Final Destination

Over Spring Break I was watching Tv and I watched the movie Final Destination. While watching this movie I noticed that all the members of the movie where trying to cheat death. The Main character, have visions that somebody was going to die from something bad. He only had flashes of the incident and did not know who was going to die. Throughout the movie the main character is playing God. He is able to choose the fate of the other characters in the movie. He tries to let his friends know when they are going to die. However, he is not God and at the end of the movie you realize this. The remaining characters are all sitting in a coffee shop and a truck hits the side of the building where they are sitting and kills them. Even though there has been many different varations of this movie I think like 4 of them, they all have the same theme to them. One of the characters, who is the hero of the movie, acts like God and tries to defy fate.

Daniel Gordon - Dekalog 1

As we watched Dekalog 1 I searched for interpretation of the story presented as the First Commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” I saw that Pavel’s father, the college professor depended entirely on science and technology; especially his computer, which he termed “colleague.” Throughout the film we see his dependence on science and lack of faith in God and anything that he cannot prove by science, especially when contrasted with the unshakeable faith of his sister. His wife, Pavel’s mother has left, and he hasn’t the heart to tell Pavel. Pavel is interested in matters of faith and would like to attend something like a confirmation Sunday school. The Jewish concept of Midrash removes the direct text of the scripture, presenting instead an opportunity for the reader, or in this case the viewer to examine to come to terms with the meaning of the text in a more personally involved way. As I watched Dekalog 1, I noticed the way in which Kieslowski challenges the viewer to question what really constitutes a “god.” Over the past few years my definition of a god has developed to an understanding that anything someone worships can be a god. And by worship, I do not necessarily mean prays to, or sings songs about. One can worship something or someone more fully by pursuing him, her, or it in thoughts and deeds. You worship what you devote yourself to, and that thing becomes your god. Many worship the god of money. For some, fame is the object of worship. Still others have made themselves their own gods. The professor has put his faith in science and mathematics. If he can solve it with an equation or enter it into the computer, then he has faith in it. He gives a scientific answer for all of life’s questions. Pavel asks him what happens at death, and he is clearly talking about a deeper sense than the physical. Yet his father answers, “The heart stops beating.” His faith is in science and this gives him the assurance to let Pavel skate on the pond. And since he has worked out the equation that shows how the pond would support Pavel at four times his weight he does not even consider for what seems to be an hour that it is Pavel who may have fallen through the pond. I am not saying that science and religion are in irreconcilable conflict. In fact, I believe that the God who created me created everything in this universe and the scientific laws that govern it. I do however think there is a point made by this film that human understanding will never comprehend the vastness and the complexity of all God has made. If it did, He would cease to be God, and there would be no need to have faith in Him. The film presents the audience with a character who has put the god of science before God who created the world that science describes. The film does not suggest that it is the father’s fault that Pavel drowns, nor that if he had not had such faith in science and had instead had faith in God the same would not have happened. I do, however, believe that at the end of the film his world would not have been so shaken if his faith had been in God instead of human scientific understandings of the physical world. Instead his god has failed him and he is left with nothing.

Robert Pinkett Decalogues

"no other gods before me"

The first film there was a homeless looking man shown randomly about with little detail on his purpose. By the end you understand he is the movies "god." To start off the movie the little boy stumbles across a dead dog and glances at the church. He questioned his aunt about god and death however, his dad wasn't having it. His dad was based on science and reason for everything and looked to his computer for every answer. The man looks at his computer as his "god" but when his son falls into the lake after the computer was wrong was showing that anything can happen and there are "no other god before me"

"Thou shall not murder"

The second film we viewed was pretty intense the main characters were one creepy taxi driver and the other was the hometown trouble maker. The taxi driver would drive people selectively and turned down people. However for some reason he decides to pick up the trouble maker and it all goes downhill. The trouble maker was creepy he would get very excited at the sight of young kids and later we find out that he lost his sister who also was his best-friend at that age. He uses these excuses in court to hopefully get the sympathy card. This film shows that "thou shall not kill"

Mark Blasingame - Decalogue(Thou shalt have no other god before me)

