The film has grossed a meager $1 million in opening-night screenings, and reviews have been as lethal as the beasts that wander its CGI landscape. And many of those reviews have suggested that the film traffics heavily in the theology of Scientology.
"Casual students of Scientology may find their ears pricking up at those maxims because fear and its overcoming receive a lot of play in Dianetics, a foundational text by the creator of Scientology, the pulp science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard," writes the New York Times' Manohla Dargis in her review. " 'There are five ways in which a human being reacts toward a source of danger,' he wrote in Dianetics. 'These are also the five courses he can take on any given problem.' These options are attack, flee, avoid, neglect or succumb."
Writing for Vulture, Matt Patches breaks down After Earth as nothing more than an elaborate homage to Scientology. The movie's villain is "emotion," for example, while the father character "audits" his son throughout the film. "The bulk of After Earth is essentially that [auditing] scene fromThe Master on a blockbuster scale," Patches argues.
In his review for The Wall Street Journal, Joe Morgenstern begins by asking, "Is After Earth the worst movie ever made?" He then follows, "Maybe not; there's always Battlefield Earth to remind us how low the bar can go."
Morgenstern then goes on to say that the film is less a movie than it is a protracted, mind-numbing sermon.
"The sermon echoes a central theme of Scientology," he writes. "Is that the production's subtext, or are there reasons yet to be uncovered why humor and humanity have been essentially banished; why everyone looks pained; why the very notion of entertainment has been banished in favor of grinding didacticism, and why Mr. Smith, who has been such a brilliant entertainer over the years and decades, looks as if he has undergone a radical charismaectomy?"
Rolling Stone's Peter Travers also cites Battlefield Earth in his review, writing, "After Earthmerits comparison with 2000's Battlefield Earth, John Travolta's godawful film tribute to the sci-fi novel by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. Yes, it's that bad."
Smith, rumored to be a member of the controversial religion that counts Tom Cruise and Travolta among its most famous adherents, has long denied any official affiliation with the Church.
Still, the New Village Leadership Academy, a school he co-founded in 2008 with wife Jada Pinkett-Smith, is staffed by a number of Scientologists and employs "Study Technology," a teaching methodology developed by Hubbard.
Rumors of After Earth's Scientologist leanings have been circulating since its first trailer hit the Internet in late 2012. One widely circulated analysis on Reddit said much of the film's iconography depicted in the trailer mirrored Hubbard's writings.
Some examples:
The concept of the "abandoned Earth."
Scientologists believe that the planet was destroyed 75 million years ago when atomic bombs detonated in active volcanoes. Writer Jeff Carter of Geek League of America goes so far as to suggest that Oblivion, too, was influenced by the religion: "Wow … two trailers starring famous Scientologists exploring a postapocalyptic Earth in two days? What are the odds?" he wrote in December. "First we had Tom Cruise playing a human Wall-E in the Oblivion trailer, and today we get a preview of Will and Jaden Smith’s sci-fi vanity project/Scientology propaganda flick -- After Earth."
The dialogue.
In the trailer, Smith's character, Cypher, tells his son, Kitai, "Fear is not real. It is a product of thoughts you create. … Danger is very real. But fear is a choice." A condensed version of that line has been used in the film's marketing. That notion corresponds with Scientology beliefs that negative thoughts are the products of traumatic collective memories. Overcoming fear and doubt -- i.e. becoming "clear" -- is the central tenet of Scientology.
The volcano itself.
A volcano, a central image in the religion, has graced the cover of Dianetics for years. In After Earth's trailer, one stands prominently in the background of one shot.
The shape of the spacecraft.
The ships in After Earth have rudders, suggesting a cross between an underwater predator and a jet airliner. Scientology believes that spaceships shaped like DC-8s were used to transport billions of aliens to Earth, then known as "Teegeeack," under the rule of Xenu, a galactic dictator.
The costumes.
The white uniform worn by Cypher, a member of the movie's Ranger Corps, an elite paramilitary organization, is reminiscent of the uniforms worn by members of Sea Org, or Scientology's seafaring equivalent.
'After Earth': M. Night Shyamalan Missing From Film's Marketing
By DERRIK J. LANG 05/31/13 08:59 AM ET EDT 
"After Earth" was directed by M. Night Shyamalan, not that you'd know it.
LOS ANGELES -- It's a twist worthy of an M. Night Shyamalan film: Where is the prolific writer-director in the marketing of his latest work? "The Sixth Sense" filmmaker has seemingly been sidelined in the promotional efforts for "After Earth," his sci-fi film opening Friday starring Will and Jaden Smith as a father and son stranded on an untamed earth.
While Shyamalan's name is the first to pop up in the credits at the conclusion of the Sony Pictures film, it's been notably missing from trailers, TV commercials and marketing signage – a stark contrast to his previous films like "Unbreakable" and "Lady in the Water," which were prominently billed as being "from writer-director M. Night Shyamalan."
"Night is, without a doubt, a world-class filmmaker who we were thrilled to team up with on this project," said Jeff Blake, Sony's worldwide marketing and distribution chairman, in a statement. "Together, we decided to focus our campaign on both the action and Will and Jaden given that `After Earth' is an adventure story of a father and son."
Sony declined to make Shyamalan available for an interview with The Associated Press for this story, but he told Moviefone "there's such a specific expectation that comes with a name. It's nice to have people watch the movie and then have them talk about the storyteller. It's a healthy balance. I am very involved with all the campaigns for my movies."
The film has so far amassed mostly bad reviews. Richard Corliss of Time called it "lifeless, eventless, humorless, virtually movieless," while Scott Foundas of Variety wrote that "nowhere in evidence is the gifted `Sixth Sense' director who once brought intricately crafted set pieces and cinematic sleight of hand to even the least of his own movies."
After the success of 1999's "Sixth Sense" and 2000's "Unbreakable," Shyamalan was hailed by many as the next Alfred Hitchcock, but his brand tarnished after the critical failures of his last three films: the 2010 fantasy "The Last Airbender," 2008 thriller "The Happening" and 2006 suspense "Lady in the Water," his only film so far to tank at the box office.
