To what extent is the film mother! a denunciation of religion
mother! is certainly a film that has divided opinion amongst critics and viewers alike. Arguably, one of the main reasons for this is the film’s relatively contemptuous portrayal of Christianity and religion generally, displayed throughout the film’s narrative and character depiction, which is a clear parable of Genesis. However, while this perception is widely accepted as a central theme of the film, there are a couple of other interesting and viable interpretations of what director Darren Aronofsky is attempting to depict as well. These include a reflection of how humanity disrespects and mistreats Mother Earth, raising 21st century environmental issues such as climate change that are already heavily debated today, as well as the critique or even self-critique of convoluted artists who are not able to realise the ramifications that their actions have on the ones closest to them. Because of this, it is difficult to centralize mother! solely around the metaphor of a religious criticism, but it can be argued to a great extent that it is a significant subject of the film’s coverage.
It can be argued that mother!’s attack on Christianity is primarily concentrated through the metaphorical character of God, played by Javier Bardem. This figure is a poet, a creator of work, and the later narrative establishes this film as a biblical parable, explaining the comparisons between “Him” (Bardem’s character) and God. From the opening minutes of the film, Him can be said to show a subtle but noticeable disregard for his wife (called mother, played by Jennifer Lawrence), which creates a hierarchical nature in the relationship, with Him being superior and mother being inferior. An example of this is when a visitor arrives at their house and Him invites him to stay over for the night, saying “my wife loves having company”. The subsequent camera-shot provides a close focus on mother’s face, with her look of shock and horror suggesting the opposite to Him’s statement, suggesting that Him either is not aware that his wife does not enjoy guests, which is unlikely, or that he is aware and lies for his self-satisfaction. This kind of treatment is disrespectful and sets up Him, a representation of God, as a narcissist who is impotent when it comes to the interests of his wife, serving as a criticism of the Christian deity. Later on, the two visitors, who are credited as man and woman, break a crystal object that was shown at the beginning of the film and had previously been kept off limits by Him. Upon realising this, Him lets out a roar of “Quiet” at their attempts to console him. This can be argued to reveal Him’s inhuman and unforgiving nature, which has often been argued as a reason why God cannot form an understanding relationship with humanity. The symbolism of the crystal is also significant, with the general interpretation of it being a comparison to the apple from Genesis. On the surface, this is because, in this biblical parable, man and woman are both representations of Adam and Eve, and they are being told by “God” (Him) that they have the freedom of their surroundings except for one specific area. However, another connection is found between the crystal and the apple in that they are both objects created by God and valued supremely in His eyes without any credit being attributed to his muse: Mother Earth, whom mother is a characterization of. This is a motif that is carried through the film, as Him continually fails to recognise the influence that mother provides, especially when Him is able to finish his work, again showing that Aronofsky has portrayed a selfish and ignorant version of God. Another repetitive trope that is similar to this is the one of demand without returning, an example of which is when mother cooks dinner for Him despite being fully pregnant, once more painting God in a negative light whilst potentially serving as a comment on traditional gender roles as well.
For over half the film, religious denunciation has been depicted through the unpleasant character of Him, but there is a shift in the last 20 minutes of the movie towards focus on religious followers as well as religious figures. In the movie, Him has acquired masses of fans due to the success of his poetry, and the supporters who flock to his home can be compared with the billions of people around the world who centralize around one figure in organised religion. In this case, Him’s fans are deranged and obsessively focused on their idol, without any concept of the effects of their actions on mother. Eventually, they become excessively violent, to the extent that it is impossible to offer a face-value comparison between real-life religious followers and Him’s fans, but Aronofsky is certainly attempting to critique the length that religious devotees go in supporting their deity. That isn’t to say that Bardem’s character is saved to any extent in the close of the film, with Aronofsky maintaining his assault on the God-like figure.While mother is panicking about the number of unforeseen guests to her home, Him attempts to reassure her by saying “I’ll be with you”. As well as showing Him’s disregard for his wife’s opinion in the face of his fans’ adulation, it can be argued that this is more widely representative of the false promises of religion and higher authority in general, and how eventually these figures are rarely held accountable, as in the case of the movie. In fact, Him only returns to mother’s side when the life of the baby, his muse, is under threat, emphasising the extent of God’s selfishness. The final scene is an effective summation of Him’s disposition; mother is horrifically burned after an explosion has destroyed their house, and Him, lying on the ground next to her, reaches into his wife’s chest and plucks out her heart, which is transformed into the crystal object that is shown at the beginning of the film. It underlines the fact that God is demanding of everything, and everything that isn’t given to Him, he takes anyway, and this scathing perspective of this religious representative, along with His followers, provides a highly effective denunciation of religion throughout the film.
