MovieChat Forums > The Dark Crystal (1982) Discussion > a religious film in nature...

a religious film in nature...

posted 15 years ago by butterworthwarbucks-1
10 replies | jump to latest

i've loved this movie since the first time i saw it when i was 8 years old. i'm 32 now and i love it for completely different reasons. and therefore appreciate it much more now.

after i saw it when i was 8, i was so torn up about the scene where the podling's and kira's essences are stolen that i shyed away from it for awhile. i watched it again when i was about 19 or so and it was a completely different movie to me by then.

when i was a kid this movie was simply a heroic adventure and also a love story between the adorable remaining gelflings (destined to be the only ones who could rebuild their species).

as an adult, i realized it's a religious film. i truly feel it was jim henson's take on religion at the time. it has very buddhist elements (i mean, just look at the zen-like mystics) and the whole idea of the importance of balance in the universe, but it also has elements of various sects of christianity and such (god vs. the devil), and even astrology - the shard had to be repaired when the 3 suns align (fate/destiny). also, the crystal itself is a talisman, akin more to native american beliefs. some very contradictory religions combined to form something very interesting and controversial. which is why i think some people overlook it so they can still enjoy it.

the way i see it is henson was trying to demonstrate that there is simply no good without evil and evil could not exist without good. (just as there is no light with out darkness and that darkness could not exist without light). that's obviously why whenever one of the skeksis dies/is killed, a mystic "counterpart" must also die. when the "dark" crystal is repaired, the two "separate" beings are finally rejoined, becoming what they originally were - one all powerful "supreme" being and restoring the good they originally intended and created for that world.

i think that is also making a statement that when one is whole, the good will prevail in them and it only takes a small fracture (like the tiny shard that broke off) to allow the evil to take over.

it also poses an idea that might make some people (i.e. fundamental christians) VERY VERY upset: the idea that the christian "god" a lot of people believe in is not "god" at all. it would take god and the devil combined (good and evil) in order to form a supreme being - the ACTUAL god. yet christians don't want to acknowlodge the necessary presence of evil to make something whole. so they only recognize the "good" half as "god". just like "day" is light and "night" is dark, yet when we put them together in a 24 hour period we call it a "day" and not a "night" as a whole. because people are afraid of the dark, afraid of evil. even if good ultimately "wins" they don't want to incorporate evil in the equation. they don't want to admit the connection. just like in science or math, you need to have an equal amount of positive and negative in order to balance things out. take it to zero. yin/yang. remember aughra and all her philisophical musings such as: "end, beginning, all the same". and now we're back to buddhism.

also, i think the "essences" represent the beings' souls. the essences of the "good" beings, when consumed by the "evil" beings, gave them more strength, vitality, power. good being more potent than evil. (hence, why in christian mythology, the devil is always trying to gain the souls of decent human beings). also, evil has the inclination to destroy and good wants to retain peace. a bad combination if balance is not in effect. good may be stronger yet has no desire for combat. order must be restored. all the beings of the land (excluding the skeksis and the mystics - who are fractions of god) represent all the creatures of earth. when order is restored and god again becomes whole, evil (the "devil's side") is forced to release the souls again to the universe. the souls were usurpt by evil, but the good half when rejoined returns them to their rightful owners.

also, it took a gelfling (i believe, the human equivalent) to restore order. in the bible, god and the devil use their human creations to fight their battle for them and only the "good" humans get their souls returned to them in the end. though it doesn't specifically say (as i recall) that the mystics or skeksis had once "created" all the other beings on the land, i propose that is to be assumed. hence, why they leave the world at the end once they are whole again and order is restored and leave the world to the gelflings (humans). now, leaving jen and kira to be a new adam and eve. before the fracture and the subsequent destiny of the feud between the two halves, that was the supreme being's intention all along.

i could go on and on about this. i was a film studies major, but this would make a much more interesting paper for a thesis for a theology major.

i'm sure some people will already be aware of these things and agree, but many more will probably vilify me for being a blasphemous, heretic crackpot. i don't care.

either way, most of us can agree: WE LOVE THIS MOVIE!!!

[–] ZAROVE 15 years ago

You have a very garbled and superficial view of what Religions of the world teach. Especially Christianity. IE, the Devil doesn't actually have Human Creations. Satan is himself not responcible for snyone being created. He's just an Angel, and thats all. Also, please refrain from the use of the term "Christian Mythology". It doesn't make you sound academic, as no one in real Academia uses it. Its a word created by Anti-Christisns to demean the Faith.

