This has been a favorite of mine since its release. If you care about spoilers (I actually PREFER them), this comment has some.
O'Toole's portrayal of the observant and sweet-natured British Lord who thinks he's Christ, and who has that crushed out of him by psychiatry -- which leaves him a dark-souled "normal" ("He's one of us at last!) and who then murders another member of the peerage (the secretly Marxist butler exclaims "One less, thank the lord!") is astonishing. This is O'Toole's best role, IMO. I can't imagine any other actor who could have pulled it off.
The transformation of O'Toole's character from warm-hearted loon to rage-filled sociopath -- by simply being forced to think and behave as a normal member of society and in particular the peerage -- is powerfully affecting. It's not unlike watching a happy young child being turned into a sulking, angry teen. I believe this, the discomfort of watching an innocent life being ruined, was a major factor in the film's poor box-office performance. Popular films have a protagonist go through and overcome difficulties, making positive character changes in the process, leading to a happy ending. This film does the reverse.
The film's social commentary is mostly exquisite, despite the author of the story showing his Socialist sympathies (so many otherwise intelligent people have them, as we know: even Einstein, who wrote an article titled "Why I am a Socialist" late in life -- proving, to me anyway, that feelings are more persuasive than logic).
A favorite line (of many): in response to the question "How do you know you're God?", O'Toole's character answers:
"Whenever I pray to Him, I find I'm talking to myself."
As blasphemous as that sounds, it seems to fit (many will disagree; I'm certainly an outlier here) with Luke: 17:21:
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
He's actually quite the New Age prophet when he's JC.
One of my favorite parts is everyones reaction once hes infiltrated normal society.
Everyone hated him when he was Jesus and he preached love and light, but everyone loves him when he's Jack and he preaches pain and punishment. They literally worship him.
I think it's crazy how they have to refer to him as "Lord" whether he is JC or not bc he's still royalty, but even when he infiltrates the House of Lords, his lust for being God is satiated.
It's like he never actually recovered. He just changed his words and look, then took over.
Often times I wonder if he's still praying to himself when he takes his oath to office, and how ironic is it that his family member watching from above yells "You're one of us at last! Well done, Jack!"
Whenever I'm stuck in the political echo chamber, I am reminded of the delusion where the sees the House of Lords as a crypt singing a hymn. It's a very powerful piece of symbolism. Hell, the whole movie is.
And if you outside this conversation is reading this but hasn't watched the movie, go do it now. Theres many layers to this plot.
BTW, thanks for posting this; I love this movie and think it illuminates the human condition better than almost any other. Never expected to see it posted here, and it deserves discussion in this forum; it's far too emotionally real and heavily charged for most people to enjoy but if the Great Awakening doesn't include becoming more emotionally aware and emotionally healthy, the benefits will fade as neurosis erodes and corrupts society again.
It's like he never actually recovered. He just changed his words and look, then took over.
He never needed to recover; he was an emotionally healthy person who actually lived Jesus' admonition to "love thy neighbor" and was so traumatized by the sickness of the world that he refused to become a member in good standing. His delusion of being Christ was far healthier than what he became after they "cured" him -- repressed, twisted, hate-filled and murderous -- and since I believe Christ is, among other things, a symbol for us all -- innocent at birth, mistreated and traumatized and eventually murdered (for most of us, emotionally murdered rather than killed physically, at least right away), his delusion was healthier and far closer to the truth than was the paradigm society forced upon him.
Just my opinion.
That scene in the House of Lords IS incredibly powerful. I rewatch this every few years and the House of Lords scene is one that hits me very hard every time. I stupidly recommended this film to someone in my family who came away from it with a near breakdown. The Ruling Class is as much a therapy session as it is a piece of entertainment.
The Ruling Class is as much a therapy session as it is a piece of entertainment.
This is why I posted it. Im glad you understand it this well.
That scene in the House of Lords IS incredibly powerful
It's literally "The Good Ending" and "The Bad Ending" all at once.
Especially when he says "and they shall know that I am the Lord, that smiteth!". He's literally not recovered, he's still speaking as JC, but the Lords view him speaking as a "Lord" from the House of Lords. He just found a way to make his condition fit within society.
The whole movie plays on the word "Lord" the entire time, even when he's JC.
Even the symbolism changes in the movie once he transforms. If you look, his cross on the wall becomes a sword.
The ancient teaching of the Christian Church has always been theosis — when we receive God through the Holy Mysteries, that establishes the Kingdom of God within us, and going even further, through a process of casting off the old worldly self that is constantly trying to escape God, we can share in his divinity in a way. That is very different from “prelest” where we get proud and think we’re someone we are not, and people who are becoming divine are very clear on the difference, much more so than outside commentators. This isn’t something that we reason our way into, it’s something that God does.
So, yeah, it’s blasphemous to claim you’re talking to yourself when you pray, and that’s never been how Christians understood verses like that one. Sounds like the character is written to have a severe case of prelest at best.
First off - Fuck you for not even watching the movie.
Nothing is more irritating then having people walk in, and start grandstanding about a topic while not even viewing the video you presented.
2nd off - You didn't even bother reading the description in the top comment. The character is a schizophrenic. Even if you did the minimal amount of homework, you would've known this.
3rd off - If you watched the movie, you would've understood his character development, and why he is written that way.
Go ahead, go blindly pound the ground and use your religion as a shield for your ignorance.
I was responding to the comment as written? I think you might have read into my post something that wasn't actually there. I was aware that the character was schizophrenic. I have dealt with a dear one who was schizophrenic and targeted me socially and legally with long tirades on a religious theme. No character development can change the fact that claiming you're talking to yourself when you pray is blasphemous and is a severe case of prelest at best.