"He's a fine filmmaker, but there are more reasons not to feature him than to feature him," said Gene Del Vecchio, author of "Creating Blockbusters" and a marketing professor at University of Southern California's Marshall School of Business. "The most obvious is that his star power has faded since `The Sixth Sense,' both with critics and audiences."
Del Vecchio added that the other reasons it makes sense to downplay the 42-year-old filmmaker's involvement include his lack of cachet in the sci-fi and action genres, as well as the fact he's not the only writer of the film. (Will Smith is credited for creating the story, while Shyamalan shares screenwriting credit with "The Book of Eli" screenwriter Gary Whitta.)
Despite his absence from the marketing of "After Earth," some moviegoers are still aware it's a Shyamalan film. According to a survey of 1,000 "After Earth" ticket buyers by online seller Fandango, 39 percent identified him as a key factor in wanting to see the film, while 80 percent said it was Will Smith who was the main reason they bought a ticket.
Paul Dergarabedian, box office analyst for Hollywood.com, said he expects "After Earth" to launch this weekend with $30 million in second place behind "Fast & Furious 6," which debuted in the top position last week and has earned $130 million after six days of release in North America. "After Earth" reportedly cost $130 million to make.
Will and Jaden Smith boggle the mind in bizarre joint interview
Will Smith and his son Jaden have baffled the minds of even the most mathematically astute in their latest joint interview.
The father/son duo (44 and 14) were discussing their upcoming space adventure, After Earth, when their chat turned to a confusing ‘multidimensional mathematics’ exploration.
‘I’m a student of patterns. At heart, I’m a physicist. I look at everything in my life as trying to find the single equation, the theory of everything,’ said Will during the interview with New York magazine when questioned about his rumoured involvement in Scientology.
He then tries to use his ‘pattern’ theory to reveal if he and Jaden would team up for a future big screen adventure.
‘If you were a student of the pattern, you’d have to say we were going to do another one,’ he said.
And then in an apparent snub to the rest of the world who obviously wouldn’t be able to understand the ‘pattern theory’ of which he speaks, Will said: ‘You know, the forum of media that we’re in can’t really handle the complexity of things that we say all the time.’
Perhaps sensing that mere mortals might struggle to grasp this revolutionary new way of thinking, Jaden attempted to clear things up.
‘I think that there is that special equation for everything, but I don’t think our mathematics have evolved enough for us to even – I think there’s, like, a whole new mathematics that we’d have to learn to get that equation,’ he said, with Will in agreement.
The 14-year-old then went on, saying: ‘It’s beyond mathematical. It’s, like, multidimensional mathematical, if you can sort of understand what I’m saying.’
To be honest, we were lost at ‘student of patterns.’
Is "After Earth" Influenced by Scientology?
BY TANYA GHAHREMANI | MAY 31, 2013 | 12:16 PM | PERMALINK
Will Smith has never publicly confirmed that he's a member of the Church of Scientology—in a recent Vultureinterview, Smith himself said that he and son, Jaden, are "students of world religion," whatever that means—but it's hard to deny that his new film, After Earth, is chock full of Scientology-driven ideas.
The concepts have been noticed by a few film critics, specifically Manohla Dargis at the New York Times and Matt Patches of Hollywood.com. Both report in their reviews that the film is filled with references to the L. Ron Hubbard-founded religion and its foundational text, Dianetics. In her review, Dargis writes:
“Root yourself in this present moment. Danger is very real. But fear is a choice.”
Casual students of Scientology may find their ears pricking up at those maxims because fear and its overcoming receive a lot of play in “Dianetics,” a foundational text by the creator of Scientology, the pulp science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard. “There are five ways in which a human being reacts toward a source of danger,” he wrote in “Dianetics.” “These are also the five courses he can take on any given problem.” These options are attack, flee, avoid, neglect or succumb.
Similarly, Patches writes in his review:
Kitai ends up having to cross the terrifying forest land of Earth and his biggest problem is that he’s a total pussy. He is bubbling over with fear. He’s too fucking emotional and that makes him a huge target for the alien.
This struck me as Scientology 101. [...] To me, After Earth is all about cleansing the body’s “thetan,” or soul. If Kitai can leave behind the physical dangers of the world and invest in self-determinism, he’ll be triumphant. He’ll be a hero because he’s entitled to be one. [...]
The auditing process also comes up. Kitai is stricken with memories of an ill-fated day back home, where he witnessed a love one perish at the hands of an alien invader. He was only a kid, but it kills him inside. This works like Scientology’s engrams, albeit a bit more overt. Through flashbacks, M. Night Shyamalan tortures his lead character with memories. The only way to make it to the end of his mission is to wash them away. So Cypher is giving Kitai his free stress test, one-on-one sessions between father and son that teach the emotionally involved child to put aside his feelings in favor of making the world a better place. The only thing missing is a 31st century E-meter.
In her review, Dana Stevens at Slate also mentioned the presence of Dianetics-inspired ideas in the film.
It's all a bit too much to ignore, especially when you consider this Reddit post that breaks down Scientology and how it relates to the film. In addition to pointing out that Smith and his family founded a private school that employs the use of "Study Tech"—something that is only taught at Scientology schools—it also notes that the basic principles of Scientology are all present in even just the trailers, and that symbols are evident even in the background of scenes (for example, a volcano seen in the film bears striking resemblance to the major symbol forDianetics, and a uniform Will Smith is wearing in the film looks a lot like the uniform worn by the Church of Scientology's Sea Org members).
This is all, of course, speculation, but as the Reddit post points out, it's not unimaginable that a big budget film would be produced to promote ideas of Scientology: "Because LRH himself tried and failed, and because Scientologists literally believe that science fiction stories, what they call "space opera", are repressed memories of events that occurred millions of years ago [...] I'm fairly confident that After Earth is a major motion picture made to exalt Scientology...Instead of Scientology's recent tactics of negatively attacking others, they are trying to positively bolster themselves."
Also worth mentioning: The film currently has a 12% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It's unclear if there's any correlation, but if it is a film made to "bolster" and promote Scientology, it's not doing a very good job anyway.
Perhaps The Gimmick Of My Father And Me Starring In A Movie Is Actually More Annoying Than Appealing
143
95
9When I was first presented with the opportunity to act alongside my father in our latest movie After Earth, I couldn’t have been more excited. It seemed like a surefire hit at the time—I mean, wouldn’t the movie-going public just be over the moon to once again see Will and Jaden Smith on the silver screen playing father and son?
