Why are Christian Movies So Bad?
by Dallas JenkinsAs I mentioned in my last article, Hollywood is more interested in Christian, or “faith-based,” films than ever. The mind-blowing success of “The Passion” got it started, but then it waned as studios couldn’t quite figure out how to match that success. It heated up again recently with the success of the micro-budget, church-produced “Fireproof,” which was the highest grossing indie of 2008.
These trends beg a few questions. What took Hollywood so long to discover the Christian market? Why can’t they replicate even half the success of “The Passion?” And when Christians make up over half the population, why are faith-based films still relegated to the low-budget, straight to DVD world? The seemingly obvious answer would be that there are few Christians in Hollywood, both at the studio and creative level, but even that would raise the question of why.
I think I know the reason(s), although it’s a bit embarrassing because I happen to be a Christian evangelical. But we must face the truth, and as Dr. Phil so eloquently and charmingly puts it, “You can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.” The fact is, Christian movies have been pretty bad for a few decades. Yes, Hollywood had largely ignored the Christian market, but it’s not like there have been good examples for Hollywood to learn from. And now that Hollywood is actively seeking faith-based material, there’s still a lack of quality scripts and filmmakers available, with a few exceptions, and among the films that are being made in this genre, there are still more crappy ones than good ones.
There are plenty of reasons for this, but four stand out, in no particular order:
1. The Christian community abandoned Hollywood a few decades ago. Until 1968, the Catholic Church had a direct influence on what Hollywood produced with the “Production Code.” After the code was abandoned and movies became more risque, American Christians became disenfranchised with Hollywood. Over time, the distance between Hollywood and the church became greater, especially as many artists made movies that mocked or attacked the church or its traditions. Instead of trying to influence Hollywood by becoming a part of it, Christians avoided it and told their children to do the same. The only time that Hollywood heard from Christians was when boycotts occurred.
2. Even though Christians didn’t want to see evil Hollywood films or listen to evil secular music, they still wanted to see movies and listen to music like everyone else. So what were they to do if the acceptable choices from Hollywood were so few and far between? They created a Christian entertainment subculture, where Christian movies and music were made by Christians, for Christians. Christian bookstores exploded, as families could feel safe shopping in an environment where the only entertainment available was Christian-based. Now Christians had no need to communicate to Hollywood what they wanted because they could get it from Christian media providers, and the relationship between Hollywood and the Christian community became even more distant. Combine the cynicism of Christians towards Hollywood with the annoyance or ignorance of Hollywood towards Christians, and you’ve got the perfect divorce.
3. In “Christian film,” you’ve got a genre defined entirely by its message. There is nothing else like this in entertainment, other than perhaps “gay films,” but because there are so many more gay people in Hollywood than Christians, gay characters show up in mainstream films more than Christian characters do, thereby reducing the need or desire for films devoted exclusively to a gay theme. This has not happened with Christianity in film, so the “Christian film” sub-genre remains alive and growing.
The problem is that everyone knows good art should always put story and character above message. Message films are rarely exciting. So by their very nature, most Christian films aren’t going to be very good because they have to fall within certain message-based parameters. And because the Christian audience is so glad to get a “safe, redeeming, faith-based message,” even at the expense of great art, they don’t demand higher artistic standards. So aspiring filmmakers who are Christians have little need to perfect their craft, and Christian investors have little need to spend a lot of money because the message is going to be most important anyway. Add in the fact that the average heartland Christian couldn’t care less what a critic thinks–if anything, they assume they’ll feel the opposite of a movie critic–and you’ve got even less incentive for Christian filmmakers to be obsessed with quality.
To be fair, this trend isn’t exclusive to Christian entertainment. Horror films are similar in that they don’t need good reviews or higher budgets to deliver the goods to their core audience. And of course, in no genre is this more the case than porn. Even Christian movies are higher quality than porn films. Not that I would know.