My main point was to state my disagreement with his interpretation of the Gospel verse and support it with information. I have found that most people here appreciate high-effort comments that continue the conversation with respect.
This has been a favorite of mine since its release. If you care about spoilers (I actually PREFER them), this comment has some.
O'Toole's portrayal of the observant and sweet-natured British Lord who thinks he's Christ, and who has that crushed out of him by psychiatry -- which leaves him a dark-souled "normal" ("He's one of us at last!) and who then murders another member of the peerage (the secretly Marxist butler exclaims "One less, thank the lord!") is astonishing. This is O'Toole's best role, IMO. I can't imagine any other actor who could have pulled it off.
The transformation of O'Toole's character from warm-hearted loon to rage-filled sociopath -- by simply being forced to think and behave as a normal member of society and in particular the peerage -- is powerfully affecting. It's not unlike watching a happy young child being turned into a sulking, angry teen. I believe this, the discomfort of watching an innocent life being ruined, was a major factor in the film's poor box-office performance. Popular films have a protagonist go through and overcome difficulties, making positive character changes in the process, leading to a happy ending. This film does the reverse.
The film's social commentary is mostly exquisite, despite the author of the story showing his Socialist sympathies (so many otherwise intelligent people have them, as we know: even Einstein, who wrote an article titled "Why I am a Socialist" late in life -- proving, to me anyway, that feelings are more persuasive than logic).
A favorite line (of many): in response to the question "How do you know you're God?", O'Toole's character answers:
As blasphemous as that sounds, it seems to fit (many will disagree; I'm certainly an outlier here) with Luke: 17:21:
He's actually quite the New Age prophet when he's JC.
One of my favorite parts is everyones reaction once hes infiltrated normal society.
Everyone hated him when he was Jesus and he preached love and light, but everyone loves him when he's Jack and he preaches pain and punishment. They literally worship him.
I think it's crazy how they have to refer to him as "Lord" whether he is JC or not bc he's still royalty, but even when he infiltrates the House of Lords, his lust for being God is satiated.
It's like he never actually recovered. He just changed his words and look, then took over.
Often times I wonder if he's still praying to himself when he takes his oath to office, and how ironic is it that his family member watching from above yells "You're one of us at last! Well done, Jack!"
Whenever I'm stuck in the political echo chamber, I am reminded of the delusion where the sees the House of Lords as a crypt singing a hymn. It's a very powerful piece of symbolism. Hell, the whole movie is.
And if you outside this conversation is reading this but hasn't watched the movie, go do it now. Theres many layers to this plot.
BTW, thanks for posting this; I love this movie and think it illuminates the human condition better than almost any other. Never expected to see it posted here, and it deserves discussion in this forum; it's far too emotionally real and heavily charged for most people to enjoy but if the Great Awakening doesn't include becoming more emotionally aware and emotionally healthy, the benefits will fade as neurosis erodes and corrupts society again.
He never needed to recover; he was an emotionally healthy person who actually lived Jesus' admonition to "love thy neighbor" and was so traumatized by the sickness of the world that he refused to become a member in good standing. His delusion of being Christ was far healthier than what he became after they "cured" him -- repressed, twisted, hate-filled and murderous -- and since I believe Christ is, among other things, a symbol for us all -- innocent at birth, mistreated and traumatized and eventually murdered (for most of us, emotionally murdered rather than killed physically, at least right away), his delusion was healthier and far closer to the truth than was the paradigm society forced upon him.
Just my opinion.
That scene in the House of Lords IS incredibly powerful. I rewatch this every few years and the House of Lords scene is one that hits me very hard every time. I stupidly recommended this film to someone in my family who came away from it with a near breakdown. The Ruling Class is as much a therapy session as it is a piece of entertainment.
This is why I posted it. Im glad you understand it this well.
It's literally "The Good Ending" and "The Bad Ending" all at once.
Especially when he says "and they shall know that I am the Lord, that smiteth!". He's literally not recovered, he's still speaking as JC, but the Lords view him speaking as a "Lord" from the House of Lords. He just found a way to make his condition fit within society.
The whole movie plays on the word "Lord" the entire time, even when he's JC.
Even the symbolism changes in the movie once he transforms. If you look, his cross on the wall becomes a sword.
The ancient teaching of the Christian Church has always been theosis — when we receive God through the Holy Mysteries, that establishes the Kingdom of God within us, and going even further, through a process of casting off the old worldly self that is constantly trying to escape God, we can share in his divinity in a way. That is very different from “prelest” where we get proud and think we’re someone we are not, and people who are becoming divine are very clear on the difference, much more so than outside commentators. This isn’t something that we reason our way into, it’s something that God does.
So, yeah, it’s blasphemous to claim you’re talking to yourself when you pray, and that’s never been how Christians understood verses like that one. Sounds like the character is written to have a severe case of prelest at best.
Nothing is more irritating then having people walk in, and start grandstanding about a topic while not even viewing the video you presented.
2nd off - You didn't even bother reading the description in the top comment. The character is a schizophrenic. Even if you did the minimal amount of homework, you would've known this.
3rd off - If you watched the movie, you would've understood his character development, and why he is written that way.
Go ahead, go blindly pound the ground and use your religion as a shield for your ignorance.
I was responding to the comment as written? I think you might have read into my post something that wasn't actually there. I was aware that the character was schizophrenic. I have dealt with a dear one who was schizophrenic and targeted me socially and legally with long tirades on a religious theme. No character development can change the fact that claiming you're talking to yourself when you pray is blasphemous and is a severe case of prelest at best.
My main point was to state my disagreement with his interpretation of the Gospel verse and support it with information. I have found that most people here appreciate high-effort comments that continue the conversation with respect.
Please dont do that here.