But now that I actually take a step back and really think about it, I’m starting to wonder if maybe—and I could very well be overthinking this, so bear with me here—the gimmick of my dad and I starring in the same film is actually more obnoxious than appealing. And maybe not just obnoxious, but super obnoxious. Downright repellent, actually. In fact, I’m starting to think that instead of seeing the movie posters and trailers for After Earth and thinking, “Oh, what a cool idea, Will Smith and his son are acting together,” people are actually rolling their eyes and saying, “Give me a fucking break.”
Now, I know that’s kind of a strange concept given the success both my father and I have had in Hollywood over the last decade. When I first started my career as a professional actor at the age of 8, I think people actually enjoyed seeing me work alongside my dad in The Pursuit Of Happyness. I guess it was kind of endearing in a way because I came off as sort of naïve and, to be truthful, I probably surprised people with my acting ability.
But I can’t help but think that maybe, somewhere along the line, when my wealthy, A-list celebrity parents began developing projects solely as vehicles to build my career and make the Smith family hundreds of millions of dollars richer than it already was, the concept of my father using his clout to shoehorn me into co-starring film roles might possibly have started rubbing people the wrong way. I can certainly see, for instance, how my dad contriving a $130-million Hollywood science-fiction film in an attempt to promote me to his level of fame and fortune could maybe come across as a tad self-serving.
In fact, maybe—just maybe—people might view the movie as less of a great film starring an actor they love and his lovable son, and more of a soulless vanity project. Or go so far as to say such blatant nepotism and hunger for fame is the biggest problem in Hollywood today, and in the United States of America as a whole.
It’s possible, is all I’m saying.
Let’s just say, for argument’s sake, that I was an average, everyday American consumer. Would I enjoy seeing an incredibly rich and famous man use his money and power to make his children incredibly rich and famous? WouldI enjoy seeing the face of a young teenager plastered on movie posters across the entire nation, not because of who he is, but because of who his father is? To be totally honest, I’m not so sure I would. In fact, it’s conceivable that I might find it unbelievably infuriating and downright unbearable.
Then again, though, when I take a step back and really think about it, I guess there are maybe one or two things that my family does that could put off the general public. Like my parents completely manufacturing a singing career for my younger sister Willow, for example. Or my musical collaboration with Justin Bieber to promote my last film, The Karate Kid. In fact, one might say that my entire friendship with Justin Bieber, and the image of two very rich, very entitled teenagers hanging out until six in the morning may in fact hurt my overall image, as opposed to enhancing it. Does that make sense?
Come to think of it, I suppose it is entirely possible that there are a few moviegoers out there right now who are saying something along the lines of, “Actually, this whole movie seems really cold, calculated, and designed purely to raise the media profile of the film’s millionaire movie star and his young, precociously famous son. And, because of these things, I do not want to see After Earth at all. I’d much rather go see that dumb magician movie this weekend instead.”
Hell, one could even conceivably argue that my parents are doing me a huge disservice by giving me a career that I didn’t necessarily earn myself, creating a wave of ill will toward me that will be more or less impossible to shed for the rest of my life. And, as it were, maybe raising me and my sister in the glamorous, vapid cocoon of Hollywood and setting absolutely no boundaries whatsoever for us and allowing us to pretty much do and have whatever we want is not, in fact, a good way to raise children. You know, at this point, I wouldn’t fault someone for thinking that my father and mother have utterly lost their grip on reality and what it means to be a normal human being in today’s world.
But hey, at the end of the day, I’m rich, I’m famous, I’ll soon be getting my own house, and my newest movie will probably make millions of dollars at the box office this weekend. So who gives a fuck what you people think?
![[image]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tW39fux_cGTIY4BLMkrx9yCbvIgs9mtjv9EbIMQ753Nws51xIhKzqSy5FEoHrGaTxDTihQhJa6SIY-E-inxct_AIX2pGZuAE47tvgxcfHXnF9gOu9V5vZPyC-i87AhX9nTU0X4qhRBJXM8LM7djku0=s0-d)
Columbia Pictures
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334240/Will-Smiths-new-film-After-Earth-accused-propaganda-Scientology-tanks-box-office.html#ixzz2Uvca3Vze
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
By Beaver State Believer,
Oregon writer,
One of the most talked about movie of the summer may turn out to be the most unexpected. I am talking about Will Smith’s After Earth. The first news to come out of this film was the early prediction that this movie will the first box office causality of summer as the weak $1 Million Thursday opening was a scare to “After Earth” promoters. Second, was the unusually harsh criticism of the movie and Will Smith’s son Jaden Smith with theWall Street Journal saying it is among the world movies ever made (ouch?!?). Even astronaught Buzz Aldrin jumped in by faulting the movie for not being realistic. I haven’t seen so much overkill criticism in a movie and yet this article is being written on the first full day of release.
Most surprisingly is the film’s tie to Scientology principles being talked about among critics. Some call it propaganda because it highlights religious themes held by Scientology. Would that then make “Life of Pi” propaganda for Hinduism or “For Greater Glory” propaganda for Evangelicals? Others claimed that Twilight contained quiet references to Mormon themes. Will Smith has been a financial supporter of Scientology and it is no surprise if he would create a film that shares his own values. The Christian movie review site,Plugged In online does not fault the film for any negative spiritual references.
One reviewer wrote about After Earth and its connection to Scientology. You can judge for yourself — Scientology overreach of critics overkill of Scientology?
Will Smith considers himself to be a “student of world religion,” which is a pretentious way of saying you don’t have a declared dogma that you cling to. Or perhaps, as some have speculated, it’s his way of covering the fact that he is involved with the Church of Scientology.
Though Smith has long denied this, he and his wife Jada do have ties to the faith — including using his old home to help fund a private school that uses teaching methods developed by Scientologists.
Now, there’s a new blog post that notices that many of the themes found in his new film,After Earth, incorporates much of the beliefs of L. Ron Hubbard, the sci-fi writer who founded the Church of Scientology.
Blogger Matt Patches writes:
Read more: Is Will Smith's New "After Earth" Movie Scientology Propaganda?