4. The above points all lead to one predominant problem: young Christians aren’t encouraged or trained to become great artists. If a young Christian wants to become a filmmaker, they are often either discouraged to do so because Hollywood is so dangerous, or if they do find encouragement, they have a hard time getting proper training. There are two primary things that can foster someone becoming a better artist: one, seeing and being inspired by hundreds of great films, and two, getting a great artistic education. For better or worse, many parents won’t allow their kids to see some of the great films (because of questionable content), and many Christian kids are discouraged from attending the best film schools (also because of questionable content). This not only impacts potential filmmakers, but actors as well.
Therefore, when Hollywood starts to pursue more faith-based films and filmmakers (which they have), they find the cupboard bare. So even if and when they decide to make a faith-based film, they have a hard time finding great Christian filmmakers or actors, which affects both the film and the publicity. A name actor in an action or comic book film is willing to go to Comic-con to promote their film to film buffs and nerds; they know they need to go where the core fans are. This publicity is necessary of course. But if they starred in a faith-based or Biblical film, are they going to go to a church or a Christian convention to promote it to the core fans? Not likely.
Yes, it’s true that Hollywood should do a better job of understanding and relating to the heartland Christian audience. But at some point the Christian community needs to know its role in the problem. I’m talking to myself here, too. I’m a Christian, I’m a filmmaker. I’ve made a few films, and they were pretty good, but they weren’t good enough. I’ve got to get better. We can complain all we want about how Hollywood doesn’t reflect our values, but we lose that right if we’re not producing great projects and artists of our own.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
267 Comments
You make some good points.
I take issue with this statement: “The Christian community abandoned Hollywood a few decades ago.” Firstly, there are some closet Christians in Hollywood, although it is true there should be more. Secondly, some Christians didn’t abandon Hollywood, but were driven out. They were, in fact, targets of a blacklist as demonstrated by the atheist, Ayn Rand, and others. Thirdly, as Hollywood became increasingly immoral, some Christians were forced out of the social circuit. The drugs. The New Age cults. While Christians are called to reach out to all people, there are only so many risks one can take, especially if one has children. Fourthly, there are Christians who have given up artistic spoils, to literally serve the poor. Did they abandon Hollywood, or the Hollywood lifestyle?
American Idol currently has 3 Christian-raised (and two active worship leaders) in the top 5. Christian music in some cases is excellent (Jars of Clay, Six-pense None the Richer and some others), but in most cases not. Christian movies are crap and that is the reason I put off seeing Fireproof until we had to see it for a small group. It, unlike most Christian movies, had some compelling moments in it but didn't excede my low expectations. Unfortunately, for some, criticizing a Christian movie is almost heretical stifling the constructive criticism that might lead to some improvement.
I've gotten more of an education regarding great film by reading the posts here at BH than I have anywhere other than a great class I had in college with one of the best profs I've ever had. I haven't seen _Fireproof_ yet and will probably see it on DVD when it comes out (and probably by checking it out from the library, since we don't have "entertainment money" in the budget right now). I remember how much I used to love going to a theater to watch movies, but I haven't done that in years.
I'd like to see more quality Christian films, too. By the way, which films have you produced, and how might we get a chance to view them? You've got my attention.
I've gotten more of an education regarding great film by reading the posts here at BH than I have anywhere other than a great class I had in college with one of the best profs I've ever had. I haven't seen _Fireproof_ yet and will probably see it on DVD when it comes out (and probably by checking it out from the library, since we don't have "entertainment money" in the budget right now). I remember how much I used to love going to a theater to watch movies, but I haven't done that in years.
I'd like to see more quality Christian films, too. By the way, which films have you produced, and how might we get a chance to view them? You've got my attention.
Evangelicals are obsessed with hyphenating Christian onto everything, so you get Christian music and Christian restaurants, and Christian clothing, etc. It wasn't always that way, and it doesn't have to be. Michelangelo was Christian, but when we look at the David, we don't walk away with a message, do we? I propse that the hyphenating stuff be eliminated in favor of just plain quality. A movie that supports good values or that shows the folly of sin is every bit as "Christian" as one that has a conversion message at the finale.
