I would rate it very, very low.
Not everyone agrees, I am ok with that.
For the record I am a regular church going christian. I even serve in my church. But the movie the passion is not one I care to see again.
I know a lot of people, including some atheists, who love The Passion. Mel Gibson is a great filmmaker. The problem is he suffers from “too much.”
No matter how stylish and no matter how important the event, I’m not interested in seeing a man tortured for two hours. But the talent is undeniable.
Surely Temptation critics can say the same about Scorcese!
And yet you continue to post here.
I never saw Temptation.
I had no desire to see it either. So I can’t say anything about that one that would be based on first hand knowledge.
My tastes and opinions on movies has changed a great deal as I myself have aged.
I go to movies to be entertained, not politicized or preached to. And no I do not see a lot of movies anymore.
It is not the cost that prevents me from going every weekend. It is simply the availability of movies that meet my requirements.
Truth is most people thought Temptation sucked. I liked it for what it tried to represent and tried to use it as an enhancement to the understanding of Christianity. Then I took Geoge Carlin’s view if it:
“I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a guy nailed to two pieces of wood.”
First, I dare you to find one post where I “slam” Islam. I pointed out the fact that Islam have people who cut off heads in the name of god.
You, on the other hand, constantly slam Christians and get away with it. Personally, I would ban your butt like SouthernBoy got his butt banned (for even less than what you are allowed to get away with). That is why I am not moderator. You trolls would be gone. You do interrupt the enjoyment of this blog which is a violation and we are certainly baffled as to why you are still around. You add nothing and detract for every thread. You are not even comic relief. Are you related to Michelle in some way or form?
As for cRusty thinking we do not want to know the “human side of Christ”, Christ was tortured and he died a horrendous death. Alas, he was not at GITMO so you casually dismiss his suffering.
P.S. Scorsese’s work was complete crap but leave it to you, you did not even see the tripe and bring it into play.
P.S.S. When Christ died, the curtain (a.k.a. – temple) that separated us from GOD was torn in two. Somehow your finding that funny goes with the idea that you are “Christian” and think abortion would be acceptable by GOD. Alas, one more thing you have completely backwards.
Sorry for the long post
Imbecilic Mike Meyers doesn’t insult Hindus any more than imbecilic Deepak Chopra does…
Actually, Chopra insults anyone with half a brain, no matter what religion.
Cornball logos meant to mimic the Presidential Seal should be antecedent to what this clown would do if he gets in office.
Opps sorry wrong post. Well I’ll take the opportunity to say it again. This movie looks like basuda and Hollyweird can kiss my arse.
Actually, I think you’re referring to “The Passion of the Christ.”
lgm: As soon as Christians start beheading apostates, non-Christians, and turn women into property, then we’ll talk. Your insistence that all religious are equal is disingenuous at best, and downright ignorant.
cSoap, I understand what Christ went through. But a 2+ hour replay of his torture does not make a good film.
I brought up Temptation because I honestly never understood what the problem was. People call it blasphemous, but the reasons cited for its blasphemy – namely the temptation part – aren’t blasphemous.
I was asking a question in good faith. I wanted to know what the problem was. And I haven’t heard anything other than “it’s crap” and “it takes figurative speech literally.”
The Passion is guilty on both of those counts.
The temple splitting in two clearly represents the Jews who went on to believe in Christ and those who didn’t. Showing the foundation of a temple literally split in two is such a ridiculous misinterpreatation that I had no choice but to laugh.
It’s the equivalent of me using CGI to show a camel walking through the eye of a needle after some rich dude died.
cSoap, I was trying to have someone explain something I didn’t understand. All in good faith. If you thought that was some kind of attack, then, well, get a grip.
A religious nut by any other name… would smell as… uhhhh… nutty.
I think it is the Islamofascists that are “sliming Islam.”
This is much to do about nothing….
If you find the subject offensive, or non-entertaining vote with your $$ and do not see it.