Despite the fact that the character of Him is primarily a metaphor for an unsavoury God, he can also be interpreted as a struggling artist who is caught up in his newfound successes, without awareness of the effects of his actions on his loved ones. This perception is much more sympathetic, but is also viable considering Aronofsky has previously encountered struggles as a writer, and has raised artistic issues in films such as The Wrestler and Black Swan. Early on, this is shown simply, as Him is clearly unwilling to open up to mother about his lengthy writer’s block, and enjoys the distraction that the visitors provide. His treatment of mother, as earlier argued, could be seen as cold and unpleasant, but, from his perspective, it is understandable that he does not want attention drawn to his lack of creativity. Any form of empathetic perspective of Him is taken away halfway through, with the film becoming more of an artist’s critique. Him attempts to justify the sudden influx of guests, saying he wants to bring new life and new ideas to the house, yet he does this without realising both their lack of positive effect, as he still hasn’t created any new work, and the existing negative effect that their presence has on mother, emphasising the desperation that some artists have in trying to create. When Him has finally written his work of poetry, he hands it to mother, who sheds tears upon reading it. There are two possible explanations for this; that she has suffered with Him for so long and the tears are a show of emotion and relief at Him’s development, or they could be mother’s anticipation of the problems of new-found fame that Him will inevitably receive from his work. The criticism of Him is that he assumes the latter, in that he thinks the tears are negative, suggesting that he does not understand that his wife has endured his pain alongside him, reiterating the trope of the self-centred artist that can be contrasted with the self-centred deity.
Another explanation of the film’s meaning as a whole is that of an environmental message within a biblical parable. The victim of the film, mother, is a representation of Mother Earth, and it can be suggested that the crazed followers of Him who enter her home are a metaphor for humanity’s assault on the environment. Originally, Aronofsky had planned to write a simple home-invasion horror movie, but the switch to a biblical allegory narrative allowed him to incorporate this message into the film. As well as highlighting the unpleasant nature of the metaphorical God character, the film is also attempting to show the effects that his actions have on Mother Earth throughout the film. This is achieved through excellent cinematography, as every camera shot is either very tight on Jennifer Lawrence’s face, or beside her shoulder, meaning that the audience is viewing the events unfolding from the perspective of mother. Apart from this focus, there are few specific environmental examples, apart from the instance where the guests start robbing mother of household items, which can be compared with humanity purging Mother Earth for her resources. The use of religious references while doing so, for example, one woman saying, “They’re hungry, they’re thirsty”, reiterating Jesus’ plea, shows how religious metaphors and environmental messages are linked during the course of the movie.
Film critic Mark Kermode said that this film was “an impressive piece of oppressive work”, and the movie feels this way because of how it presents complicated messages such as the criticism of religious figures and environmental awareness through harsh images such as the unattractive character of Him and the torment that mother is subject to through the film. It can be argued that the primary message of the film is that of a religious denunciation, as it has the most examples and consistent focus. However, Aronofsky is deliberately making sure that awareness is raised of other themes by integrating them either within religious references or adding them separately, meaning that this is by no means a one-dimensional film.
Site Title 