Excellent observations, Dallas. There is very little to disagree with in your break-down.
As an evangelical Christian, I do suffer a bit of a split-personality on the topic. I have loved the "Facing the Giants" type of films, simply because it has been SO refreshing to see a film that doesn't make me cringe, or blush, or fight back some negative emotion… and a movie that I can wholeheartedly recommend to my parents AND the teenagers at church.
That being said, I can imagine the honeymoon wearing off sometime soon. I will eventually want something a little more substantial. But, for now… I can swallow another five years of the mediocre independent stuff. The more that's out there, the more I will be able to watch with my daughter as she is growing up.
Thank you for starting these discussions.
Eagerly awaiting the New Hollywood…
One of the biggest problems that I see is that potential Christian writers and actors are pushed away at a young age. Every night on network primetime TV, Christian teens and young adults are portrayed in one of four ways 1. A no-fun, pious kid who snubs everyone for leading a less moral life style; 2. A Christian gone bad who inevitably ends up in rehab or an abortion center; 3. A social outcast because of their virginity status; 4. Someone who just doesn’t get that cultural relativism is the only way to achieve social happiness,
One writer who always grabbed my attention as making (at least some) wholesome shows that had Christians and non-Christians co-existing together without too many stigmas attached to the religious lifestyle was Aaron Spelling. I always enjoyed that he had cool-kid characters that held religious beliefs/convictions.
With a few notable exceptions, Christian movies tend to be emasculated, Sunday School presentations of the sort your local mininster might run in the church assembly hall. In other words, inoffensive and shallow enough for Old Widow Jones to grasp without having to challenge her comfortable understanding of the shopworn Christian tropes. The typical Christian movie lacks passion, I guess because passion can be a dangerous thing, and this makes for a pretty dull show. A film with a G-rating has to work extra hard to involve viewers with a minimal of titilation.
[comment continues below].
Perhaps too many Christian filmmakers rely too much on the message to the neglect of high production values.
Were I making a Christian movie, I would take my cue from The Old and New Testaments and not hold back from showing sex and violence and all things carnal whenever the story called for it. You don't have to overdo it the way Mel did in his Jesus bloodbath film. I would want to portray the metaphysical mysteries of Christianity in such a way as to prompt the viewer to set off on his/her own spiritual quest (and you don't do that with hokey special effects or sub-par acting.
Christianity has great depth–so should Christian movies. Filled with mystery and miracles, it should not be boring.
{continues}
I've always believed that supernatural horror movies satisfy (to some extent) a spiritual hunger that otherwise goes unaddressed in our secular culture. The basis for horror is mayhem, putrefaction and death–the very things the Christian hopes to ultimately escape via Jesus' love and sacrifice. Christian movies should not be timid in dealing with disturbing themes or images.
A good film has to grab the audience before it can proceed to its revelations. Most Christian movies just don't know how to get the audience by the balls.
Christain filmmakers should not be afraid of getting down in the dust and dirt or of getting bloody while wrestling with angels or demons. Don't wear your Sunday best while making movies. If you do it right, it's going to get dirty and rough before you get it up there on the screen.
You're about eight years too late with your column. I said this when my parents wouldn't let me watch film. Then I moved from home. I've made some stupid decisions that are an impediment to me, but I'm getting closer to my goal of being an independent filmmaker.
Two points:
Fundamentalists have been boycotting Hollywood since Billy Sunday, so they NEVER had a say– though they would watch the same movies once they were old.
Christians tend to avoid movies that get into the muck and mire of real life, making their movies seem to exist in some Pleasantville altermative universe. There are a lot of evangelical leaders that would censor the Old Testament if they could.
Many good and great films use Christianity as it's spine and are deeply religious, "Cool Hand Luke", "The Natural", "Rainman", "Babette's Feast", and "Fargo". Yes "Fargo", believe it or not is loaded with spiritual meaning. Many Christians would dismiss mainstream films with a message, because of the violence, language and subject matter. Or because the films are spiritual and not necessarily hard core Christian. They bury their heads in the sand for lack of a better term. To embrace these films and have discussions about the symbolism would reinforce their Christain beliefs.
