End of The Spear, homoexual activist stars.

That link has NOTHING to do with the movie--it has EVERYTHING to do with the TRUE story of what happened on January 8, 1956. Five missionaries were martyred in the jungle of Equador.

You are the silly one to think otherwise. </font>[/QUOTE]The story in the link is the same one told in the Movie, exactly. I saw the movie and I read your link. It is the same. Have you seent the movie?

 

I don't know about the rejected script, standing-firm, but the movie is the true story of what happened between the missionaries and the Indians. If this is how the dialogue went, than I think it should be portrayed that way. The purpose of the movie is not to proselytise, it is to tell the story of what happened in Ecuador. It really shows how the Indians were thinking through the things that were happening and how they were reasoning it out.

If they thougt to get into heaven one had to perform a work, Like jump the Great Boa, than it seems reasonable to me for the missionaries to tell them Christ had jumped the great boa for them. It is just another way to say Christ has done the work of salvation for you. I am sure later as they became believers, they were given the details. But the missionries had to try and convey some understanding to them in terms they could understand. It worked, apparently.

 

I don't know about that. But unless a film is a dry documentary, creative license is always taken. But in this case, it appears to me that they did not take so much license as to make it inaccurate. If the missionries were of a sect that was against dancing, I am sure Steve Saint would have objected to the potrayal. But anyhow, it does not seem to be a major thing given that it is not a documentary but a ture "story" and has to deal with certain constrants on story telling and movie making.

 

Why would anyone object to the kind of dancing they were doing between husband and wife???? I really can't go there with you folks. If you are against all dancing, you are from a different world than I am. I don't know why Steve would object to the film his dad shot of the Natives, why would he? As far as using Chad, I did and do object to his playing the role.

In my experience, when the say "based on a true story" they take as much license as they want for any reason they want. This story is very close to the link you provided, Linda. I appears they took minimal license, and only for practical reasons. So I think it is a "True" story. You said yourself, the story in the link was the true story. The movie tells the same story.