Amenabar's Epic AGORA In Trailer Form!

Founder and Editor; Toronto, Canada (@AnarchistTodd)
Sign-In to Vote
Amenabar's Epic AGORA In Trailer Form!

[Updated with higher quality version of the trailer]

The lid is now off of the most tightly controlled film set in recent memory with the release of the first teaser for Alejandro Amenabar's massive historical epic Agora, which stars Rachel Weisz as famously atheistic Egyptian philosopher Hypatia back in the days when atheism could - and almost certainly would - get you killed. The flow of information from this one has been incredibly well stifled, given the scale of things, with only a few lonely images managing to get out but now, with the first teaser in hand, we can see this stuff in motion. The quality of the video file is, sadly, not nearly as epic as the film itself, but it still gives more than enough to prove that this thing will be jaw droppingly gorgeous. Check it below the break!

Sign-In to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.

More from Around the Web

via Slashfilm

CaterpillarFebruary 23, 2009 2:30 AM

Just the other day I was wondering where Amenebar had disappeared to. This is most interesting.

AirchinapilotFebruary 23, 2009 4:46 AM

It will be interesting to see how this is treated in the media.. an atheist ... As a hero? *shock*

I read about hypatia a couple years ago and it's funny how the moment you are reading about something -- suddenly it's a bajillion dollar movie. You go girl!

ChevalierAguilaFebruary 23, 2009 5:44 AM

The trailer is a bit generic, but looks interesting. The world needs more movies about atheists.

nikthewerelionFebruary 23, 2009 5:44 AM

looks really cool

woundmanFebruary 23, 2009 9:15 AM

Nice trailer, but I don't think the historical Hypatia was an atheist. My books of histories of philosophy (none of which are all that old) simply mention her as a neo-Platonist, and they definitely weren't atheists. Pagans, yes (well, some were Christians); atheists, no. The only places I've found calling her an atheist are places describing this film.

The VisitorFebruary 23, 2009 9:40 AM

another movie about "those evil Christians". HO-HUM.

Chevalier Aguila, there are LOTS of movies about atheists. Amenabar's The Others basically tells you that there is no heaven or hell, therefore no God.

ChevalierAguilaFebruary 23, 2009 11:37 AM

Other examples besides "The Others"? I really can't think of any right now.

ben.adamFebruary 23, 2009 5:56 PM

By the way, Rachel Weisz seems to evolve from playing just underpart in trashy egyptian horror flicks. And ever since "the fountain" there is all reason to be excited about another movie with her.

Ard VijnFebruary 24, 2009 12:05 AM

Contact doesn't count as an atheist movie because the Jodie Foster character isn't proven to be right.
In fact, the whole movie takes care to make you doubt her on that topic.

Todd BrownFebruary 24, 2009 12:33 AM

Man, I had it spelled that way and second guessed myself when I started seeing it speeled with an 'e' in a bunch of other places ... grr.

And I'm with Ard on the Contact thing. I've seen tons of people class Sagan as an atheist but I've never bought it. He comes across much more as an agnostic to me. There are actually very few true atheists in high end physics circles ... atheism raises a lot of awkward questions about predictability and order in those circles.

IzikavazoFebruary 24, 2009 4:54 AM

Twitch will post the trailer again if it comes in a better quality.. right? Hopefully.
- izi

The VisitorFebruary 24, 2009 9:05 AM

so, SonaBoy,

it's because of the evil "Xtians" that you lack knowledge today, because they burned down one of the great storehouses of knowledge? does that mean you're stupid now because of an incident that happened in ancient times hat prevents you from gaining knowledge? is that also why you can't seem to be able to spell "Christians"?

oh, hey, do you see any "Xtians" burning down buildings and stuff today? or killing people? or maybe we should hate all Germans today because, you know, Hitler killed so many people?

ChevalierAguilaFebruary 24, 2009 9:59 AM

"oh, hey, do you see any “Xtians” burning down buildings and stuff today? or killing people?"

Ask some abortion doctors about that one.

The VisitorFebruary 24, 2009 11:26 PM

"I just don’t refer to those half-breeds that twist the teachings of a philosopher named Jesus into excuses for imperialism, dirty politics, slavery, war or exclusion."

i'm sorry, i'm a little lost there. "half-breed"?

the problem with what you wrote is that you lump all Christians, be they fundamentalist, moderate or etc, together, and blame the loss of knowledge, the regression of civilisation, burning of buildings, bannings, etc, on all Christians and their faith. like how not all Muslims are terrorists, so not all Christians are crazy fundamentalists.

that was the part of your rant that i took offense with. hence, my question: "or maybe we should hate all Germans today because, you know, Hitler killed so many people?"