Kieslowski's film has many interesting themes. There is much to be interpreted in this highly emotional picture. The two main characters are a father Krzysztof, and his child, Pavel. It is clear from the beginning that the boy and his father have a very close relationship. Much of the bonding they do is through calculations made on their household computer. Krzysztof holds the computer in the highest regards, often talking about it(and to it) as if it were a person. His great admiration for the computer comes through in a lecture he gives to his class. Then when Pavel wants to go skating on a frozen pond Krzysztof uses his computer to make the calculations to determine whether the ice is safe or not. His calculations show that the ice is safe to skate on. The next day, in a gut-wrenching scene, Krzysztof watches as his dead son is pulled from the frozen pond that he was sure was safe for skating. I really enjoyed this film and trying to interpret the symbols to reach the deeper meaning. It is fairly obvious that Krzysztof's God was his computer and calculations. In the end he discovers that unpredictable things can happen, and reason can be defied. A powerful scene was when he sat in the darkness in front of the computer just after his son died. The computer is almost mocking him with its input command, and its not until he goes to the altar until he is really able to grieve. Another thing that really interested me was the homeless man who was the God-like figure. He was always by the fire when Krzysztof would see him, but then when they were pulling his son out of the pond he was nowhere to be found. I'm not really sure what this means. Does it mean it mean that the homeless man fell in the lake with Pavel, maybe even causing this tragedy? Or perhaps his absence means that God did not do this? In the end was what Krzysztof did really a bad thing? He made sure his son was not at risk by calculating the thickness of the ice. He also tested the ice himself to see if it was safe. Maybe one of the statements this film makes is the unpredictability of everyday life.

Eric Saxon - Decalogue (Thou shall not kill)

This film portrays a young man who murdered a taxi driver. This man is then hung for his crime. The young man in the film is shown to be somewhat of a hooligan. He stands on top of an overpass and drops a rock onto a car. He also flings a piece of cake onto the restaurant window. The taxi driver he kills is also shown to be not a very good person. He sees people waiting for his car to open up, but drives off anyways. He also honks at a man walking his dogs, causing the dogs to run away. I find it peculiar that both the young man and the taxi drivers are portrayed in this manner. Like in the first Decalogue movie we saw, a god-figure appears. In this film, it was the traffic guard. As the taxi carrying the young man stops to let a group of children pass, the god-figure stares at the young man as if to confince him to not kill the driver. The young man's excuse for killing the driver was that his sister died at a young age. This experience scarred the young man. However, many people have tragic things happen to them in life and not all of them murder someone. Using his sister as an excuse was rather pathetic in my mind. While talking to his lawyer before his execution, the young man references his sister, saying that if she did not die, maybe he would not be in prison. I don't recall him ever mentioning the taxi driver he killed. He only talked about himself. This led me to believe that the young man felt no sorrow for killing the driver, only regret that he ended up on death row. The commandment of "thou shall not kill" can be interpreted as if you kill someone, you will either end up dying for it, or going to hell after you die of natural causes. I did not see much of a reference to God in this film. Yes, it had to do with the commandment, but the young man ended up being killed by other men, not by nature. God gave man free will. This free will led the court system to execute murders. Is this an act of God? This question is up to individual viewers to decide.

Eric Saxon - Decalogue (Thou shall have no Gods before me)

This film portrays the commandment that one shall have no other gods before the true God. The story takes place in Poland and the main characters are a father and his son, Pavel. Pavel's father is a professor who relies on science and technology to guide his life. Early in the movie, Pavel asks his father about death. His father gives a scientific answer about how blood stops flowing to the brain and the body shuts down. Pavel's father goes on to say that humans do not have souls, and he does not really know what happens after death. Pavel's father seems to have viewed the computer as a godly figure, answering any questions he may have. Later, to find out whether it was safe for Pavel to ice skate on the lake, he and his father put a formula into the computer. The computer concludes that the ice will not break under Pavel's weight. As it so happens, the ice does indeed break and Pavel dies. Many might think that Pavel's death was God punishing his father for viewing the computer as a godly existence. However, the Christian God is supposed to be loving. How could a loving God take the life of an innocent boy just because of his father's actions? This also is not consistent with the loving God that Pavel's aunt described to him. Many symbols led the viewer to believe that Pavel's father was traveling down the wrong path. When Pavel's father gives a scientific answer, his milk turns sour. Later, Pavel's father's ink container breaks, causing ink to black out all of his rational papers. I felt mixed emotions about the film. If God is supposed to be loving and caring, then why would he kill Pavel just because of his father's actions? In fact, this film may have caused people to turn away from God. Who would want to follow a God who takes the lives of innocent children? All in all, there could be many interpretations to this film's meaning. Myself, I believe that the director portrayed God as vengeful and cruel, not loving and caring as many like to believe.