This is right up there with the “Da Vinci Code”….which was and still is a work of FICTION.
I’m hoping the competing movie, “Get Smart” will be good.
I really like Hinduism and the guru concept. I done a lot of reading and I think they are a positive force in the world. One thing, they advocate “non killing”, which is in all religions by the way, not just not killing humans but all beings…and they actually respect that unlike the Christians who conveniently ignore that commandment.
I also like how they respect the cow. Cows are gentle creatures and want to give milk to us IF we treat them well. Sadly, in our culture we have zero respect for these sweet creatures and just and abuse her for her flesh and milk. We separate her from her babies so we can take the milk that the baby would normally have. Then, we so unkindly and cruelly take the baby, put him in a crate to become veal. We could learn a lot from the Hindus, we would be the better for it.
Anyway, having said that, when I saw this poster I laughed. I can laugh at myself and my interests. I have not seen the movie…if it seriously puts down the religion that’s another story but if it’s just tongue and cheek comedy, it’s good to be able to laugh at ourselves and not take things so seriously. You can still have respect for something and laugh at yourself.
And having said that, a lot of people in Hollywood could use respect for all kinds of spirituality/religion. I know they think they are above it all and much too sophisticated for all that. How ignorant they are.
Yankee Oppressor said:
Yes it is. The problem is that Dan Brown claimed it is historical fiction. In fact, this is a statement from the front of his book:
This claim is what the fuss is all about because the claim is absolutely not true. Even non-christian historians are offended at his revisionism and passing off a known hoax, The Priory of Scion, as true.
Soliel,
“Thou shalt not kill” is not an accurate translation. The correct translation is “You shall not murder.” This has been known for decades.
Here are the translator’s notes from the WEB translation of Exodus 20:13:
Rusty,
It’s not the torture itself that makes the story worthwhile. In fact, the torture makes it pretty darn hard to watch. What makes this story so fascinating is that Jesus chose to go through it willingly because he thinks the results are worth the suffering.
I agree that there were problems with the movie, both artistic and theological. (What was up with the Satan and his demon child?) But this one isn’t much of a stretch.
According to the accounts, the skies did darken, there was an earthquake, and the veil separating the Holy of Holies from the rest of temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom (important in relation to Jewish traditions which are not in the Bible). The floor itself probably wasn’t split, but Hollywood is so used to hype that it falls within “artistic interpretation.”
Overall, I would have preferred some things to be different, important things were omitted, and weird, confusing stuff was included. Even so, it’s an important event which needs to be told, even though it’s hard to watch. No one can ever say that everything worthwhile is always easy.
EWTHeckman
historical fiction- fiction set in the past, can be of any genre.
Dale Brown used some historical elements in his story. Fiction is fiction….what is your point?
YO,
Historical fiction is fiction wrapped around events and locations which actually happened and exist. The movie Titanic is an example of historical fiction. The main protagonists did not actually exist. In fact, they put the girl in a suite which was known to be empty. Everything else outside of the protagonists, their story, and their interactions with other passengers actually happened (or are is based on something which actually happened).
The quote I posted about the documents, architecture, etc. supposedly being true was from outside of the story. It was not one if his characters making a claim, it was Dan Brown, the author speaking as Dan Brown before the story actually began. He said everything but the story was accurate. It was not.
Simply put, things which he claimed were historically accurate are not historically accurate. His book is not historical fiction, it is all fiction. It is his attempt to pass off fiction as fact which is offensive.
The only question in my mind is how much money is Rajan Zed getting to resussitate this DOA film and or Mike Meyer’s career?
As soon as I saw Mike Meyers was involved I decided to boycott.
Why can’t we get movies like “To Kill a Mockingbird” or “Doctor Zhivago” any more?
You know, something that tugs at your emotions, doesn’t involve CGI and the acting isn’t performed by no-talent hacks?
Heck, even a Martin & Lewis or Don Knotts comedy is head and shoulders above anything done by Meyers.
Sigh, I miss the old days.