I'm a former lapsed Catholic who has been drawn back into the fold through the spiritual messages in some of these mainstream films. Every script I work on has some spiritual spine now. I can't get away from it. It's who I am.
I whole-heartedly agree with you. For years I've said that in order to have a super hero you must have a vile villian. This advice falls on deaf ears of so-called Christians.
Who want to go watch 2.5 hours of Mr. and Mrs. Nice live in Niceville where they have a nice house and two nice cars. Their 2.5 children are nice. The weather is nice. Everything about the Nices is nice.
Gag!
I remember being at a certain religous conference where they didn't believe in going to the theater. We had a speaker talking about writing. The point he was making was if you have witnessed something first hand, how can you report on it? He then told about how he took is son to go see Glaidator so he (the writer) could review the film for the local paper and his son could get exposure to what it would have been like to be alive in Roman Times.
The speaker was scheduled for another session the next day. He wasn't let back in.
It was at that point I said "to hell" with that cult.
Don't wear your Sunday best while making movies.
Amen! The only person who got away with this was Hitchcock, but the reason he got away with it was he knew what he was doing.
A challenge has been issued. GOD speed!
many good comments.
One problem with christan movies is that they are fluff. There is very little meat on the bones. But, if you are a good christian the second you get edgy, you are attacked by your own. No cussing, no blood (unless it is Jesus' and even then you can run into problems). movies don't have to be preachy. It just seems that we want the industry to do it rather than the individuals in to community.
As for me. If I want religion i go to church. If i want entertainment i don't need or want the message films. i just don't want to be assualted with vulgarities (usually). I tend to stick with pg-13 and find they are more in line with my sensabilities. I dont reject R movies outright, but tend to abstain.
All excellent points! I am a Christian and wish that there were more movies that were appropriate for Christians to see. Most "Christian movies" are *so* cheesy and it is embarrassing! Even Fireproof had many awkward moments because the acting and dialog was terrible!
I think what we need are not more Christian movies, but more movies made by Christians, if you know what I mean. Movies that aren't made to specifically to be a part of the "Christian Movie genre", but rather good stories without all of the garbage elements that currently come out of Hollywood. I'm thinking that either C.S. Lewis's "Until We Have Faces" or his space trilogy would make awesome movies. Or almost any classic novel has stories that would be popular with Christians — Jane Eyre, David Copperfield, or Brave New World, for example.
Budget, budget, and budget. It is all about the budget. Most films are a direct result of the money spent to produce them.
And who's going to pay big bucks for under par acting and production?
Were I making a Christian movie, I would take my cue from The Old and New Testaments and not hold back from showing sex and violence and all things carnal whenever the story called for it. You don't have to overdo it the way Mel did in his Jesus bloodbath film.
I would want to portray the metaphysical mysteries of Christianity in such a way as to prompt the viewer to set off on his/her own spiritual quest (and you don't do that with hokey special effects or sub-par acting.
{For the record, I am not the film director with the same name as mine.]
I agree with you. However, part of the reason "Christian" is always added is because the majority of what's out there is blatantly anti-Christian, making the stuff that shows off Christian values stick out.
I agree. Any sort of "preachiness" — even left-wing preachiness — saps all the wonder out of a movie.
If you're a storyteller, make me care.
I'm currently going to Cedarville University, and I can tell you that #4 does not apply at all here. Almost everyone in the electronic media program wants to be a filmmaker, and everyone in the faculty has been encouraging us toward that goal. We've even got a graduate who's tearing it up in USC's film school right now.
However, there's very little understanding of how we can improve our craft. I hear a lot of "We need to make films of better quality," as if that's a controversial statement that anyone would ever disagree with. For those students who don't get it but want to sound intelligent, they just replace "better quality" with "artistic value." The question remains, what makes a film good? What makes it an artistic achievement? And sadly, many of us have been raised in the Christian subculture ghetto and can't even begin to comprehend actual quality in films. Most people here are prone to read Ted Dekker or Frank Peretti rather than Flannery O'Connor, if you catch my drift. In terms of actual filmmaking, we're not looking to the pioneers of the craft who placed meaning in every single cut and camera movement; most students here rely on the ADD, MTV of shooting a bunch of "cool" shaky handheld shots without any plan of coverage and just trying to edit them into something coherent later.