Decalogues Vincent Farino

Vincent Farino

In these Decalogue short movies there were two commandments from the Bible that were displayed. The first was “You shall have no other gods before me” (Holy Bible). During this Decalogue there were many uses of the visual mediums. There was a god like figure in this Decalogue that if one looked closely could see gave the man a very serious look. He was dressed as a bum and was very mysterious throughout the film. Whenever this character was shown I could feel a sense of mysterium that made me wonder of his meaning.

Another visual was the computer. This computer was a god to the man. The man revolved his life around knowledge and facts. This computer worked as a symbol to bridge the gap of understanding. The symbol that it represented was a god that the man relied on. This connection is how those who believe in God relate. When they face a problem they turn to God in prayer. This man however when he had a problem he turned to his computer and his knowledge.

This film showed the man that he couldn’t control life or death for that matter. No matter how much knowledge and understanding he may have there is an “otherness” that plays into affect in this film. This film certainly made the connection of the moment to the eternity. The man realized that there is a higher being and that his control on life is not as effective as he thought.

The second Decalogue played on the commandment that “thou shall not murder” (Holy Bible). This Decalogue had similar symbols and meanings like that with the god figure. This time the god figure was a traffic man and a janitor. The symbolic connection that he played was to warn the man that he is going down a deadly path. There was another symbol in this film and that was the little kids. Everytime the boy (the murderer) saw the kids he would laugh or smile. This reminded him of his sister who he lost in an accident. I believe that this pain that he would feel when remembering his sister is what motivated him to kill the taxi driver.

Both of these films displayed the commandments in different ways. Both times the main characters went against the commandments, and they both experience great pain and anguish for that. Both films displayed that man does not have as much control of his life as he thinks he does.

Tim Powitz - Thou Shalt Have No Other God Before Me

As I said in the previous blog, film is a great tool for interpretation in today's time. I still think this is true but due to the complex nature of this Kieslowski short film, I believe that you cannot bank on somebody interpreting things for you. You must interpret laws on your own accord and on your own beliefs. Everybody sees life through a different and personal lens. So I believe that your personal interpretation is the best midrash.

Kieslowski left this one to our own interpretation. I think the father believes in God, after all we are told that he went through religious school, but I think that he believes and trusts knowledge more. Calculations always give a concrete answer where God doesn't always smack you in the face with an answer; that is what faith is for. I don't think that God caused the boy's death to teach his father a lesson, I think that the father is learning a lesson about God through the unfortunate events. He learns that calculations, however concrete an answer they may produce, can still be wrong. You control the variables of the calculations which is a safe and confident feeling. God can make you feel vulnerable because he has all the control. Even when Pavel goes missing, the first thing the father does is search at all the places he knows that Pavel has been or should be. He tortured himself by looking elsewhere as opposed to remaining at the pond where his answer would be revealed to him. This film just shows an example of what can happen if you trust your mind before God.

Tim Powitz - Thou Shalt Not Kill

Let me just start off by saying that I think that film is an amazing way to interpret old texts and laws. As you said in your background to the assignment, the Jews, upon returning from the Babylonian diaspora re-interpreted the laws so that would make sense for their current time. Kieslowski is doing the same thing here. Film is the most popular literature of today and it is very useful for visual learners like myself. Now to dive in to the short film itself. We discussed in class how there is not much different between the killing of the taxi driver and the killing of the killer. They both weren't exactly the most charming people, they both put up a fight in their death, they both had reason to live, etc. By the time of their deaths, we sort of feel for both of them which is a little odd especially for the killer. Do we not want what he had coming for him? He learned his lesson, but must he still die? I won't go far into the argument of the death penalty because I'm not an arguing man and wish not to start now. But this brings me to a point I learned in my Hebrew Bible class. The term "Thou shalt not kill" is more accurately phrased "Thou shalt not Murder." If we couldn't kill, then how do we sacrifice to God? How do we eat, for don't we even kill plants when we pluck them? We shall not murder. Now the true question of the death sentence is: Is it murder? I think that Kieslowski's film portrays the killer's death as murder. We see the court system determine the outcome of his life just like he determined the outcome of the taxi driver's life. Who is anybody to determine who lives and who dies except God?