Further, Fundamentalist Christains woudln;t be upset by this film. At leats not for the Reasons you stated. This is because no one wudl get the idea that the film was mean ot show that the actual God must be both good and evil. That wans't Hensons intention. the movie is based more on Dualism, which was a common Ancient Philosophy revived and refined by the Philosopher known as Hegal in the 19th Century. Hegal beleived that truth lay in the [roposition of a Thesis, and a Rival Anti-Thesis, and the truth is foudn by Synthesis between the two. Thats what this movie is basiclaly about.

Its not about the Supreme Beign needing to be both good and evil, but about how two halves can't really exist apart form each other. God in Christian THeology (Theology, not Mythology) was never a Divided being, and Satan was never his Equel in power. This is a PRimary problem with what your describing. For your thesis to work Satan woudl have to be co-equel with God and Gods existance woudl have to depnd on Satan. But Satsan was just one of his Angels he created and who happened to either Rebel or serv ehim as Prosecution, depending on whose theology you follow. Never is Satan understood to be anythign but a Creation, thiough, and no where near Equel in terms of pwoer.

Also, Satan dosnt actually Represent Evil as a force so much as Satan IS an evil being. In both Jewish and Christain thinking, Evil is not a force inand of itself, but simply doing what we ought not o do. C. S. Lewis described it as Spoiled good. Christainity teaches that Good can exist apart form evil. Evil is dependant on Good for existing, though, beaus you need a proper and rihgt way to do soemthign in ordr to have a measure of how soome other way is wrong. Evil is itself only a description of not doign the right thing.

Satan also doesnt gain strength by takign Decent Human Souls. Rather, his cheif goal in most Traditional Depictions is to simply not allow God to win, and to ensure others share the same fate he does. It has nothgin to odo with him consuming ur souls so he can be empowered. He's already powerful.

God and Satan also dont use their human Creations ( WHich Satan doesnt even have as Satan is not a Creator) to battle one another indireclty. In Christian theology, God seeks to redeem the lost SOuls unto him, which have alreayd been damned by the intorductionof sin in the world. Satans sole object woudl be to ensure the Damnation of each individual Human by Preventign Salvation. In CHristianity, Jesus came to Sacrifice himself for the Attoement of all of Humanities collective sins, and by acceptign and enjoinign that Sacrfice a person will be redeemed before God for his sins and reconciled ot him, thus he will have Salvation form the Fate that formerly awaited him or her in Hell. God isnt acivley engaged in setting huamns up to fight other humans who Satan controles, and thats just not part of the equation in CHristianity. ( And again, Satan never, ever created a sungle Human.) Satan does't even have to, as Satans principle object is to, you know, preventthem from being saved. o do this he hinders their beleif in the Gospel or else causes htem to be seduced into sinful conuduct. He doesn't se tup armeis of Humans to attack God Humans. Christianity isnt World of Warcraft. Sure, Satsan may oppose Gods plan to Save the Human Race, But no where in this do we see either of them usign Humans as mere pawns to fight one another.

As to Buddhism, Buddhism is not abotu Gentle mystics drawign pleasant liens on the Sand, either. Its abotu lettign go of all our earthly attatchment sin order to find inner peace and tranquility an then to try to acheive a State of Enlightenment in which we can have a perfect, yet fully detatched, sense of COmpassion on all of the Universe. Also, iN Buddhism their is no evil as an actual force. As in Christianity, Evil is simply not livign in acordance to what is in our best intrest. It is breakign the laws of HArmony with Nature. Evuil is seen as the Result of Ignorance, and having attatchments, or beign lead by our untamed passions. It is nto seen as a seperate, viable force.

Also, Darkness doesn't exist. Dakness is just the abscence of light.

The whole 24 hour day routine was also ignorant. We dont call a 24 horu period a Day because we fear Darkness, its the product of an evolving Eglish Language that used the same word out of general Habit. Its actually linked tot he full cycle of the sun, but because the sun causes daylihgt, we call both the actual time when we see the sun day and the 24 hour period day. It snot to do with us beign fearful, else why would we begin our 24 hour day at Midnight?

[–] butterworthwarbucks-1 15 years ago

First of all, is there something wrong with your keyboard or were you drunk when you wrote this?