M. Night Shyamalan, 'After Earth' Director, On A Sequel To 'Unbreakable' And His Relationship With Critics
M. Night Shyamalan is the director of the new Will Smith movie, "After Earth." This is a fact that you might not be aware of, because Shyamalan is not a major aspect of the film's marketing campaign. It's a twist from how things were for the 42-year-old director in the aftermath of 1999's "The Sixth Sense," when Shyamalan's name alone was often enough to sell his movies. Following an impressive run of critical and financial successes ("The Sixth Sense," "Unbreakable," "Signs"), the waters have cooled a bit for Shyamalan over his last few movies ("The Lady in the Water," "The Happening," "The Last Airbender").
In person, Shyamalan is about as cordial as they come. When we met on Wednesday afternoon, he was wearing an Iron Man t-shirt; it made him seem approachable and endearing. So did this: Shyamalan was tipped off that May 29 was my birthday, so no matter how contentious the below conversation seems to get at times, keep in mind that it ended with him and me eating a cupcake.
Before the interview, I was told that nothing was off limits. So, with that, we started talking.
You're looking through Life magazines.
It's so cool, man. Look how beautiful Cybil Shepard was during "The Last Picture Show," which is one of my favorite movies.
It's so cool, man. Look how beautiful Cybil Shepard was during "The Last Picture Show," which is one of my favorite movies.
I wouldn't have guessed that.
It's all tone. Bogdanovich, his control of tone is insane.
It's all tone. Bogdanovich, his control of tone is insane.
Most people remember Shepard from "Moonlighting."
She was amazing in "Moonlighting," but, this movie ... she's more powerful than the movie and your heart is taken away with this not-so-glamorous girl.
She was amazing in "Moonlighting," but, this movie ... she's more powerful than the movie and your heart is taken away with this not-so-glamorous girl.
This is my segue, but speaking of tone, "After Earth" doesn't have the typical tone that we are used to from you.
Well, I think it's a hybrid, right?
Well, I think it's a hybrid, right?
There are moments.
Moments, yeah. Quiet kind of has its place in the movie -- you know, the quiet stillness and the introspective stuff. Which I think we're talking about, that kind of tonal thing. You know, it's interesting: I think my movies are primarily dramas -- you know, 70 percent drama and 30 percent whatever the genre is -- and then normally they're sold on that genre piece. And that causes a weird reaction of, "Oh my God, I didn't know it was 70 percent this other thing." And this time it's at least50/50.
Moments, yeah. Quiet kind of has its place in the movie -- you know, the quiet stillness and the introspective stuff. Which I think we're talking about, that kind of tonal thing. You know, it's interesting: I think my movies are primarily dramas -- you know, 70 percent drama and 30 percent whatever the genre is -- and then normally they're sold on that genre piece. And that causes a weird reaction of, "Oh my God, I didn't know it was 70 percent this other thing." And this time it's at least50/50.
But this one seems less your movie than what we've seen in the past since probably "Stuart Little." This has been publicized as Will Smith's movie.
I don't know if I'd say that as much. "Stuart Little" would be the one that I just kind of embraced it, but, to some extent, that was a lot me, too -- the tone that came through. I've become a version of whomever I'm working with, to some extent. Does that make sense?
I don't know if I'd say that as much. "Stuart Little" would be the one that I just kind of embraced it, but, to some extent, that was a lot me, too -- the tone that came through. I've become a version of whomever I'm working with, to some extent. Does that make sense?
How so?
Like if I'm working with Scott Rudin on "The Village," I start leaning more that way in the way I'm thinking a lot -- so, I'm more toward that person, my partner, a lot. And, on this one, it was Will.
Like if I'm working with Scott Rudin on "The Village," I start leaning more that way in the way I'm thinking a lot -- so, I'm more toward that person, my partner, a lot. And, on this one, it was Will.
But I feel like something like "The Sixth Sense," you can say, "This is my vision. This is my movie."
Yeah, from the beginning.
Yeah, from the beginning.
But I feel on this one Will Smith can tell you, "No, I'm looking to do it this way. Do that for me."
I think the balance of it was that he left me mostly to my devices in terms of how to portray the character's journey. So, I'd say, "Well, maybe he gets poisoned by a leech." I remember writing that sequence. And I think Will's influence specifically would be seen, say, in an action scene where I would stop at "two" and we might go "three" or "four" -- go one more beat in the action. And I definitely learned from that in terms of -- I'm a big self-analysis guy, making sure I go through therapy all of the time with myself.
I think the balance of it was that he left me mostly to my devices in terms of how to portray the character's journey. So, I'd say, "Well, maybe he gets poisoned by a leech." I remember writing that sequence. And I think Will's influence specifically would be seen, say, in an action scene where I would stop at "two" and we might go "three" or "four" -- go one more beat in the action. And I definitely learned from that in terms of -- I'm a big self-analysis guy, making sure I go through therapy all of the time with myself.
What's that mean?
You know, that's what making a movie is: therapy for me.
You know, that's what making a movie is: therapy for me.
Which movie is the most therapeutic?
They're all.
They're all.
Equally?
Yeah, they're all like that. They all represent where I am. Does that make sense? And in this one, working on this movie -- I have two types of minimalism. I love, really love, to be minimum. Left to my own devices, I'd definitely do "The Tree of Life." That's where I would go. I'd love to do that -- ambiguous and quiet and all that stuff.
Yeah, they're all like that. They all represent where I am. Does that make sense? And in this one, working on this movie -- I have two types of minimalism. I love, really love, to be minimum. Left to my own devices, I'd definitely do "The Tree of Life." That's where I would go. I'd love to do that -- ambiguous and quiet and all that stuff.
Do you consider yourself a filmmaker like Malick?
Well, he's so courageous. I don't know if I'm quite as courageous as him.
Well, he's so courageous. I don't know if I'm quite as courageous as him.
How so?
You know, there's a kind on insinuation that we were talking about with "The Last Picture Show," just a tone. There's very little plot in "The Last Picture Show." It's not based on plot. The plot comes in and out, but your driving force is tone. A lot of Malick's movies and especially "The Tree of Life" for me -- I can't tell you that I knew exactly what was going on, but emotionally I was 100 percent there. So, he was working on a subconscious level.