Todd BrownFebruary 25, 2009 2:19 AM

See, attacking the leaders I've got no issue with. I just don't think the leadership of the church had anything to do with actual Christianity from basically the rise of Constantine until roughly the Protestant reformation. Throughout that period - and in varying degrees still - Christianity was completely and thoroughly co-opted by political forces. When bishops became massive landowners and major political forces 'church' decisions stopped being about faith of any sort. Considering these people normative, regardless of their official position, is the same as saying George Bush or Pat Robertson - or, for that matter, the leaders of the Ku Klux Klan, who are a legally recognized Christian sect - represent all of Christianity. This stuff had no more to do with faith than the troubles in Ireland have to do with differences between protestant and catholic belief or the politics of Israel have to do with the actual faith of Judaism. That last one's probably the best analog to the situation in the film, actually ... things get messy when faith and politics merge and politics almost always win.

Conbarba: that's a dramatic reduction of what I was saying - the standard argument is that faith is meant to address the failings of human nature that lead to this sort of behavior in the first place - but, in many cases, yes, I'd be okay with that. Though people are far less prone to credit their good behavior on some outside force than they are to blame their bad behavior on one so it's not like it's an issue that comes up a lot.

conbarbaFebruary 25, 2009 2:32 AM

I´d like to say that even though I agree more or less with your point of view, I also think that some religions, sepcially monotheistic as christian and islamic religions, have a long history of causing trouble because one of their points is to extend their faith and abolish the other false ones. Other religions have no problem co-existing with others (just like it happened in Alexandria before Hypatia´s death) but some religions demand destruction of the enemy in any way, one of them being Saint War (though it is true this can be considered more politics than religion anyway)

So it is kind of impossible to separate religion with some of the problems that humankind has suffered since the early ages, because it was caused by religious matters.

I don´t really care much about what other people believe or think. And that is the attitude I would like to receive from the rest of people. And living in a country like Spain where we had 40 years of ultra-catholic dictatorship makes you see things about religion in a very particular way.

Anyway, Agora is cool, and it will raise lots of discussions like this one, which is fine.

SonaBoyFebruary 25, 2009 2:48 AM

@ Todd
See, attacking the leaders I’ve got no issue with. I just don’t think the leadership of the church had anything to do with actual Christianity from basically the rise of Constantine until roughly the Protestant reformation.

That's fine and all, but try convincing historically-challenged Xtians about finer focus on incidents like this, and soon you have a whole legion of howling followers screaming "Attack on Xtianity!"

yet, when you press them on it - what happens? "Hey, you can't lump all of us together!"

ad infinitum...

Ard VijnFebruary 25, 2009 7:33 AM

I am trying to imagine this thread as being on "Ain't It Cool News", and I just can't!

Amazing how heated this discussion got without people truly insulting each other. I love our readership.

Fanning the flames:

@Visitor:
Don't mess with the Potter. Millions of children (and some adults too I guess) are learning some very basic values from Harry about duty and self-sacrifice, dealing with (in)popularity, and responsibility.
As for Christians killing people these days, I think the militias in South Lebanon did some really atrocious things in the eighties in the name of their belief.

@Todd:
I agree with all your points except the one about education. Yes, "the evil that men do" will still exist even in an educated society, but education definitely changes the rules, and not to evil's advantage.

@Conbarba:
Yes, you don't need religion to have "good" in people. Even most "bad" people often act out of what they belief is good (and if that accidentally is to their advantage, heck why not?).
My first split with my (Catholic) church actually happened when I was five or six, and some idiot missionary told our class that you couldn't go to Heaven unless you were baptized. So even if you were a good person, the best even, you couldn't get in unless you had had the right enlistment procedure? It took me about one second to figure out that if there indeed was a loving GOD, then That Could Not Be Right (I know baptism isn't the same as "enlisting into Christianity" but give me a break, I was five...).

@Sonaboy:
Knowing Visitor somewhat, my guess is his problem with what you wrote borders more on the semantic side than on the historical facts you quote. He thought you were a dead-set churchbasher and he is right in thinking those people are just as annoying as Xtians.

@All:
I have never been able to seriously discuss religion with anyone without it turning into a fight.
And oh, man, even though I'm Catholic myself I do get annoyed when people on "my side" start claiming they know everything just because they feel backed up by their faith. One guy claimed that he was at inner peace because he could explain everything and knew where he came from, as the bible clearly explained all of that. He was our designated driver at the time so when we started targeting him with "Then why did God...?" questions he got so livid he almost crashed the car and killed us all.
Truth is you never KNOW.
Religion wouldn't be based on faith if you KNEW.

conbarbaFebruary 25, 2009 9:04 AM

Visitor, why don´t you just wait to see the movie to find out who the bad guys are?

That is, if there is any, good or bad.

The VisitorFebruary 25, 2009 9:11 AM

OK.

RedfezwriterFebruary 26, 2009 8:04 AM

The reasoning for Hypatia's death was a complex mix of religion, politics and resistance to change.

I did an in depth piece on the history of Roman Alexandria, Hypatia's inquisitive/brilliant nature, Constantine's 'formalizing' Christianity within the evolving empire and the methodical split between Constantine's church and that of the Coptic (Egyptian) Church.

http://redfezwriter.blogspot.com/2009/02/hypatia-hollywood-shot-agora.html