By Bruno Rukavina
Due to the great influence of cinematic art, which has an increasing number of consumers, the analysis of the depiction of the Sacred in filmography is highly relevant. This has been explored through three case studies: the James Bond film series (2006–2021), the TV series La Casa de Papel (2017–2021), and the Dark Knight Batman trilogy (2005–2012).
James Bond Film Series (2006–2021)
James Bond is a cult film series, based on a series of novels written by Ian Fleming, about the adventures of a British secret service agent. The most recent iteration of the series stars British actor Daniel Craig and spans from 2004 to 2021. Because the series has been produced from the early 20th century almost to the present day, it is relevant to this study.
How is the Sacred portrayed in James Bond? In the first ten minutes of the initial film Casino Royale, specifically in the second scene of the entire series, a question is posed about the villain Le Chiffre: “Do you believe in God?” to which he responds, “No. I believe in a reasonable rate of return.” One of the villain’s defining characteristics, even at the beginning of the 21st century, was that he is portrayed as a non-believer, an irreligious, profane, cold, and rational man. Even then, a shift is noticeable, as Bond himself is not religious. For example, when Bond and Vesper have to play undercover roles in a secret operation, Vesper requests separate rooms because she comes from a Catholic family. Bond replies, “I hate it when religion comes between us.”
However, this James Bond is portrayed differently from many others. He is not as confident, arrogant, or invincible, but rather, his vulnerability is shown, along with how he entered the service. He did not choose to become a licensed-to-kill agent—this role was imposed on him. As a child, he was recruited by MI6—the British military secret service. Historically, this was SIS—the Secret Intelligence Service, founded in 1909 as the Secret Service Bureau. Why as a child? “Because orphans don’t care about sacrificing others for the Queen.” His boss M says, “Orphans always make the best recruits.” Is Bond happy with such a life? No. The film consistently shows his inner turmoil—he constantly drinks alcohol, takes pills, lives on the edge of death, and has many affairs with married women “because it simplifies things.”
All Daniel Craig Bond Trailers (2006-2021)
Yet in the first installment, Bond falls in love with Vesper, who awakens in him the realization that he has a choice: “Just because you’ve done something doesn’t mean you have to keep doing it.” This represents the idea of a new beginning and a sacred transformation towards God. He is willing to resign from the service because of her. But after she betrays him, he returns to his job. Here we can compare Bond to the biblical tax collector, who performs a dirty job and beats his chest asking God for mercy, while the Pharisee thanks God he is not like that tax collector.
In the third film, Skyfall, Bond says that he makes his own decisions and that his job is not just to pull the trigger—but also to choose not to pull it. He realizes he has a choice, which is the foundation of Christianity—free will. The theme of choice is dominant in the fourth film, Spectre, when Madeleine asks him why he is a killer. Bond replies that he had a choice—either this or the priesthood—but admits he never really had a choice. She warns him (as Vesper did) that he always has a choice. At the end of this film, Bond chooses not to kill the villain, who turns out to be his stepbrother—reminiscent of the biblical story of Cain and Abel—and he chooses a new life with Madeleine.
Let us mention some of the sacred elements depicted in James Bond. There is the church (chapel) in which his boss M is killed. A very interesting moment is a car chase in front of the Vatican (St. Peter’s Basilica), where the background music changes to a sacred female choral piece, highlighting that this part of the chase is different from the rest. It’s also significant to mention James Bond’s hobby—resurrection. Interestingly, that truly seems to be his “hobby,” because we all know how each film ends: happily, having overcome all challenges. This is, of course, shown in a materialistic way, so that everyone can understand it—Bond rides off with a girl to a tropical destination. This is a profane, materialist portrayal of resurrection.
However, the final part of the James Bond series, No Time to Die, destroys this image of Bond’s resurrection because he dies. A more accurate title for the film might be No Time to Lie or No, Time to Die. This depiction of death can be interpreted in two ways:
- That everything in this material life must come to an end—even James Bond.
- That the image of the happy ending associated with Daniel Craig’s Bond must be destroyed.
This final installment has been heavily criticized. And alongside these criticisms, something un-Sacred appears—the villain with a symbolic name, Lucifer Safin, who is described as “a god who gets under people’s skin.”
The emergence of woke culture in the Bond films can be seen in several moments. It is first noticeable in Spectre, through the potential homosexuality of James Bond when villain Silva begins to touch him inappropriately, thinking it will break his mental defenses, to which Bond replies, “Who says this is my first time?” In the final film, the new 007 agent is a Black woman (as Bond is retired), so when “Agent 007” is mentioned, it refers to her. Furthermore, in the last part of the film, Bond’s colleague Q is portrayed as homosexual, as he is preparing a romantic dinner with his partner. While some praised this scene, others criticized it for not further exploring this sexual orientation. This shows a cultural shift and the deliberate promotion of certain liberal worldviews during the last few years.
