The Insatiable Moon finally seen

The Insatiable Moon is a film that needs to be seen twice. First time around you're trying to take in the way things work in this particular world, and how the story all fits together. A second viewing gives you more time to reflect.

Arthur (played by Rawiri Paratene) believes he's the 'second son of God.' He lives in a boarding house with a bunch of other people with mental health issues, and is by far the most outgoing and positive of them all. The story explores whether his ability to discern other people's inner turmoils, his belief that God is benevolent to his children, his prophetic words and other insights, are truly charismatic gifts, or merely part of his brain dysfunctions. It challenges us to believe in miracles, in the need for a true belief in God and not just a religious one, and of course, most of all, it challenges us to see people with mental health issues as people loved by God.

The 'villains' of the piece might be a bit too black and white, but they're mostly minor characters: the really interesting people in this movie are those who have a sense of the spiritual and are willing to follow it even if it causes them pain, or requires them to change long-held attitudes.

The scene towards the end, when the suburb of Ponsonby rallies for and against having a boarding house for people with mental health problems in its midst, is the climax, but the more important scene comes earlier, at the funeral of one of the boarding house residents. This is where Arthur comes into his own as a prophetic voice, a man who speaks the words of (first) Son of God.

The other interesting character is the man - Bob - who runs the boarding house: foul-mouthed and short-fused, he nevertheless cares deeply for the men he feeds and cleans up for (seemingly single-handed). This is a vocation for him, rather than a job, although it's unlikely he regards himself as a spiritual man. The 'spiritual' man in the story, the Anglican priest, is at odds with himself and his spiritual life, and seems rather wet by comparison with Bob. It's not that he's meant to represent institutional religion; that would be too simplistic. Rather he's a man in the wrong job, and wisely, by the end of the movie, he's realised it.

Mike Riddell, the author of the original book and the scriptwriter for the movie, doesn't give us all the answers - although he teases us with possible answers at times. His seven years of effort (along with a host of other supporters, including his wife, who directed the movie after the original director had to pull out) in getting this movie off the ground have borne good fruit.

Building Community

After nearly a decade of work, Mike Riddell's book, The Insatiable Moon, is finally being filmed in Ponsonby.
It's been a long journey which Mike has written about in various places, including the earlier parts of the blog relating to the film's coming to birth.
Being a person myself who is often involved in stage productions, whether musical or theatrical, and knowing how communities are formed during the rehearsal and performance times, it was interesting to read the following in the post dated November 19th.

At the core of the process is the willingness for all involved to trust each other's abilities. It's a great exercise in temporary community building. Author Scott Peck wrote about communities that they require the relinquishment of the temptation to control others. Ironically, in the highly structured chain of command of filmmaking, this is as true as anywhere else.

Every person brings something special and unique to the process, without which the entire enterprise would fail. The secret is a deep trusting and respect of those around us as we work in highly pressured situations. It allows the love to flow, and the wonder to be captured.

Virtuality again

The discussion continues....

Is virtual (on the Internet) church really church? The issue is troubling a number of people, including Bob Hyatt, who's written in the first blog post of two or more that: The problem, in my mind, with virtual community and internet campuses isn’t that it’s not church... it’s that it is just church enough to be dangerous. Because it has all the easiest and most instantly gratifying parts of community without the harder parts, it ends up misshaping us.

On one hand, there's certainly truth in the fact that face to face stuff with other Christians is an essential part of being in the Body of Christ, but on the other, the fact that people are tuning into some form of church when they might not otherwise attend seems to me a plus rather than a minus.

It all depends on what we think church is. The gathering together of a group of Christians on a Sunday is only part of what Church is, and for many, while it gives them a chance to worship corporately, to hear preaching, to pass the time of day with a few fellow Christians, and maybe get to know a stranger or two, it's a fairly small window in the week. It's what's done outside of that Sunday morning experience that constitutes the rest of church - often the non-Sunday part is the bulk of church for some Christians.

Getting some people to tune into the radio, or TV, or the Internet are all ways of making sure people hear the Word preached. They may also sing along (as the Praise Be series obviously expected people to do) if there's the opportunity. For some people this may be all the church they'll know, and while it may seem fairly low-key to outside viewers, it's vastly superior to no experience of church at all.

If we are to participate in church in the whole sense then obviously we have to do more than attend Sunday services. But I'm not sure that those who just attend Sunday services are really any different to those who attend via the Internet or some older form of media.

Apropos of this, I just came across a blog post by Mark Pierson (who, along with Mike Riddell, is/was one of the pioneers in alternative worship in NZ):

What is there for someone in my situation when I go to church? 30 minutes of sung worship that will pop me out of how I feel and into something “better”? A sermon giving me another 3 things to add to the hundreds I have collected over the last few years in order to better be a follower of Jesus? A stream of people asking me how I am but not waiting long enough for me to tell them? Why do “worship leaders” nearly always expect that a good outcome in worship is to have everyone happy, “up” and talking to those around them? Eric Wilson in his wonderful book, “Against Happiness” suggests that “the predominant form of American happiness breeds blandness.” That may explain why so much worship is so bland.