You know, there's a kind on insinuation that we were talking about with "The Last Picture Show," just a tone. There's very little plot in "The Last Picture Show." It's not based on plot. The plot comes in and out, but your driving force is tone. A lot of Malick's movies and especially "The Tree of Life" for me -- I can't tell you that I knew exactly what was going on, but emotionally I was 100 percent there. So, he was working on a subconscious level.
Let's say you made a Terrence Malick-type movie. Do you think it would have been better received, say, right after "Unbreakable" came out or now? That people would have given you more of a shot back then with something so abstract and that critics would be more unfair today?
God, I don't know. I've come to think of it more as a body of work. That's the way I've always thought about it to some extent, but it's the healthiest way to continue to think about it rather than kind of going on each one in its particular context at that moment and its particular expectations of that moment. Those can be driven by the marketing, those can be driven by the previous movie, it can be driven by other movies -- you know, that kind of thing.
God, I don't know. I've come to think of it more as a body of work. That's the way I've always thought about it to some extent, but it's the healthiest way to continue to think about it rather than kind of going on each one in its particular context at that moment and its particular expectations of that moment. Those can be driven by the marketing, those can be driven by the previous movie, it can be driven by other movies -- you know, that kind of thing.
Do you feel that critics have turned on you?
[Laughs] No, no. I definitely think that they're seeing it more -- I think it will be easier to see in a body of work, I think.
[Laughs] No, no. I definitely think that they're seeing it more -- I think it will be easier to see in a body of work, I think.
You had a critic character in "Lady in the Water."
I don't feel an adversarial relationship to them -- I goof around with them in "Lady in the Water."
I don't feel an adversarial relationship to them -- I goof around with them in "Lady in the Water."
But you see why some critics take that as a personal attack? He's brutally killed.
[Laughs] I know.
[Laughs] I know.
And you cast yourself as the writer with the important vision.
Well, it was all about storytelling. And all about kind of all the aspects of storytelling -- that movie's main character is named "Story" and all of that stuff. I mean, it was a tongue-in-cheek movie.
Well, it was all about storytelling. And all about kind of all the aspects of storytelling -- that movie's main character is named "Story" and all of that stuff. I mean, it was a tongue-in-cheek movie.
Could "The Sixth Sense" be a phenomenon today? With the Internet, could it have kept its secret for as long as it did.
I don't know. It would have been difficult, I think, today. It would have been difficult. For sure the headline on Twitter would have been like "surprise ending," right? Or "I didn't guess the ending." It immediately orients you in a different way to it. I don't think it would have been the same experience in today's market. The fact is, it was very lucky timing. It was right before the Internet became a real, real place where everyone constantly went. I remember it at the time, it wasn't even talked about when we put that movie out.
I don't know. It would have been difficult, I think, today. It would have been difficult. For sure the headline on Twitter would have been like "surprise ending," right? Or "I didn't guess the ending." It immediately orients you in a different way to it. I don't think it would have been the same experience in today's market. The fact is, it was very lucky timing. It was right before the Internet became a real, real place where everyone constantly went. I remember it at the time, it wasn't even talked about when we put that movie out.
I remember I had no desire to see it at first because it looked too much like "Mercury Rising," Bruce Willis' other movie with a child actor.
"Mercury Rising"? I'm trying to remember it.
"Mercury Rising"? I'm trying to remember it.
Then the word of mouth came.
Right. It would be different, one way or the other. In some ways, it could have been recommended faster. So, it could have been that or it could have been talked about in the wrong way too quickly.
Right. It would be different, one way or the other. In some ways, it could have been recommended faster. So, it could have been that or it could have been talked about in the wrong way too quickly.
Did you ever feel caught up in having to have a twist? Did you ever feel that you had to do it?
No, I never -- I don't think like that.
No, I never -- I don't think like that.
A lot of your movies have twists.
They do. So, in my mind, if it turned out that I did 10 movies and seven of them had twists, that's great.
They do. So, in my mind, if it turned out that I did 10 movies and seven of them had twists, that's great.
You never thought, I need to stump the audience again?
No. I don't ever think of it like that. That's kind of outside-inside thinking where it's really none of them are that. None of them are a gimmick.
No. I don't ever think of it like that. That's kind of outside-inside thinking where it's really none of them are that. None of them are a gimmick.
I don't think they're a gimmick. But I wonder if there's something internal that makes you want to one-up yourself.
Not at all. Not at all. What I'm trying to say is it's not an outside thinking thing. This is the story of a young reporter who is turning 39 and he wants the day of his birthday to be amazing.
Not at all. Not at all. What I'm trying to say is it's not an outside thinking thing. This is the story of a young reporter who is turning 39 and he wants the day of his birthday to be amazing.
I fear this is going to end badly for me.
I'm going to tell it from the point of view of the person that didn't know him. And then I reveal the story, reveal what your actual plan was for your birthday. Anangle on the story rather than thinking of it like like I need to have a twist. It's what's the most provocative angle to tell the story? And from that, it becomes a revelation of another part of the story. So it's more of a paradigm shift in how to tell the story than it is thinking of it as a gimmick.
I'm going to tell it from the point of view of the person that didn't know him. And then I reveal the story, reveal what your actual plan was for your birthday. Anangle on the story rather than thinking of it like like I need to have a twist. It's what's the most provocative angle to tell the story? And from that, it becomes a revelation of another part of the story. So it's more of a paradigm shift in how to tell the story than it is thinking of it as a gimmick.
You've gotten away from that in your last couple of movies.
I don't think of it like that. You know, my first two movies before "The Sixth Sense" were just straight movies -- and "Signs" was a straight movie. And "Lady in the Water" was a straight movie, in that way. Although there are revelations in those movies.
I don't think of it like that. You know, my first two movies before "The Sixth Sense" were just straight movies -- and "Signs" was a straight movie. And "Lady in the Water" was a straight movie, in that way. Although there are revelations in those movies.
You tried to make "Life of Pi." Was it hard at all to watch Ang Lee win an Oscar for Best Director for that movie?
No. You know, there are so many movies that I wish I had made. And Ang doing it is like the perfect ending to that story for me.
No. You know, there are so many movies that I wish I had made. And Ang doing it is like the perfect ending to that story for me.
That's a nice thing to say, but how?