Joshua Booth- Decalogue

The film concerning “No other God before me” had a good theme within it. The Midrash is used to develop a moral principal that the boy should put nothing before God, including his father and all his father’s teachings. We all expected the boy to make it throughout the movie but he did not and we struggle to come up with a reason that he deserved to die. No one likes death and when it happens to the innocent young people in society it just naturally seems harder to overcome and to accept. The boy who is taught by his father to trust science, reason, and logic was unfortunately ultimately killed by this method although the aunt tried to convince the boy that God had an impact on everyone’s life and that the boy should have had more faith to lead him throughout life. It was sad that after all the work the father and son did together he still fell through the cold ice. I suppose this was the point of having no other Gods before me.

“Thou shalt not Kill” is a commandment that should only be used in context to certain situations. I feel as if you are in war or if you meet the killer of one of your family members I believe you should kill and if you don’t then you’re going to be killed although it does not always happen physically. The boy had many issues after the death of his sister and had lost touch with reality. He was feeling so much guilt he could no longer function with reality. He did not see the signs that God was actually with him every step of the way. He was trying to reach out and save him or even help him grow into a stronger person but the boy never realized it. He really had no reason to want to live and this ultimately killed him. He did not care if he was going to get away with it. He just reacted upon depression and sadness that he did not know how to channel the right way. The torment that the boy was suffering was seen vividly when the boy killed the taxi driver and how he did it displayed the boy’s darker side in which he was now apart of much more than before. Although the taxi driver was not the best of people he did not deserve to die. Since the boy made the decision to kill he deserves the consequence in which he earned.

Elissa Wilcox- No other Gods

This Decalogue was my favorite between the two, although it was very sad. I thought that the contrast of the father's and the aunt's beliefs was presented well. The commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" was given to the Israelites in the context of the worship of many different gods in the shape of actual graven images. This film is a very good Midrash to the commandment because of the interpretation and application to society today. Not only does the commandment relate to actual carved images, but to anything that is held in higher esteem and worshiped above God. In the film the father believed that science and facts had a bigger impact on life and made more sense, where as the aunt believed that God was simple if you have faith. The father teaches the son about the computer, which symbolized facts and science, and the boy was very excited to learn about it. The aunt taught him about God and the boy was also very open to learning about Him. After the son and the father did the calculations for the thickness of the ice in order to see if it was thick enough to skate on, the father went out on the lake to actually test the thickness by hand. At the end of the film the viewer finds out that the son fell through the ice, even after all of the calculations. The film maker's purpose for this film was to show that science fails sometimes and was used as Midrash in the way that it expanded on the definition of idol and what it meant to "have no other gods before Me".

Elissa Wilcox- Thou shalt not kill

I think that one of the purposes of the film was to bring to light a different view of capital punishment than is usual. Neither the boy who committed the murder, nor the taxi driver who was murdered had any redeemable qualities. This made it hard to relate to either person and in the end it was the boy that gained the most of my sympathy. The reason that the boy was so troubled was because his sister was accidentally killed when he was drinking with his friend and that led to a series of bad decisions. He left home and suggested to the lawyer that he would have stayed if his sister was still alive which would have been a more stable situation and therefore he may not have killed the taxi driver. Although morality issues should not be affected by the character of a person they are. Whether or not someone likes another person will effect how they treat them. Because this is the death of the taxi driver was not as terrible, emotionally, as if he had been someone that was likable. The boy did not commit the murder in a way that would hide his identity and did not seem to care whether he was caught or not. There was intention and death, but this does not answer the question of whether or not the boy deserved death himself.

Lindsay Conrad Decalogue: Thou Shalt Not Kill

The second film in the Decalogue series is a great midrash on "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Once again, God is interpreted to be an ever-present being and even comes around three times as the same character as seen in the first Decalogue movie. This is like the trinity in mainline Christian beliefs. One of the appearances is as the obnoxius man int he bathroom, one is the man with the ladder, and one is the construction worker. He is there through the entire walk of this man's life as he makes decisions that effect his fate.
The film relates to the Cain and Abel story, because the boy who killed the taxi driver seems to be fighting with a reasonable amount of guilt over the loss of his sister. His friend accidentally rna over her while they were drinking in the field, just like when Cain killed Abel in the fields and then dealt with the guilt. The guilt that the brother must have been feeling could have driven him into a bad decision that ended up costing him his life. The feelings in this part are shown by the rope itself. While the man is cutting it and planning the taxi driver's murder, his wrapping of the rope around his hands time and time again shows the turmoil in his soul. The other feelings are shown in the lack of emotion in the taxi driver by some of his decisions. He may have had some aggression or other poor decisions that also eventually lead to his demise.
Finally, the appearance of the God figure throughout the film suggests the ability for God to interfere with what man calls one's fate, but how he could choose whether or not to.