So we're making progress in the area of intent, but unfortunately, these good intentions mean little when we've been raised as a generation of creatively illiterate Christians.
Yes, some of the best films out there are deeply religious. William Peter Blatty's "The Ninth Configuration" is an absolute wonder.
Heather, I think you have hit it saying we need more movies made by Christians as opposed to more Christian movies. I have to commend Dallas Jenkins for writing this article. I rarely if ever see this kind of discussion taking place anywhere.
When you say "Did they abandon Hollywood, or the Hollywood lifestyle?", I wonder if the conflict came more from the holier than thou attitude so prevalent in today's evangelical community as well as the in your face evangelism?
One "Little House on the Prairie" episode has more character, content and story than most "Christian" movies produced today. Sure, that fantastic show had some sort of a message in practically every episode, but rarely was it so over-the-top, smack-you-with-a-shovel heavy-handed that you felt you were watching C H R I S T I A N entertainment. The characters arrived at their decisions/actions "naturally," based on who they were developed to be. In other words, the characters weren't phoney or plastic or cardboard. For example, you knew Charles Ingalls was a godly man and would react in certain ways, which made his occasional falls from grace all the more poingiant. And Laura would fight with Nellie and get in trouble, disappoint her parents, learn her lesson–but then head off to do battle with Nellie another day. "Little House" wasn't self-consciously Christian because it didn't need to be. It was simply well-done overall (with
I take exception to the idea that a film has to be overtly religious to be a Christian film. As I wrote in another thread, what has been lost in modern film is the promotion and championing of virtue, which is what most older films managed without being overtly "Christian" or "Bible" films. Typically, stories were centered back then on the four cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, temperance (restraint), and courage (fortitude), although they often touched on the theological virtues as well: faith, hope, and charity. A film like It's a Wonderful Life managed to hit on all seven of them without having anything more overtly religious in it than a bumbling angel character and a Christmas tree–neither of which was essential to the story.
Most movies of that era were Christian films in this sense then. There was a good guy–maybe flawed, but by the end he was mended, or at least much better–and the good guy won. The Christian message was clear, whether it was a Western, a gangster movie, or even a light comedy…but Jesus and Mary personally were nowhere in sight.
THIS is what needs to be salvaged from the shipwreck of American moviemaking. Merely creating a ghetto where Bible movies can be found over in the corner of the video store is not the answer. The answer is to return to the optimistic, hopeful, good-will-overcome-evil worldview that used to inform all American movies. THAT will bring moviegoers back to the theaters in droves.
(oops: (with rare exceptons).
Peretti has written some great, ballsy, Christian material in his time. My favorite book is The Visitation which was bastardized by Namesake.
I would agree with you 100%. I enjoy and think pop songs that mention God,etc… are generally better and more effective. Songs like Heaven(Los Lonely Boys), Heaven(Live), River of Dreams (Billy Joel), Everything falls Apart (dog's Eye View), I think god can Explain (Splendor), Jamming (Bob Marley), and even Only God Knows Why (Kid Rock).
I think that music is the exception. "Praise and Worship" doesn't teach the fundamentals or do much for music education, not like learning to read music and sing harmony from a hymnbook (the old "daddy sang bass, momma sang tenor, …. ") but church is still one of the very few places where musicians can get regular experience playing in front of an audience and with other musicians.
I'd say not to get caught up in discussions of ratings when talking about authenticity. You don't have to have blood and guts and on-screen nudity to be offensive, controversial or challenging. Those things are just the tools we use to communicate ideas. An R-rated film can still be as vapid and shallow as a G-rated if there are no ideas behind the images on screen. I certainly don't believe that we should shy away from authentic depictions of sin, but making blanket statements about what we can and can't put on a screen isn't the place to start. Rather, this decision should grow out of individual stories and the ideological implications of those stories.
