Jane Riess on Pixar's "Soul"

[smac97]

Wow!

Quote

Hollywood loves the Mormon afterlife
Stories like 'Soul,' 'Coco' and 'The Good Place' depict core Mormon ideas that are alive in the popular imagination about the afterlife—and the “before life.”

 This week, I was reminded of how the richness of Mormon theology can bubble up in unexpected places — in this case, the new Pixar movie “Soul.”

I honestly can't remember the last time I read something by Riess that was complimentary of or optimistic about the Church.  So this is . . . nice.

Quote

Tagline: Hollywood creations like “Soul,” “Coco” and the television show “The Good Place” are reminders that core Mormon ideas are alive in the popular imagination about the afterlife — and the “before life.”
...
Let me just say that Soul has a full-blown narrative about the premortal path of human beings. The “pre-existence” as conceived in Soul is not identical to what Latter-day Saints believe — there’s no war in heaven, and most fundamentally, no creator God. But it’s close in other details, like the idea that disembodied intelligences have core aspects of their eventual human personality and life spark already attached.

I wanted Soul with my family on Christmas Day, and quite enjoyed it.  I was okay with the non-mention of "creator God."  Pixar left parts of the narrative ambiguous, such that people who do believe in God - including and perhaps particularly Latter-day Saints - can find its depiction of things to be compatible with their beliefs.

Quote

And most crucially, it’s rooted in the same core belief: that everyone who is walking on this earth does so because he or she made an active choice to come here.

Yes, I liked that.  I think it is a natural and expected aspect of a narrative that contemplates a pre-existence.  

Quote

Mormons are not the only ones who have dreamed about “life before life” — Terryl Givens has a whole book that traces how these ideas of a premortal existence appeared in Western philosophy through history, even though they became heterodox in mainstream creedal Christianity. But the notion is fundamentally important in Latter-day Saint belief, and in some aspects of popular culture.

I like this too.  I don't think Joseph Smith was just making things up.  I think he had access to revealed truths.

Quote

I am not saying that the filmmakers and writers who created these stories were influenced by LDS ideas or even exposed to them. I am saying that many of those ideas are universally appealing at a deep level, tapping into truths about life, death and love.

Our premortal and postmortal experiences, like our mortal ones, are about forging human connections, making choices, and fulfilling our purpose.

Well said.  

I find Riess' column to be generally unpleasant in its seemingly relentless negativity about and disparagements of the Church (which becomes aggravating and obnoxious when she does so under the auspices of her membership).  Kudos to her for this one, though.  Very nice.

Thanks,

-Smac

[CV75]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Wow!

I honestly can't remember the last time I read something by Riess that was complimentary of or optimistic about the Church.  So this is . . . nice.

I wanted Soul with my family on Christmas Day, and quite enjoyed it.  I was okay with the non-mention of "creator God."  Pixar left parts of the narrative ambiguous, such that people who do believe in God - including and perhaps particularly Latter-day Saints - can find its depiction of things to be compatible with their beliefs.

Yes, I liked that.  I think it is a natural and expected aspect of a narrative that contemplates a pre-existence.  

I like this too.  I don't think Joseph Smith was just making things up.  I think he had access to revealed truths.

Well said.  

I find Riess' column to be generally unpleasant in its seemingly relentless negativity about and disparagements of the Church (which becomes aggravating and obnoxious when she does so under the auspices of her membership).  Kudos to her for this one, though.  Very nice.

Thanks,

-Smac

Every story ever told is about "tapping into truths about life, death and love" (ask any film critic), even those with no apparent redeeming value -- somebody likes even the "sickest" of stories. I did find this movie entertaining, and better than other Disney fare such as "The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes".

 

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Every story ever told is about "tapping into truths about life, death and love" (ask any film critic), even those with no apparent redeeming value...

 

I would disagree.  I think many are for the purpose of presenting lies “about life, death and love”

[CV75]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

…lies “about life, death and love”

That is what I was referring to with "even those with no apparent redeeming value -- somebody likes even the "sickest" of stories."

[Scott Lloyd]

On 12/31/2020 at 5:39 PM, smac97 said:

Wow!

I honestly can't remember the last time I read something by Riess that was complimentary of or optimistic about the Church.  So this is . . . nice.

I wanted Soul with my family on Christmas Day, and quite enjoyed it.  I was okay with the non-mention of "creator God."  Pixar left parts of the narrative ambiguous, such that people who do believe in God - including and perhaps particularly Latter-day Saints - can find its depiction of things to be compatible with their beliefs.

Yes, I liked that.  I think it is a natural and expected aspect of a narrative that contemplates a pre-existence.  

I like this too.  I don't think Joseph Smith was just making things up.  I think he had access to revealed truths.

Well said.  

I find Riess' column to be generally unpleasant in its seemingly relentless negativity about and disparagements of the Church (which becomes aggravating and obnoxious when she does so under the auspices of her membership).  Kudos to her for this one, though.  Very nice.

Thanks,

-Smac

Good for you for trying to give credit where credit is due. 
 

But I’m having a hard time right now looking past her current public and boastful virtue signaling about refusing to pay her tithing to the Church and instead giving it to other causes, this because she was triggered by last year’s leak from an attention-seeking “whistleblower”  about the Church allegedly keeping a rainy-day reserve. 
 

And her, in effect, daring local leaders to take back her temple recommend because of her behavior in this. 

“Generally unpleasant in its ... relentless negativity” is right.

Edited January 2, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[juliann]

On 1/2/2021 at 7:59 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

Good for you for trying to give credit where credit is due. 
 

But I’m having a hard time right now looking past her current public and boastful virtue signaling about refusing to pay her tithing to the Church and instead giving it to other causes, this because she was triggered by last year’s leak from an attention-seeking “whistleblower”  about the Church allegedly keeping a rainy-day reserve. 
 

And her, in effect, daring local leaders to take back her temple recommend because of her behavior in this. 

“Generally unpleasant in its ... relentless negativity” is right.

That was a bizarre and self-indulgent article.