Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
In terms of accuracy and authenticity, what is the general consensus on the film A Dark Song?
Personally, I very much enjoyed the film and I've watched it twice now. I've never seen a film that really tries to get it right like this and I very much appreciated the writer-director making a film on ritualistic magic that, at least to me, feels authentic. But as someone who is not as well versed on the subject matter, I cannot attest to its accuracy (ie. the various ritual elements). In the film they mention the ritual as being from Abramelin the mage (Qabalah) and Gnosticism, although the male character claims it is more Gnosticism than Qabalah.
What do others think about the film? Did the writer-director get it right? Where do you feel it took creative liberty too far?
I liked the film's approach to ritual magic, even if it strayed from the Abremelin (Chinese characters!?). You don't really see a lot of movies really committing to ritual as a story telling device, and that was enough for me to appreciate it. Although, it did have that thing a lot of explicitly occult movies have, in that it loves preening itself for the accuracy of its ritual. Which is a thing I enjoy, granted! But looking at the film as a narrative for a general audience, I feel like I gotta admit: anyone who's really enjoying all the ritual scenes are probably people who already understands its references.
I'd love a film to use their realistic, grounded approach to ritual (i.e., no special effects till spoiler) but play around with the editing more. Like, quick rapid shots between ritual objects to represent wrestling the distractable consciousness towards the intent. More musical stings. Something.
The film certainly captured what it looks like to be an occultist--but did it capture how it feels?[/spoiler]
"anyone who's really enjoying all the ritual scenes are probably people who already understands its references."
Exactly. I understood enough to know they were really going for authenticity, and in my book that was a real plus for me. I believe the chap you wrote it was also the director, so it was definitely a very personal project and I very much admire that passion. It's likely he knows a lot more on the topic but had to make difficult choices so as not to completely lose a wider audience (or more likely studio funding).
I have been involved in discussions about this recently (elsewhere ) - I have not seen the whole film but curiously there are a few people that affirm they have done the ritual and achieved similar results .
The thing is , there does not seem much communication between the 'angel' * and the person .
* and they describe the angels like in the film, although not like a common angel , but having breastplates , swords and a type of military look about them .
which is nothing like my expereince at all .... but I never did the ritual like they did or how the ritual is written ;
that ritual is very strange and needs its own threads to explore it , outside of this film .
The flawed qualities of the characters captured the inherent desperation and motivation of those that seek occult solutions to mundane personal problems.
The mother's love leading to perseverance and success after ordeals that shed impure desires leading to a higher calling.
Strange and frightening potential omens that could be or may not be connected rationally as the ceremony began added to authenticity.
I mean, the very premise is not particularly accurate (you wouldn't do the ritual with anyone else, ever, that's not the point, the point is a line of communication opened between you and your Angel). And the sections dealing with the leadup to the demon-summoning are not particularly tense or "testlike" in the text. You aren't being beset by demons, you're being an ascetic--the demons only come after your relationship with the HGA is secured and you are safe (provided you adhere to the HGA's instructions).
So not accurate, but a good movie, and it gets some of the spirit of the ritual right.
The story in the film made it sound impossible to complete the ritual without a second person, but I don't know much about the mechanics of it in all honesty. What is the ritual called and what magic system were they working from? The male character mentioned Abramelin?
The story in the film made it sound impossible to complete the ritual without a second person, but I don't know much about the mechanics of it in all honesty. What is the ritual called and what magic system were they working from? The male character mentioned Abramelin?
The point of the ritual is isolation, which fosters the connection/communication between you and the Holy Guardian Angel. I get why they added the second individual to the movie (it makes for a much better script) but it's very contrary to the point. You are supposed to isolate as much as possible, and specific instructions are given for how you can and should interact with other people when necessary, among many other things. There aren't the horror movie elements of temptation, etc., in the book, just boring prayers and repetition and purifications and cleansings.
The Angel in the movie also maybe doesn't match what the HGA is supposed to be in the Abramelin. There, it's a personal guide of sorts, and it's there to guide you to become a magician and commander of demons. It knows your thoughts and can help you directly. It doesn't fulfill a single wish. (This is no shade. The scene where the Angel appears is an excellent one. It's a good movie.)
The ritual is just called the Abramelin Ritual, and the magic system is just modified Key of Solomon-style demon-summoning alongside some folk magic and magic square techniques. The Angel rite is much more strenuous than the Key's protocol, and gives a lot more assurances of safety from the demons. Overall the mentality of the Abramelin is much more about piety than those texts. I have a lot more to say about it, but those are the basics.
It does bear mentioning, also, that the Abramelin doesn't have a monopoly on how to interact with your HGA. I've had conversation with my Good Daemon (functionally analogous to the HGA) through other means, and there are rituals described in texts like The Discovery of Witchcraft and The Book of Oberon to attain conversation that involve much, much less work. What I will say, and this is UPG, is that the repose element of the ritual is needed. My daemon has described it as needing a "calm heart" to properly begin communication, and I think there is reason to believe a lot of self-reflection helps the ritual's chance of success. But you definitely don't need the ultra-monotheistic framework of the Abramelin to do it.
why do they come after? if you're already safe why would they want to? Either way, must be fairly terrifying.
The short answer is that the Abramelin promises a much safer method of getting demons to do what you want than the Keys, and the safety is assured by the HGA, who acts as an enforcer of your will and teaches you how to handle them carefully. In the Keys, managing the demons takes a great deal of effort, whereas the Abramelin just promises you that if you successfully reach your HGA, you will be fine.
Post automatically merged:
Oh! And I forgot--having a companion actually is extensively covered in the Key of Solomon, so it's not like that's a bad idea, in general! It's just not the point of the Abramelin as written.
Come to think of it, Dark Song actually kind of just mashes the Keys and the Abramelin together. In most respects the demons and angels act more like they're out of the Keys, but the ritual structure borrows a lot form the Abramelin.