He's my hero. All of his movies, even before "The Ice Storm" -- which I think is a masterpiece -- just to have someone that I think is a master-level storyteller to take that story, which is a boy from Pondicherry [in India], where I was born ... You know, I love that movie a lot and I love that book a lot. It means a lot. It was nice to see things work out for everybody. It's happy, as opposed to if it was done by somebody that I didn't like or didn't think as highly of. I would have felt bad about the situation.
He's my hero. All of his movies, even before "The Ice Storm" -- which I think is a masterpiece -- just to have someone that I think is a master-level storyteller to take that story, which is a boy from Pondicherry [in India], where I was born ... You know, I love that movie a lot and I love that book a lot. It means a lot. It was nice to see things work out for everybody. It's happy, as opposed to if it was done by somebody that I didn't like or didn't think as highly of. I would have felt bad about the situation.
Is there a movie that you wish you could have another shot at or film a different way? A movie that audience didn't respond to as well as you had hoped.
Well, you always have a way of making it more accessible. Always. The decision is always between "accessible" and "authentic."
Well, you always have a way of making it more accessible. Always. The decision is always between "accessible" and "authentic."
What's an example?
Well, let's say, for example, like a difficult decision for the main characters -- let's say at the end of "The Village" -- a difficult decision to continue the lie versus the youth becoming free. And winning the day. And realizing their opportunities of being able to come into the light of the real world and to a Times Square kind of vibe. So, that would be provocative and empowering, but I chose to make it morally ambiguous. But it was more authentic to me. My whole conversation with that movie was I'm nervous about the world.
Well, let's say, for example, like a difficult decision for the main characters -- let's say at the end of "The Village" -- a difficult decision to continue the lie versus the youth becoming free. And winning the day. And realizing their opportunities of being able to come into the light of the real world and to a Times Square kind of vibe. So, that would be provocative and empowering, but I chose to make it morally ambiguous. But it was more authentic to me. My whole conversation with that movie was I'm nervous about the world.
What specifically?
Living out the fantasy of protecting your children and how far would you go to protect your children from everything. "Would you lie to them about everything?" kind of thing. So, that was the premise of this story. So, you know what's an authentic decision for the artist versus what's the more accessible decision. That's the struggle you make all of the time in your commerce versus art conversation.
Living out the fantasy of protecting your children and how far would you go to protect your children from everything. "Would you lie to them about everything?" kind of thing. So, that was the premise of this story. So, you know what's an authentic decision for the artist versus what's the more accessible decision. That's the struggle you make all of the time in your commerce versus art conversation.
There's been talk of an "Unbreakable" sequel for a long time.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Samuel L. Jackson seems to want to do it. I saw you two talking on Twitter.
It's a harder one for me because -- it's getting closer, by the way.
It's a harder one for me because -- it's getting closer, by the way.
I feel like I've heard that for the past 10 years. I want that to be true.
I want it to happen, too. We've been talking about almost the same subject in every one of your questions, which is artistic integrity -- something versus an agenda. Right? And almost every single one of your questions was agenda versus intention, even though you didn't realize it, but it kind of fell into that theme as we were talking.
I want it to happen, too. We've been talking about almost the same subject in every one of your questions, which is artistic integrity -- something versus an agenda. Right? And almost every single one of your questions was agenda versus intention, even though you didn't realize it, but it kind of fell into that theme as we were talking.
Agenda how?
So, like you think I go and I write, "Oh, I'm going to write a twist ending."
So, like you think I go and I write, "Oh, I'm going to write a twist ending."
I didn't know. That's why I asked.
That's an agenda versus "I want to talk about loneliness." And then it comes out, "How is the best way to talk about loneliness?" Intention versus agenda. And then I go, "Oh my God, if I make a movie about loneliness and everybody hated it, will it be able to come out and people will get it?" That's when you start going, "Oh my God," and you try to push that away. The same thing with "Unbreakable," to some extent, it's excitement to be made. "It's such a fun thing" is squashing my ability to find the thing that's connecting me with it. Does that make sense? So, I don't feel like I did it for agenda reasons. So, slowly I'm getting a story in my head that I feel like is able to tell what I'm feeling right now.
That's an agenda versus "I want to talk about loneliness." And then it comes out, "How is the best way to talk about loneliness?" Intention versus agenda. And then I go, "Oh my God, if I make a movie about loneliness and everybody hated it, will it be able to come out and people will get it?" That's when you start going, "Oh my God," and you try to push that away. The same thing with "Unbreakable," to some extent, it's excitement to be made. "It's such a fun thing" is squashing my ability to find the thing that's connecting me with it. Does that make sense? So, I don't feel like I did it for agenda reasons. So, slowly I'm getting a story in my head that I feel like is able to tell what I'm feeling right now.
For people who like that movie, it sounds encouraging.
Yeah, it is! The story of a guy who kind of wakes up with a little gray feeling in the morning, I love that character. It's something that I feel and I want to talk more about that character.
Yeah, it is! The story of a guy who kind of wakes up with a little gray feeling in the morning, I love that character. It's something that I feel and I want to talk more about that character.
Another is a possible sequel to "The Last Airbender." A movie that critics didn't like, but it did make a lot of money.
Yeah, I love the kind of Eastern philosophies of that. Those are costly movies to make and they take a lot of time. So, what happens is, there's a thriller I can do pretty fast, they go quickly. And I didn't expect to make another big movie -- I was going to make a thriller and then go make the sequel to "Airbender." Then I made "After Earth," which took a long time, so it kind of took that two-and-a-half to three-year period. So, I'm trying to sit down and see if I want to do a really small movie next.
Yeah, I love the kind of Eastern philosophies of that. Those are costly movies to make and they take a lot of time. So, what happens is, there's a thriller I can do pretty fast, they go quickly. And I didn't expect to make another big movie -- I was going to make a thriller and then go make the sequel to "Airbender." Then I made "After Earth," which took a long time, so it kind of took that two-and-a-half to three-year period. So, I'm trying to sit down and see if I want to do a really small movie next.
Honestly, I'd love to see you do a really small movie.
I am really leaning towards doing a hyper-small movie.
I am really leaning towards doing a hyper-small movie.
Like something on the festival circuit.