Daniel Craig’s Best James Bond Moments (2006-2021)
La Casa de Papel Series (2017–2021)
La Casa de Papel (Money Heist) is a popular Spanish TV series consisting of five seasons. It tells the story of a group of thieves, con artists, and criminals who decide to rob the Royal Mint of Spain (where money is printed), and later the Bank of Spain (to steal its gold reserves). It portrays a sort of Robin Hood image—a grey area between good and evil—because they are not stealing anyone’s money, as the printed money is fresh and has not yet entered circulation, so it belongs to no one. It would be interesting to explore the economic and financial aspects of this story in future research: is this sustainable, when does money acquire value, and what would be the consequences of such a heist in the real world? Additionally, it would be valuable to examine the figure of Robin Hood in a Christian context, as he takes from those who have and gives to those who do not—especially from the perspective of moral theology and the virtue of epikeia.
In La Casa de Papel, the goal is to print money and extract it from the bank—without killing anyone—because the characters are not violent murderers but merely thieves or pseudo-robbers.
The series was initially produced by the Spanish company Atresmedia, but was later acquired by Netflix, which added three more seasons. The series promotes non-sacred attitudes, and to some believers it is laced with blasphemy and promotes the values of “woke culture.” In the first two seasons, under Atresmedia’s production, the Sacred is presented through the human being as a bearer of the Sacred within, but this Sacredness is desacralized. For example, Berlin—the main character and leader during the heist—speaks of virginity as a kind of “virginal madness” that must be destroyed and overcome because “virgins are rebellious because they haven’t been broken—innocent rebellion.” This is a depiction of sacred virginity as something negative. Berlin has had five failed marriages and speaks negatively about both marriage and women. His last marriage ended because his son took his wife. The series desacralizes intimate relationships, which are nonetheless constantly portrayed and promoted through the statement that “sex unites people.”
After Netflix took over production, the portrayal of the Sacred deteriorated further, leading to more direct mockery of religion and the Sacred. Right in the first episode, Berlin has bought and renovated part of a Catholic monastery and turned it into his personal residence, where he stores stolen artwork for resale. It is in this monastery that the thieves prepare for their next heist, committing various sins within a sacred space, desacralizing it, and mocking sacred symbols. For example, upon entering the monastery, Berlin says “Hail Mary,” to which the Professor replies: “Are you f***ing with me?” Berlin corrects him: “It’s not ‘full of grace’—we’re in a sacred place,” and the Professor simply calls him an “idiot.” The monastery is filled with images and statues depicting holy figures and events, which makes some characters say they can’t sleep because “Jesus is watching them.” Others complain about not wanting to look at Christ’s death, especially a scene showing Christ wounded and with arrows in His heart. In another moment, as intimate encounters occur within the monastery, Tokyo comments on how everything is full of Jesus and saints, while sexual moaning echoes in the background.
Trailer for the season 1
The symbol of the cross is also depicted outside the monastery—on the main antagonist Alicia Sierra, who uses torture methods, buries people alive during interrogations, and wears six crosses—three on a necklace and three on her earrings—while talking about how everyone in the bank should be killed. She is in an advanced stage of pregnancy, or “blessed state,” which is portrayed as anything but blessed due to her cruelty and inhumanity. However, she becomes more humane after giving birth, suggesting that motherhood humanizes—or perhaps that the state of non-pregnancy humanizes people?
Christian music is also desacralized—perhaps even demonized—based on the scene’s context. The bank’s security guards are portrayed as villains and referred to as predators who slaughter the flock. In one scene, the guard Gandía ties one of the heist members to a door in the shape of a cross—without the head, which is positioned through a hole in the door—then shoots her in the hand, where the stigmata of Christ are often portrayed. He even remarks that she looks like Jesus Christ. Meanwhile, the robbers surround him, and he forces them to sing the Christian hymn “Lord, You Have Come to the Seashore” (Cristo, Tú Has Venido a la Orilla). Apparently, Netflix considers it logical that if you’re surrounded and holding someone hostage, you would tie them in the shape of a cross and make your enemies sing Christian songs in the middle of a historic bank heist. Later, the same guard is offered a chance to surrender by kneeling, to which he responds that he would not kneel “even before Almighty God.”
Woke culture permeates the entire series. It features two homosexuals, a transvestite, and frequent dialogues filled with gender ideology. Two scenes particularly stand out in this regard:
- A physical altercation between the guard Gandía and one of the robbers, Bogotá. While beating Gandía, Bogotá calls him a racist, fascist, sexist, and homophobe, listing the insults Gandía had allegedly used—“immigrants, faggots, gypsies”—thus framing opponents of homosexuality, immigration, or critiques of societal security as villains who must be resisted. The show promotes a left-wing socio-liberal (and at times even anarchist) agenda.
- Another notable scene occurs in the final episode of season two—still under Atresmedia—when Berlin stays behind in a hallway to protect the others while they escape, saying: “I’m a male chauvinist, that’s why I stay behind—women and homosexuals go first.” This scene is interesting when compared to another film: Titanic (1997), based on the sinking of the Titanic in 1912, where the captain orders women and children into the lifeboats first, while men stay behind on the sinking ship. 105 years later—or 20 years after Titanic was filmed—in 2017, men (especially conservatives) who stay behind are portrayed as chauvinists, and instead of children accompanying women, homosexuals are saved alongside them.
Spec. pol. Bruno Rukavina is a specialist in foreign policy and diplomacy and a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Political Science, University of Zagreb.
The full article was originally published in print in the Rijeka Theological Journal (Riječki teološki časopis), 2022, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 5–27. The full article is available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/clanak/426385