Now, you seem very hung up on the idea that I am promoting the idea that Satan is a "Creator". I must have mis-wrote or made myself unclear. I do not believe Satan is a Creator. I believe he uses existing creations as tools in the "war" against "God". And you kind of defeated your own argument in saying that Satan was "simply" a fallen angel and "nothing more" but then later stating that Satan doesn't need human beings to further his power as he already IS powerful. Yes, I know Satan is a fallen angel but obviously he's become more than that throughout time. I propose he's gained momentum and power by consuming human souls turned away from "God".

Also, I was never trying to sound "academic". I was merely musing online. Being self-indulgent if anything. And I'm sorry, but I did mention at the end of my rant that I was filtering theology. I still call Christian beliefs mostly "mythology". The Bible is a novel as far as I'm concerened. I do not know everything about all religions (obviously) but I have studied various religions for a decade or so as a hobby. I mean, for goodness' sake, I've even read the Bhagavad Gita. Both you AND I oversimplified Buddhism as well but I wasn't trying to go into great details about many religions (assuming that anyone who read what I wrote should have a basic understanding of various "religions of the world"). Mostly I was focusing on the Christianity aspect in the film (and Henson's attempt to disprove much of the concepts in Christianity). When you mentioned "Dualism" that only confirmed my theories. Dualism IS in essence exactly what I was trying to describe. Yin/Yang. The two halves of a whole cannot exist without each other and only define their opposites.

And, YES, there IS darkness. Just because it is "the absence" of light does not make it any less real. It DOES "exist". Being "bald" is the "absence" of hair, but that doesn't make baldness any less real. Baldness does EXIST. what do you think "existence" is?

I appreciate you taking the time to write what you did and that you gave it some thought. But who's really trying to sound "academic" here? People on the defensive always get so irate about their beliefs. Geez.

"never underestimate the power of denial" - ricky fitts (american beauty)

[–] ZAROVE 15 years ago

First of all, is there something wrong with your keyboard or were you drunk when you wrote this?

I'm dyslexic. Thanks for beign the loving, tolerant one here.

Now, you seem very hung up on the idea that I am promoting the idea that Satan is a "Creator". I must have mis-wrote or made myself unclear. I do not believe Satan is a Creator. I believe he uses existing creations as tools in the "war" against "God". And you kind of defeated your own argument in saying that Satan was "simply" a fallen angel and "nothing more" but then later stating that Satan doesn't need human beings to further his power as he already IS powerful. Yes, I know Satan is a fallen angel but obviously he's become more than that throughout time. I propose he's gained momentum and power by consuming human souls turned away from "God".

All Angels are powerful. They ar ebeigns of light on the highest order of Creation. Satan woudln't really need to consume souls to become more pwoerful. Worse, nothing actually indicates that he does Consume Souls.

The only thing Satan seems ot do is to promote sin and seperation form God to ensure the Soul goes to Hell, but beyind that there is nothing more. No concept was ever put fourht to state that Satan then conusmed the souls and becam emore pwoerful. Satan is not a Vampire.

Also, I was never trying to sound "academic". I was merely musing online. Being self-indulgent if anything. And I'm sorry, but I did mention at the end of my rant that I was filtering theology. I still call Christian beliefs mostly "mythology". The Bible is a novel as far as I'm concerened.

Then you have absolutley no idea what your talkign about. The Bibel isnt a Novel. Its not even a sigle book. Its a colelction of between 27 and 84 books. Not all written in the same oplace or by the same author, and certianly not all in the ame Genre.

Example: The Book of Proverbs woudl make a poor Novel. It only contains wise sayigns and axioms. However, sicne the Book of Proverbs ism, well, a book of Proverbs, its not really suppose to have a Narrative structure or convey an interestig story. Its baout tellign wise sayings to help the reader develop wisdom for themselves.

The Prophetic Books are another example, as they where written by Ancient Prophets in order to dispence hei tachings, and have no real narrative eithr.

Incidentlaly, the Hisotry of large portiosn f he Bible is generlaly accepted ot reflect real events by the academic world. THis doesnt mean the Bibel in full is accurate, only that large segments of the Hisotyr preserve at leats an outlien of real events, even if filtered through a Hebraic or later Christain perspecive.

All that said, even if we agreed wiht your assessment, base don ignroance, that the Bibel was a Novel, that woudl still not classify it as Mythology or Christian beleifs as such.

