IMDb RATING
5.7/10
716
YOUR RATING
A bigoted, fanatical nun comes face to face with the lives she ruined through her teachings when a quartet of her traumatized former students return to perform at her Christmas Eve church le... Read allA bigoted, fanatical nun comes face to face with the lives she ruined through her teachings when a quartet of her traumatized former students return to perform at her Christmas Eve church lecture.A bigoted, fanatical nun comes face to face with the lives she ruined through her teachings when a quartet of her traumatized former students return to perform at her Christmas Eve church lecture.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Photos
Jordan Allison
- John, Boy in Lighting Booth
- (as Hunter Scott)
Featured reviews
Just to add two bits to this. I, too, studied with a nun with a male saint's name, Sister Joseph Maureen. That's why I always quipped -- even before seeing Durang's play -- "The ones with the male saints' names are the worst." Sister Joseph Maureen was such a terror that I was sent to a psychologist at 7.
As to who is and isn't a "nun," for 99 percent of those in the Roman Catholic Church, both contemplative (cloistered) sisters and apostolic (out in the world as teachers, nurses and, nowadays, other occupations) sisters are referred to as "nuns." Indeed, in 1984, when I wrote my master's thesis on modern nuns, apostolic sisters freely referred to themselves and others in the apostolic orders as nuns. The distinction is not much observed in everyday speech.
As to who is and isn't a "nun," for 99 percent of those in the Roman Catholic Church, both contemplative (cloistered) sisters and apostolic (out in the world as teachers, nurses and, nowadays, other occupations) sisters are referred to as "nuns." Indeed, in 1984, when I wrote my master's thesis on modern nuns, apostolic sisters freely referred to themselves and others in the apostolic orders as nuns. The distinction is not much observed in everyday speech.
I love reading other people's commentary. Of course, the downside is seeing opinions that differ from one's own. I had to say, this movie was pretty darned funny.
Of course, the folks who have seen the play on stage will say the movie was a poor replica; it is their duty as "insiders" to knock any reproduction of what they felt was especially theirs. The screenplay was by the same man who wrote the play, and he sculpted it very carefully. To knock the movie is to knock the playwright, which to any Durang fan is quite the slight.
As for the heavy-handed approach to Catholicism; why not? I'm sure, if Durang had suffered through a Jewish school of the same nature, we would be seeing a film and/or play based on his days with the Semite community. He just happened to be Catholic, and wrote a brilliant satire of what he knew.
And of course, there is the erratic pacing of the film. Odd sequences, strange juxtapositions, etc. It is all very confusing at times, but it all serves a purpose. If one has dealt with Durang before, one knows that his delivery is always quite odd, and always biting. The performance by Keaton actually emphasized the strange nature of his writing, and while it might not have been as stellar as some stage performances, it deffinetely served its purpose.
Basically, it is an odd film. The words of Christopher Durang presented by quite the cast of actors, coupled with a pretty decent director, brought a brilliant play to (recorded) life. I can assure you that any misscomfort you feel was fully intentional. It takes you on a rollercoaster from hillarity to shock to horror, all the time driving home a very blatant message.
And by the way, non-Catholics get the jokes, too.
Of course, the folks who have seen the play on stage will say the movie was a poor replica; it is their duty as "insiders" to knock any reproduction of what they felt was especially theirs. The screenplay was by the same man who wrote the play, and he sculpted it very carefully. To knock the movie is to knock the playwright, which to any Durang fan is quite the slight.
As for the heavy-handed approach to Catholicism; why not? I'm sure, if Durang had suffered through a Jewish school of the same nature, we would be seeing a film and/or play based on his days with the Semite community. He just happened to be Catholic, and wrote a brilliant satire of what he knew.
And of course, there is the erratic pacing of the film. Odd sequences, strange juxtapositions, etc. It is all very confusing at times, but it all serves a purpose. If one has dealt with Durang before, one knows that his delivery is always quite odd, and always biting. The performance by Keaton actually emphasized the strange nature of his writing, and while it might not have been as stellar as some stage performances, it deffinetely served its purpose.
Basically, it is an odd film. The words of Christopher Durang presented by quite the cast of actors, coupled with a pretty decent director, brought a brilliant play to (recorded) life. I can assure you that any misscomfort you feel was fully intentional. It takes you on a rollercoaster from hillarity to shock to horror, all the time driving home a very blatant message.
And by the way, non-Catholics get the jokes, too.
For a Christian , ignoring the confession , it has high potential to be pure blasphemy. For a not Christian, I suppose, it can be bizarre and absurd. I saw in the last scenes not as a film/play about Christianity and its message, not as a film about bigotism but as a story about teaching as refuge against life. Diane Keaton gives a splendid portrait of profound loneliness, need of power in absolute forms, about isolation in herself of a sister- obvious, Mary ignatius is a sister, not a nun and a precise indictment against sins, cruel mistakes of Romano - Catholic Church. It is not a black comedy, but good occasion to reflection. About soulless faith , about refuges and real meaning of education. A not comfortable film about forms of moral blindness .
Great movie, especially if you're a recovering Catholic!! Excellent job by Keaton. She was so believable I found myself ducking to avoid getting hit by ruler. Over all I laughed, I cried, I confessed my sins. Worth renting!!!
Supposedly the play on which this movie is based was a laugh-riot on stage, but the filmed version is a mess. The playwright as well as the cast and director can't seem to figure out whether this is a comedy, a tragedy, or a melodrama. As a result, the film is all of these -- and therefore, none of these.
I love good satire, and I was hoping that this would be a gritty spoof of those tunnel-visioned fundamentalists who take themselves so seriously that they begin making up their own religion, never realizing that they have sadly strayed from any orthodox teachings. But I was severely disappointed in this mish-mash.
Back to the old hell book with this script!
I love good satire, and I was hoping that this would be a gritty spoof of those tunnel-visioned fundamentalists who take themselves so seriously that they begin making up their own religion, never realizing that they have sadly strayed from any orthodox teachings. But I was severely disappointed in this mish-mash.
Back to the old hell book with this script!
Did you know
- TriviaIn this movie version of Durang's play, Laura San Giacomo's character's name is Angela DiMarco. However, in the play that character's name is Diane Symonds.
- Quotes
Sister Mary Ignatius: You do that thing that makes Jesus puke, don't you?
- SoundtracksMeanstreak
Written by: Scott Nickoley and Jamie Dunlap
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was Et dieu créa soeur Mary (2001) officially released in Canada in English?
Answer