Lindsay Conrad, Decalogue: No other Gods

The Decalogue is a very interesting portrayal of the 10 Commandments. The first one we watched, Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me, was very easily seen as Midrash. The "God" character is the homeless man by the lake. He is always with a fire and he is seen often in the movie. This is an interpretation of God a s ever-present and a kind of light to people - even those who don't understand Him or think they don't need Him.
In the film, the computer is the idol, which relates back to Exodus when the Bible talks about the people making golden calves to worship instead of God who was bringing them through the wilderness. The computer says "I am ready" but the readiness is just giving the man power to put empower the computer. So many idols are just the things that we let have power over us. Relationships, role models, homework, alcohol, all these things are just idols that we give power to, and the more power we give to them, the more destructive they can get.
Feelings are also shown in a very interesting manner. At first, a lack of feeling was shown when the dog had died. This emptiness the boy seemed to feel was touching because most humans will become soft-hearted at the sight of a dead dog, but the boy felt nothing but confusion. Later, when he is talking to his aunt, God and love was explained to him through a hug. expressing feelings through commonly-felt emotions are significant ways to bring forth the message the producer is trying to make.
The interesting point in the movie was the showing that life does happen, tragedies occur, but the God that the movie producer has encountered is a God that is always there, despite the losing of one's faith. When the calculations didn't work, and when all was lost, the god-figure in the movie was experiencing grief with the mom, the aunt, and the dad. There is a song in contemporary Christian music by Stephen Curtis Chapman that is titled "I Have Been There" and it talks about God knowing the pain and the troubles of life due to the life of his Son and sacrifice, and it very much parallels the goings on of this film.

Jared Free - Decalogue "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

In discussing this film I found it hard to determine which death was the greater sin. From a cold and literal perspective, the death of the cab driver was the greatest and only sin. From a legal standpoint he was an innocent victim. From a moral perspective, however, he was significantly flawed and was a man without any redeemable qualities; at least none that the audience was made aware of. Does this make his death, from a religious standpoint, justifiable? or sinless?
The murderer himself was killed. Was his death a sin? I felt that the death of the murderer was more tragic than the death of the cab driver. The murderer was a young man, he had lost the one thing in the world he loved most and had sentenced himself to a life of solitude and loneliness by running away from home, there was no warmth in his life save for one occasion when he was able to briefly interact with two young girls.
Both deaths were calculated and deliberate. Even though only one was unjust from a legal perspective, from a religious perspective both were sins. If there is a degree to which something can be a sin (a minor sin or a major one), however, than which one was more severe?

Jared Free - Decalogue "No other god before Me"

As I was watching the film it was very difficult for me to find any religious themes, aside from the obvious efforts of Pawel's aunt. I viewed Decalogue I very literally; and did not interpret anything in the film to be symbolic of a more subtle message. During our class discussion however, the themes of the film became very obvious.
For Krzysztof, his world is scientific and empirical. He is a man without faith, and does not rely on prayer or a higher power for guidance. His "god" is his computer. We see this lack of faith in his answer to Pawel's questions about death. They are very "sour" and cold; perhaps Krysztof struggled with this question because the answer was one his computer could not give him.
Throughout the film we repeatedly see the visual of a homeless man. He is always observing He never interacts with the characters, but at the same time is always in a position for the characters to interact with him. I think a pivotal moment in the film comes when Krysztof goes out at night to check the strength of the ice. The computer has just told him that the ice would support Pawel's weight, but here he shows doubt in his "god" by going out to confirm it for himself. While standing on the ice he sees the homeless man sitting in the light of a fire, observing Krysztof's actions. To me this is an interesting interaction between the God Krystof has rejected altogether, and the one he is expressing doubt in.
Maybe that was Krysztof's last chance for redemption. Had he approached the homeless man, God, maybe He would have saved Krystof's son. Instead, he places his faith in a mechanical higher power and loses his son as the consequence.

Kara Walling & John Ligon-Decalogue

When John and I were talking about the second Decalogue film "Thou shall not kill" we both felt the theme was easier to understand, however both feel the same about capital punishment; when is taking another persons life ever justified?