I do not know everything about all religions (obviously) but I have studied various religions for a decade or so as a hobby. I mean, for goodness' sake, I've even read the Bhagavad Gita. Both you AND I oversimplified Buddhism as well but I wasn't trying to go into great details about many religions (assuming that anyone who read what I wrote should have a basic understanding of various "religions of the world").

I summerised the meanign and purpose of Buddhism. The poitn I was mking is that Buddhism s not an intrinsically Dualist relgiion, and doesnt hing on Good and Evil beign reconciled into a single being.

Mostly I was focusing on the Christianity aspect in the film (and Henson's attempt to disprove much of the concepts in Christianity).

But, Henson was himself a Christian, and didn't try to disprove CHristainity with his film. In fact, the film dpens't even address central themes in CHristainity, such as Salvation by placign ones trust in a Saviour, or redeption form sins. The Movie portrays the Skeksis as pure evil, and the Ur-Ru as pure good. Period. Its flatly Dualistic, and the point is that oen eneds to embrace the totality of ones beign to be truely whole.

In contrast to Christianity, it doens't really say anyhting at all.

Your assumption that this was Hensons attemo to discredit Christianity makes no sense as the film doesnt depict anything remotely close to Christianity in order to attack it.

This isnt "Nine".

When you mentioned "Dualism" that only confirmed my theories. Dualism IS in essence exactly what I was trying to describe. Yin/Yang. The two halves of a whole cannot exist without each other and only define their opposites.

Which is the poitn of the film. However, that point really dons't speak about Christianity. Your claim that Henson was tryign to undermine CHristain concepts doen't add up as Henson never said that God needed Satan to be complete, and the enture tirade you gave doen't connect to anythign we see on screen dome or said by the Charecters.

And, YES, there IS darkness. Just because it is "the absence" of light does not make it any less real. It DOES "exist". Being "bald" is the "absence" of hair, but that doesn't make baldness any less real. Baldness does EXIST. what do you think "existence" is?

Existance is aivng a tangeble form. Darkenss doesn't. Nor does Baldness.

I appreciate you taking the time to write what you did and that you gave it some thought. But who's really trying to sound "academic" here? People on the defensive always get so irate about their beliefs. Geez.

Im not beign defensive about my beleifs. I am postign why your argument doesnt work. You clim Jim Henson was tryign to argue agaisnt fundational beelifs in CHristianity, when he obviosuly wasnt. The point of the movie wa that we need ot emrbace thefullness of our beigns to really live. Itsnot that God needs Satan and the true God is a merger of the two.

The interpretation you presented was highly strained, and didn't connect oto the film at all. You further have no evidnece of this beign Hensons intention. If it was his intention, he failed misurabkley.

Just as he failed ot capture any real Buddhist concepts.

Fortunaley I dont think eh was even attempting to comment on them.

"never underestimate the power of denial" - ricky fitts (american beauty)

I woudlnt if you havd any evidence, or even a rational argument here.

[–] feather_jammed_gears 14 years ago

holy *beep* are you retarded. please don't breed. i can't believe i read that load you wrote. it's like a keyboard took a dump. your understanding of your own religious beliefs and how the rest of the worlds religions operate outside of judeo-christian dogma are oustandingly stunted and misconstrued. dyslexia isn't an excuse, you're just sadly misinformed.

[–] TalesfromTheCryptfan 14 years ago

I never thought of it that way but YES it does have overtones of bibical purportions, Kira and Jen are like Adam and Eve while the Mystics are like Buddists, yin-and-yang, light and dark and that sort of thing.

"Questions Questions too many questions, want shard here!"-The Dark Crystal

[–] butterworthwarbucks-1 14 years ago

Thank you SO much! Some people were totally opposed but you seem to get EXACTLY what I was talking about.

"never underestimate the power of denial" - ricky fitts (american beauty)

[–] GoryPumpkinToby 14 years ago

Never really thought it was a religious film, it's only religion to the skeksis and not the gelflings or podlings. Perhaps it goes to show you that religion kills the innocent.

"You have to heal the...the dark crystal" -Kira

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mahoganytouch 8 years ago

I've read that Jim Henson was into scientology. I myself did see different religious aspects thrown I to the film, some thing kept, over embelished, or disfigured a bit. It is very interesting because as a writer creating a world, especially a puppeteer creating new characters it's hard to be completely original. Every thing reminds you of something in this movie, animals plants celebrities. But that is the task. The amount of work and detail in this film, a creator pours his personal heart into all he touches. And screenplays will almost always have a spiritual underlining plot.