Dont forget The Matrix, KPAX and Omega Man/I Am Legend. Christian-themes and the redemption story itself are compelling topics and make for potentially good films.
This is a great topic for discussion.
Michael Landon was a great actor. Too bad the most that so-call "Christian" filmmakers can get is some burnt out D actor from yester-year, Kirk Cameron.
Money and script. It seems like there are alot of stories in the Bible that can be adapted to modern day or Science Fiction, maintaining the message and delivering a good story at the same time. Or, a story could be told straight out of the bible, Charlton Heston in the Ten Commandments is still an all time favorite of mine.
It's not all about budget, budget, budget. Look at Waterworld. It cost a boat load of money but sucked. On the other hand, look at the Evil Dead series, low budget but wonderful movies.
I think many are missing the point. Christian values and a reflection of living a Christian life have been scrubbed from most of the movies and TV. This is evident if you view movies made in the 1930's and 40's. One that comes to mind is Sergeant York with Gary Cooper. If memory serves me right it was either nominated or won an Academy Award.
The movie was about one man's struggle with his religious convictions about his interpretation of the Bible. It was an excellent film that featured a real-life situation without being preachy. The message was weaved into the plot.
The Human Comedy with Micky Rooney was another.
These films were not Christian films, but reflected the role that faith naturally played in the character's lives, especially during times of conflict and turmoil.
Faith plays an important part in many people's lives. It was recognized by many famous film makers of the past, but is ignored,, mocked or distorted today. It is not something that stands alone, but is reflected in the values and actions represented by the characters in a plot.
Did you see The Passion?
Just as a point of interest and comparison, this same discussion takes place on a regular basis regarding "LDS (Mormon) cinema", with many of the same observations and conclusions (cf.http://www.ldsmag.com/arts/061128glory.html/). I suspect the same issues hold true for "Christian fiction" (vs. fiction that happens to involve Christians). ..bruce..
This is why I included the word "Most". There are exceptions to every rule.
Heston's Old Moses at the end of the film wasn't believeable.
I think the best advice I could offer is to make the story around your message. Every good story has a strong, coherent theme, but keep it real. By that, I mean that all the elements of the story also have to be real. Christ was perhaps the only person in scripture who could be treated as better than human. He had to be in order to be the acceptable sacrifice for our sins. But everyone else is human. They have their loves, their joys, their doubts, their fears. Hollywood of today would delight in only examining their doubts particularly their doubts of their own faith. That's cool isn't it? but in doing so and in doing so so exclusively, Hollywood tends to dehumanize their Christian subjects be they priest or prophet. Make your Christian subjects a balance and an interesting one. Then your audience identifies. We've all been through that struggle. And then, give him or her the American Hero ending.
Though I didn't care for the film, neither the acting nor production was under par. Not even close to "Christian" film.
Dallas, you said: young Christians aren’t encouraged or trained to become great artists.
You're right about that. Their main dictation is to spread the Gospel.
Unfortunately, no one points out how this guy from Galilee did that a couple of thousand years ago. He used parables. He was a good storyteller. He told them to Jews, Romans, Samaritans, Gentiles, and anyone else who would listen. And because he used that method, they listened.
Thomas Jefferson went through the Bible once and pulled out the principles in them. Nice exercise in truth, and despite what some folks will try to tell you about Jefferson, he was a deeply religious man. And this is a Christian nation. Unfortunately, not many people have arms as wide as Jesus, or know how to tell a story, so they revert to trying to convince.
And that's the problem with many "Christian films" today. Go watch "Angels with Dirty Faces" some time, you'll see exactly what I mean.
Do you know what movie I found startlingly "Christian?" Constantine.
And it was a terrible movie in many ways… violent and horrible. But what were the themes?
