The motion picture "Luther" has received a resounding no vote from the motion picture critics ( http://movies.go.com/reviews/). Yet this motion picture presents a 100% accurate portrayal of Martin Luther and the Protestant reformation that he set in motion. By translating the Septuagint into German, and with the aid of Gutenberg's press, every peasant in Germany was encouraged to learn to read and become literate. As a result Germany ascended into the greatest artistic, intellectual and academic nation of the world. Germany's ascendancy lasted until the Treaty of Versailles reduced Germany to economic rubble after World War I, allowing National Socialism to completely obliterate the achievements of the German people.
The movie besides being historically accurate renders an evocative and sensitive portrayal of Martin Luther as a freedom fighter for intellectual and spiritual freedom, and freedom from the commercialization of religion and the selling of indulgences. Luther set into motion the idea that each individual human being is their own sovereign and that reconciliation with the divine can only come through following one's own heart with the guidance of scripture. The reformation set into motion by Luther lead to the establishment of the United States republic based on individual sovereignty and individual responsibility.
Now why has such a historically accurate and sensitively rendered movie been given completely negative reviews in the press? Could the critics have been influenced by political powers? I think so!