Yep. And that's where my head is right now, by the way. I'm leaning towards that.
Yep. And that's where my head is right now, by the way. I'm leaning towards that.
Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.
Muddle-'Earth'
Is 'After Earth' the worst movie ever made?
Columbia PicturesWill Smith, left, and Jaden Smith in 'After Earth.'
Is "After Earth" the worst movie ever made? Maybe not; there's always "Battlefield Earth" to remind us how low the bar can go. But that's the wrong question, since it implies that this bizarre enterprise is a movie in the conventional sense.
At first the production exhibits movielike characteristics, a sort of "Star Trudge" crossed with a hero's journey by way of Joseph Campbell. The story begins on a planet that has served as humanity's refuge since Earth became uninhabitable. Will Smith is Cypher Raige, the commanding general of a U.N.-sanctioned peacekeeping group—I'm only reporting what's on the screen—called the United Ranger Corps. Mr. Smith's son, Jaden Smith, is the general's son, Kitai, a painfully earnest 13-year-old who's desperately seeking approval from his authoritarian father, even though the old man seems to have no approval to give. Despite the sci-fi trappings, and dollops of almost literally unspeakable dialogue—"Graviton buildup could be a precursor to mass expansion," someone warns someone else—"After Earth" is basically a two-character study of what happens to father and son after their spaceship crashes on a quarantined planet that is, in fact, Earth, but Earth infested with exceedingly cheesy digital monsters.
Watch a clip from the film "After Earth." A crash landing leaves Kitai Raige (Jaden Smith) and his father Cypher (Will Smith) stranded on Earth, 1,000 years after events forced humanity's escape. (Photo/Video: Sony)
Here again, the action conforms to a recognizable movie template. With his father gravely injured and unable to extricate himself from the ship's wreckage, Kitai must summon the courage to go forth on his own and fight whatever demons come his way in order to find the electronic beacon that will bring lifesaving help. In other words, a familiar tale of a boy surviving vicissitudes to become a man. Yet this variant of the template, as directed by M. Night Shyamalan from a script he wrote with Gary Whitta—and based on a story by Mr. Smith—soon takes the form of turgid pontifications that Cypher lays on Kitai at every step of the poor kid's way. (They're connected by a fancy communication system that only emphasizes the disconnections of the quasidramatic structure.) "Every single decision you make will be life or death," the general intones. Or, rather, "Every...single…decision…you…make…will…be…life...or...death," because every…single…word…the…general…speaks…is…spoken…slowly…for…emphasis. It's gravity without gravitas.
I've never seen a movie that moves so slowly, or takes itself so seriously, which is why it doesn't seem like a movie at all, but a sermon whose central subject is fear: "Danger is real," the father tells the son, "but fear is a choice." So a right question might be why "After Earth" was made. The sermon echoes a central theme of Scientology. Is that the production's subtext, or are there reasons yet to be uncovered why humor and humanity have been essentially banished; why everyone looks pained; why the very notion of entertainment has been banished in favor of grinding didacticism, and why Mr. Smith, who has been such a brilliant entertainer over the years and decades, looks as if he has undergone a radical charismaectomy? It…is…all…very…mysterious…and…deeply…dreary.
Watch a clip from the film "The East." An operative finds her priorities changing after she is tasked with infiltrating an anarchist group known for executing covert attacks upon major corporations. (Photo/Video: Fox Searchlight)
Will Smith's new film After Earth accused of being propaganda for Scientology as it tanks at box office
- Critics are calling Will Smith's new action film propaganda for The Church of Scientology's teachings
- Smith has been tied to the church in the past, donating several large amounts to its charities over the years
- Smith denies any formal affiliation with the church, referring to himself as a 'student of world religion'
|
Critics are claiming that After Earth, the new action film starring father and son team Will and Jayden Smith, which had meager earnings at the box office, is a parable for Scientology.
Though he denies being a member of the Church of Scientology, Smith has made several large monetary donations to the church's charities over the past few years.
Film critics have pointed out several similarities between the film's themes and L. Ron Hubbard's religious teachings.
Critics have compared After Earth, starring Will Smith, to teachings of the Church of Scientology. The film's final scene (pictured here) features a volcano erupting, an iconic image from the religion founder, L. Ron Hubbard's book, Dianetics
This is not the first time Will Smith has been closely associated with the Church of Scientology.
Tough he has denied to classify himself as a Scientologist, Smith has openly spoken about his curiosity in the church's teachings, labeling himself a 'student of world religion' in several interviews.
Smith said that celebrity friend, Tom Cruise introduced him to the religious teachings.
Defending Cruise, Smith asked an Access Hollywood reporter, 'How can I condemn someone for what they believe, and I believe that God was born from a pregnant virgin?'
Will Smith and son Jayden pose together at the premiere of their new summer action flick, After Earth. The film has been called a parable for Scientology by critics. Smith has donated money to the church in the past, though he denies being a Scientologist
The film star has also made several sizable donations to the church.
In 2007 Smith donated $122,500 to several Scientology rehabilitation organizations, Fox News reported.
Then two years later the movie star and his wife, Jada Pinkett Smith opened the New ViIllage Leadership Academy in California, a private school founded upon the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard.
After Earth, directed by M. Night Shyamalan, tells the story of General Cypher Raige (played by Will Smith) and his 13-year-old son Kitai (Jayden), who crash land on a Earth 1,000 years after it has been abandoned by the human race.
Now overrun by aliens who feed on fear, Kitai must fight through the planet's dangerous terrain to find the wrecked ship's rescue beacon and save his father who was wounded in the crash.
The iconic image of a volcano erupting from the cover of L. Ron Hubbard Dianetics, which expounds the teachings of Scientology, is the final image in Will Smith's new film After Earth, inviting comparisons between the film and Hubbard's religion
Several film critics have dissected its plot and found numerous similarities to main principals of Scientology.
The most glaring similarity is the film's assertion that man must assume control over his emotions, Vulture noted. One of The Church of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard's teachings was that people must set aside their doubts and place unquestioned value in the self.
In the film Kitai is plagued by fear and self doubt which he struggles to overcome to evade the evil aliens. Conversely Cypher, the superior solider, is able to 'ghost' or suppress his emotions.