How often are evil events in the world driven by people trying to force the hand of God or by someone certain that they know better than God or by someone sure that they know the mind of God? The best intentions entirely irrelevant to good or evil… and *that* is contrary to modern thought where virtue is placed in intentions and people consider themselves virtuous because they "care" and not because they actually managed to help anyone… maybe they "raised awareness" or something, and if nothing came of it or if their efforts actually make a situation worse it doesn't matter because at least they *tried*.
But not a family movie. Not even close. Not a movie that won't offend. Not any more doctrinally correct than "Oh, God" or some other "family" monstrosity. But with some hard, and very "christian" ideas to think about.
Why do "Christian" movies have to be "Christian"? There are great books and life stories that display Christian values that would make great movies – Chariots of Fire, Lord of the Rings. Instead of developing some "Christian" movie from scratch, produce something great that is already out there.
Neither the acting nor the production were sub par. They were still higher quality than so-call "Christian" film.
I agree, Heather. So many movies have great storylines but have just a few questionable scenes that don't really add to the storyline. Or a few F-bombs that can easily be deleted. Even if the quality of Christian movies was spectacular, relegating them to a particular genre still marginalizes them.
Um…if the movie your watching has only one line of repeated dialog and that line happens to be "Oh God!" you're watching a porno!
What's the worst part about being an Atheist?
No one to talk to durning an orgasm.
very good article. I want to add that the best Christian movies are Bible stories on film. Perhaps this is because the message is contained within the story, so character can be developed.
The problem with what you're considering Christian films is that no one feels like being beaten over the head with a message, strangely this is the same reason anti-war movies fail. No one wants to pay $10 to be guilted or preached to for two hours.
The best Christian movies are the ones who get their message across without you realizing it with the most recent example being the Chronicles of Narnia movies. If you can convey a strong moral message without emotionally exhausting people in the process you will find your good movie. The best Christian movies have always functioned more as an allegory than a literal translation.
Good post Dallas. The good news is that the publishing $$$ success trumps most of the historical problems you outline. Listen to Skip. Writing a great screenplay seems like the easiest thing in the world – but it obviously isn't.
That said, given the success of Christian fiction – why hasn't there been a crossover into film? It seems that securing film rights to any fiction that is profitable is commonplace – except Christian authors. That suggest that you and others aspiring to give the rest of us excellent movie experiences are going to have to find a path that at least partially detours Hollyweird.
To echo Ezra and the earlier post about Fargo & other films – especially the Cohen Bros – love the sinner and hate the sin – great film making is the starting point – and some real A-holes have been great film makers. Mel Gibson made two before spouting off anti-Semitic in a drunken rage – & the biggest 'story' that sold had several re-writes in the past two thousand years prior to filming. Twenty + years in the biz and his success w/Braveheart certainly influenced his creative decision making.
The simplest things are so worth restating; loving great films leads to making great films. A simple story well executed will make boatloads of $$$. But the truth is the process of film making is very hard – and there are lots of ways to screw it up. Kick down the door Dallas. One hit – like Fireproof – is a quirk – a lucky break ect. Knock off two or three in a row and you got a genre. There is unquestionably a market out here.
That said, given the success of Christian fiction – why hasn't there been a crossover into film?
Because reading a book is an active action. The reader imagines the enviornment, etc. This also means that the reader can determine what the character is thinking, if they are lustful, explosions, curse words, etc. Readers don't have to follow the book–they make up their own reality. As soon as you try to pin the utopian visions of Christian fiction to the literal screen, the controversy starts. No Chrisitans will go see the movie to support it and no secular people want to see a Christian film, so the movie makes no money. Because it is not profitable to make these kinds of films, producers don't buy the rights to Christian fiction…unless it's some Christian film company like Namesake or Cloud 9 1/2, but these companies are inexperienced as noted in the article.
I've often wondered at this too. It seems to me that making a "Christian movie" is just too narrow a goal most of the time.
Instead, what if Hollywood worked on making a movie from the 1940s? Keep the same restrictions on writers of the day. Not a period piece but a 1940s style story in 2009.