Kara Walling & John Ligon-Decalogue

John and I were talking about the Decalogue films, first being "No other God's before me". I think in the first film we were struggling with the overall theme. We didn't realize until the end of the film that it was portraying science vs. God as a way to live or value life. Obviously b/c the father was a professor he was reliant on scientific reasoning and practical information, where the mother held a christian faith saying that God was love. Each parent was trying to teach their child what they felt was important, which made it a heart wrenching story when the boy dies in the end. Because of different perspectives of both parents, John and I had were posing questions for the outcome of the film. First off, the film allows an individual perspective/interpretation. For instance, in class John brought up the point where you never officially see the boys body, so from his point of view it could have been anybody. It may have pointed to that direction of the boy, but it was never technically proven. So depending on your own faith or lack there of, your conclusion may be different than others who perceived the film. We also talked about what is the right way to live your life? Both parents offer alternative methods of viewing life, and are steadfast in their beliefs, however they both feel the pain from the loss of their son. The loss made us wonder how this would effect each parent. For instance, do you think the father would become more religious b/c of his sons death or would he continue to believe his own scientific reasoning even though it failed him? Another aspect may be how the death affects the relationship between the father and mother. Will they be drawn apart b/c of the pain, or will they be able to reconcile their differences through the pain? We also talked about the "God figure" in the film. The bum on the street was the apparent representation, however he was silent, sharing no interaction, and just watched the outcome of a tragedy. How does this represent an all powerful, benevolent God when he allows a child to die? All of these things explore the argument of reason vs. faith.

Mary Kate Curry: Decalogue: "Thou shalt have no other gods..."

Does Khryztof lose Pavel because his god (rationality/science, represented in this film by his PC) has failed him? Or does he lose his son as a punishment, for honoring false gods, and not realizing the fallible nature of all things that are not truly God? And why, if God is a a loving God, take an only child from his abandoned father? Could this be parallel to the Son being taken?

I believe that Khryztof has created his own suffering because he has made the choice to believe in science completely, and to not allow quarter for other explanations. He makes no room for that which simply happens (nature and weather defy logical prediction time and time again) outside the realm of prediction and calculation. He has made the choice to side entirely with ration, and when reason (his child dying) defies him, he is left with nothing. He weeps, broken, across from an icon of the Mother, icy tears coating her cheeks and she clutches her own child. He has chosen his own comfort for himself--a PC bling I am Ready.

Are we slaves to logic? And do we, (oh us of the technologically enlightened ranks!) doubt God because we cannot comprehend that reason which defies our computations? If it is not reasonable, does that mean it does not exist?

Mary Kate Curry: Decalogue: "Thou shalt not kill."

This brief film explores one of man's enduring inheritances--murder (running perpendicular, I feel, to death.). The blood of that first murder, that stain on Cain's hands, has been passed on and repeated time and time again throughout human history ('O, my offence is rank it smells to heaven;It hath the primal eldest curse upon't, A brother's murder.' "Hamlet" (3.3.40). ) How is such a damning gift rejected? What stops the cycle of killing, what washes hands clean?

What is the point of Jacek murdering the cab driver, a man whom he had never met, nor had any logical reason to harm? But, what then, is the logic in death? Jacek's younger sister was cut down by a tractor driven by a drunken friend. Where is the logic in her death?

Is there reason behind capital punishment? The defense attorney vehemently denies any justification; the death penalty has not proved a deterrent to potential murderers, but in the failed attempt to keep a person alive, it manages to claim yet another life.

If there was no murder, would there no longer be free will? Cain killed Abel because he was jealous, and he acted upon his jealousy. If Jacek was stopped by the God-figure, would that have negated his free choice?

I agree with capital punishment. Not because I believe it deters a future criminal, but because I believe in vengeance, and punishing those who violate the reason of the law.

Elizabeth Henderson 10 Commandments

In the second movie we watched, it was about the 5th commandment- Thou shall not Kill. Here the director toyed with the idea that even though the boy killed and that was not right, also so did the law. Even though they killed him because of a crime he committed it still did not make it right. Here a debate can come into play- capital punishment. I tend to agree with it and if your crime was bad enough then maybe you should be killed. However, two wrongs in the sight of god never makes a right. As God sees this both the murder and the law killed somebody , and they both should be punished for breaking one of the ten commandments.

Elizabeth Henderson 10 Commandments

In the first movie we watched about the 1st commandment- Thou shall not have any other God above me, the professor had one. I think that the God figure in this movie was trying to show him that this other God would let down the professor. As you saw in the beginning of the movie "God" was crying when the aunt was crying, while she was watching the movie of Pavel. God is sad because the son only believed in him and his powers. However, the father realized this in the end when his calculations did not give him the answer that they were supposed to. And the son died anyway, the calculations did not add up like they were supposed to.