Cypher classically embodies Hubbard's theory of 'thetan,' or the pure human soul unburdened by emotion, whereas Kitai is a 'misguided theatan,' struggling to escape his fear.
Critics claim that After Earth, starring Jayden Smith (pictured here) and father Will Smith, is based on principles of Scientology including a focus on the individual overcoming emotions and themes of man-versus-nature
Other comparisons include predominant themes of man-versus-nature, the anti-emotion alien's symbolism for Hubbard's condemnation of psychiatry, and Scientology's iconic image of an erupting volcano prominently featured at the film's climax.
Critics also point out that throughout the film Cypher 'audits' his son, which is the Church's practice of ridding its members of painful emotional memories.
Religious overtones aside, After Earth failed to debut well at the box office.
The Hollywood Reporter reported that on its opening night the film only grossed $1M, and may only debut at $35M, the lowest opening for Smith in his recent film history.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334240/Will-Smiths-new-film-After-Earth-accused-propaganda-Scientology-tanks-box-office.html#ixzz2Uvca3Vze
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
After Earth Film: Scientology overkill?
May 31, 2013
By Beaver State Believer,Oregon writer,
One of the most talked about movie of the summer may turn out to be the most unexpected. I am talking about Will Smith’s After Earth. The first news to come out of this film was the early prediction that this movie will the first box office causality of summer as the weak $1 Million Thursday opening was a scare to “After Earth” promoters. Second, was the unusually harsh criticism of the movie and Will Smith’s son Jaden Smith with theWall Street Journal saying it is among the world movies ever made (ouch?!?). Even astronaught Buzz Aldrin jumped in by faulting the movie for not being realistic. I haven’t seen so much overkill criticism in a movie and yet this article is being written on the first full day of release.
Most surprisingly is the film’s tie to Scientology principles being talked about among critics. Some call it propaganda because it highlights religious themes held by Scientology. Would that then make “Life of Pi” propaganda for Hinduism or “For Greater Glory” propaganda for Evangelicals? Others claimed that Twilight contained quiet references to Mormon themes. Will Smith has been a financial supporter of Scientology and it is no surprise if he would create a film that shares his own values. The Christian movie review site,Plugged In online does not fault the film for any negative spiritual references.
One reviewer wrote about After Earth and its connection to Scientology. You can judge for yourself — Scientology overreach of critics overkill of Scientology?
This struck me as Scientology 101. Cypher spends most of the movie guiding his son through the dangerous environments of evolved Earth, coaching him to drop his emotions and believe in his self. Fear is imaginary, a construct of the mind that can be abolished if you believe in your own abilities. To me, After Earth is all about cleansing the body’s “thetan,” or soul. If Kitai can leave behind the physical dangers of the world and invest in self-determinism, he’ll be triumphant. He’ll be a hero because he’s entitled to be one.
Scientology is all about personal survival — the the “first dynamic”— and that’s the key to Katai’s mission. Washing away the past, any bad decision he’s made, in order to come out on top. It’s the way his father has lived and it’s basically gone unpunished, even when he has massive mistakes on his record to show for it. Unlike many Hollywood science fiction movie’s, After Earth has an emphasis on self that I don’t believe is coincidence.
The auditing process also comes up. Kitai is stricken with memories of an ill-fated day back home, where he witnessed a love one perish at the hands of an alien invader. He was only a kid, but it kills him inside. This works like Scientology’s engrams, albeit a bit more overt. Through flashbacks, M. Night Shyamalan tortures his lead character with memories. The only way to make it to the end of his mission is to wash them away. So Cypher is giving Kitai his free stress test, one-on-one sessions between father and son that teach the emotionally involved child to put aside his feelings in favor of making the world a better place. The only thing missing is a 31st century E-meter.
Will Smith Using His “After Earth” Movie to Promote Scientology?
3 8
Will Smith considers himself to be a “student of world religion,” which is a pretentious way of saying you don’t have a declared dogma that you cling to. Or perhaps, as some have speculated, it’s his way of covering the fact that he is involved with the Church of Scientology.
Though Smith has long denied this, he and his wife Jada do have ties to the faith — including using his old home to help fund a private school that uses teaching methods developed by Scientologists.
Now, there’s a new blog post that notices that many of the themes found in his new film,After Earth, incorporates much of the beliefs of L. Ron Hubbard, the sci-fi writer who founded the Church of Scientology.
Blogger Matt Patches writes:
In the end, it doesn’t really matter — but it’s hard to dismiss Smith’s ties to L Ron Hubbard’s sci-fi-inspired belief system when its ideas are all over his new film, After Earth.You can read the rest of the post here.
I won’t get too spoilery here, but consider this:
In After Earth, Smith’s character Cypher Raige (ha!) is a commander in a human society that fled Earth 1,000 years ago. They escaped their ecologically-ravaged homeworld to a new planet that was picture perfect… minus a race of blind aliens with a thirst for the pheromones produced by fear. Convenient! What makes Cypher special is that he’s capable of “ghosting,” the ability to abandon fear and become invisible to the aliens. As we’ve seen in the trailers, circumstances eventually take Cypher and his son Kitai (Jaden Smith) back to Earth with company — a fear-hungry alien. Kitai ends up having to cross the terrifying forest land of Earth and his biggest problem is that he’s a total pussy. He is bubbling over with fear. He’s too fucking emotional and that makes him a huge target for the alien.
This struck me as Scientology 101. Cypher spends most of the movie guiding his son through the dangerous environments of evolved Earth, coaching him to drop his emotions and believe in his self. Fear is imaginary, a construct of the mind that can be abolished if you believe in your own abilities. To me, After Earth is all about cleansing the body’s “thetan,” or soul. If Kitai can leave behind the physical dangers of the world and invest in self-determinism, he’ll be triumphant. He’ll be a hero because he’s entitled to be one.
Scientology is all about personal survival — the “first dynamic”— and that’s the key to Katai’s mission. Washing away the past, any bad decision he’s made, in order to come out on top. It’s the way his father has lived and it’s basically gone unpunished, even when he has massive mistakes on his record to show for it. Unlike many Hollywood science fiction movie’s, After Earth has an emphasis on self that I don’t believe is coincidence.
Read more: Is Will Smith's New "After Earth" Movie Scientology Propaganda?
