[.ca] Empires Martin Luther

Too much psychology, very little theology:
Why is it so hard for television to convey ideas? Everything is reduced to simple and unoriginal conflicts -- father/son, mentor/student, or husband/wife, without any suggestion people can have lives of the mind. Watching "Martin Luther," you'd think Lutheranism owes more to Hans Luther's alleged cruelty to his his son than Augustinian thought. This idea of the Reformation as a rebellion against all father figures has dogged Lutheran studies since Freud; Heiko Oberman finally slayed the beast in his 1982 biography of the reformer, but the producers apparently didn't read that book. There is some brief discussion of justification by faith, but hardly any attempt to place that thought in the context of earlier theology. The restlessness of the German princes under the Pope is given only passing mention, and not a peep is made about Catholic reformers like Erasmus or Thomas More. It's all Luther: neurotic Luther confessing six times a day, disillusioned Luther coming back from Rome, tired Luther preparing lectures, enlightened Luther sparking the rebellion against the evil, evil papacy with apparently no precedents to draw from. Most of this, the documentary assures us, stemmed from his dad's cruelty. It's Reformation as Oedipus complex. The documentary gets Luther's, ahem, earthiness across, and accurately depicts his constant fear of the devil. It doesn't shy away from his anti-semitism, either. The talking heads are good but apparently belong to a mutual admiration society; a Roman Catholic commentator was desperately needed. But the weaknesses make the film little better than an episode of Biography. The obsession with psychology turns Luther into a 16th century version of Judge Judy (Luther: "The pope should shut his mouth" Judy: "I said shut up!"). Oberman's book will tell you more about Luther in its first hundred pages than "Martin Luther" will, and it doesn't have the Freudian obsessions of this movie.

Not the best on the life of Luther.:
I agree with the person above who said this PBS documentary was bland. The dramatizations were sparse and unneccessary. Mostly, Luther is shown as an old man, riding in a cart, or on his deathbed, with cut-ins of scholars, expounding on his life and influence. Not really a "Life and Times of Luther," but more of a "Collection of Opinions about the Life and Times of Luther." Very little is said about his faith. More is said about the politics of his times. Some better resources: Martin Luther (1953, starring Niall MacGinnis), Luther (2003, starring Joseph Fiennes). I even thought that Luther (1973, starring Stacy Keach), with all of its shortcomings, was a better presentation of Luther's life than this.

Fascinating Overview:
I've looked over the reviews for this release, and I think I see two camps. One is composed of Lutheran scholars - or at least those with an in-depth understanding of Luther and what he meant for the modern world. They seem to think this documentary is dull or simplistic. The other (of which I am a part) know who Luther is, know of the 95 theses, and know that he was the major figure of the Reformation, but not much beyond that - the personality and figure of Luther himself, the level of pressure he was under, his effect on secular government as well as the Church, etc. To this second camp, I think this documentary is a fabulous overview of the life of Luther and what immense influence he had over the course of history. It touches on the major points of his life and effect, and it NEVER seemed dull to me - quite the opposite. As filmmaking, the documentary relies on original footage more than old drawings or paintings. The actors are good, although oddly, they never get to speak a line. It's all narration (Liam Neeson does well and the actor of Luther's voice is convincing) instead of direct re-enactment. It perhaps lacks the freshness of PBS's 'Benjamin Franklin' for this reason, and might explain why another reviewer found the documentary to be boring. In the end, I found this technique to be a very minor point of critique. A final thought would be that the soundtrack on this DVD is top-notch - I would have bought a CD of it if it had been released.

Wonderful background missing from MY Lutheran upbringing:
I saw the program on PBS recently which is why I am ordering the DVD .. for myself and to share. I was raised Lutheran, turned atheist at age 12, became a Christian again at age 21. I found this to be a wonderful presentation of the history I had some sketchy introduction to during my two and one half years of Missouri Synod Lutheran parochial school. I hadn't realized how significant a part Luther played in stating basic doctrines (not theological, mind you) of individual freedom, worth, and self-determination. Without Protestantism, there would have been no American Revolution.

Powerful and majestic:
I was impressed by how the writers used both the last journey to Eisleben in 1546 and the prior 1521 journey to Worms as complimentary events. The visual imagery was fantastic. the narrators were powerful and their discourse was enlightening. The comparison between the printing press and the internet was novel. Jan Hus failed because he was before printing. I have watched it over and over again. Luther was a man who changed history - of course God's sovereignty over history and human events is apparent. Luther should have failed. But he did not.