I was raised by a fanatical Catholic. But also have had my experiences with born-again Christians and i've noticed something that this movie sort of points out.
Has anyone noticed that religion doesn't really change a person but just changes their belief system. I've noticed that people who are usually very extreme with their religious beliefs were actually that way before they became religious, meaning that it's not really a higher power that's urging them to extreme acts but in actuality their inherent personality traits.
Often times, the same people that are yelling fire and brimstone are the same people who engaged in extremely "sinful" acts before their conversion. Like in the movie, where Sharon leaves the orgies and swinger group only to join basically a religious cult. This is in no way a general statement, just an observation. I know not all christian are this way.
"I've noticed that people who are usually very extreme with their religious beliefs were actually that way before they became religious, meaning that it's not really a higher power that's urging them to extreme acts but in actuality their inherent personality traits.
"Sharon leaves the orgies and swinger group only to join basically a religious cult."
Good observation. I think religion merely redirects or focuses "extreme" tendencies in people, it doesn't fundamentally change them. But maybe it can unlock tendencies that would otherwise remain dormant?
Sharon's total belief in the Rapture takes her to a pretty horrible place. Was her bahaviour, her direction, so self-destructive before religion? Probably not. But the movie is ambiguous that way and it sure makes you think. It's certainly no simple condemnation of religion.
People will often casually cite religion as the cause of so much war, persecution, death, and misery, which on a basic level is true but it misses the big picture. It is not religion itself, but our intolerance that causes these things. Religion is the excuse. If there were no religions, it would be language or race or something else that would excuse crusades, wars, etc. To sum up my rambling reply: human nature bad; religion neutral.
I've always thought that that was one of the main points of the movie actually: Rogers and Duchovny are extremely promiscuous at the start, but then gradually evolve to the opposite extreme, and in both their cases it leads to their destruction (Duchovny indirectly, Rogers and her daughter directly). It's interesting to note that director Michael Tolkin is a practicing Jew. That kind of adds another weird dimension to this movie in a way, at least for me. Definitely the challenge of this film, at least if the viewer is religious, is its implication that religion really and truly is the worst thing that could happen to some people. In the case of the Mimi Rogers character, maybe she was better off as a childless tart than as a religious zealot who murders her daughter. She comes full circle, from loneliness without god in her life to loneliness with god in her life. That's the irony of the whole story. I really, really enjoy this movie alot.
I don't want some renegade necrophile princess as MY roommate!
Those are excellent observations, lanah. They certainly apply to myself when I became a born again believer. To be honest, I shudder at some of the things I said and did initially. Looking back, it was pretty much just doing what you said; going from one extreme to another (something I still battle).
The bible is pretty clear that I must decrease and HE must increase (John 3:30) and that I need to practice at being quiet (1 Thessalonians 4:11). Look at Paul's life. After converting, he chilled out and made tents for a few years before he did any preaching. Unfortunately, some of the biggest a-holes in the world are born again believers, myself included. In fact, some could probably argue that I became a bigger a-hole after my conversation. I pray that is no longer the case, but you can never be too sure :-). GOD bless.