Also, not a tongue-in-cheek remake showing "how much sophisticated we now are." Fade out before the bedroom scene rather than after.
Don't try to cater to Christians specifically, just make a good clean movie and they will pay to watch it.
As a writer in Hollywood who attended the UCLA film school, I'm new to BH and I'm thrilled to see such lucid commentary from this board's readers. I've never had any desire to live in the Jesus Entertainment Ghetto- run (and approved) by big Ministries and Christian publishers who are tone deaf when it comes to popular culture. I remember Rev. Jimmy Swaggart railing against those who waste time watching sinful network comedies, mentioning "Three's Company" by name. Meanwhile, Jimmy was starring in his own sex romps and the moral relativists in Hollywood had an excuse to further indulge their Christian-bashing.
It's time Christian artists (and I meet plenty of them out here) validate themselves. Get out there and open your eyes to the compelling drama in this world and confront it all from a real perspective- not just the "niceville" (fake) version that puts the audience to sleep, nor do it from the exploitative Hollywood version that's been done to death and now rings hollow. Hollywood's story telling is dying because it's usual cliches aren't working anymore- there needs to be new perspectives to save this industry from further decline. This presents an opening to honest storytellers who can offer fresh perspectives on old stories. You listening, Christian?
Consider- I have a relative who's served time in jail for drugs, armed robbery and organized crime affiliations. He also found Jesus in jail and struggles to keep clean after getting released- but he's managed to avoid getting busted again. Trust me when I say his Christian faith, flawed and shaky as it is, has discouraged him from perpetrating further crimes on society-even if he's still a pot smoker and occasional drunk.
Imagine the Christian themes that would emerge from such an honest (and often brutal) prison story – as opposed to the same old "Shawshank Redemption" plotline (wonderful as it is). Unfortunately, I'm too busy to at the moment to write such a story but you get the idea . .
Amen. I'm with you . Get rid of the hyphen .
Up top there is a link to "17 again" glorifying teenage parenting.
Any of you who want to make Christian films should consider this closely and think about how it applies to the movies you want to make. Is the proper message more important than showing real people the way they really are? And can something less than ideal be portrayed. Is avoiding any possible chance of making teenage parenting appear anything but horrible the most important thing? (And I'm not suggesting this "teenage parenting" thing as a Christian issue… it's a liberal, PC, you should get an abortion instead, issue.)
In the past I've talked to Christian authors writing Christian books who complained that they couldn't sell them because the story was about a messed up girl who found God, but the fact that she was messed up, that she smoked, was unacceptable because the book portrayed bad behavior. What? If a book can't be written about a sinner, how can a book be written about redemption?
The last few days I've read discussions with the same premise but from a liberal-PC point of view… how *wrong* to portray the wrong ideas! What if something written plays to a stereotype even by accident? How wrong!
But the world is full of sinners… of teenage girls who smoke… of people who believe or play to oppressive stereotypes… of real people who just might pattern faults because they are not perfect.
A bit ago an author posted here (unless someone else has the same name) who published a few books with Baen that are overtly Christian and I'm convinced could never ever have been published with a "Christian" publisher. _The Year of the Warrior_ by Lars Walker. It is very much about *who* does the work of God… the person, or God? And in this case the person doesn't even approach holy but finds he doesn't have a choice but to be used for God's purpose when he is captured by viking marauders.
The vikings thought Christ was an insipid, weak, God and wanted nothing to do with Him.
Sometimes I think that Christians want an insipid and weak God, so they don't have to confront evil… not even in movies or fiction.
1) Most Christian movies are produced not by Hollywood buy Christian Groups (ie Focus on the Family) and they do not have/use the multimillion dollar budgets that Hollywood movies can produce.
2) IF Hollywood DOES produce them the message of the Christian faith is SO water down and almost nonexistant that it almost cannot be called a Christian movie… :/
As a Mormon, this is the same connection. We have a Mormon line of films that have been made over the last 10 years (I've done several myself) and we have seen message overtake story and art. I think this is changing. Very good point by this author.
*snicker*
No, I'm talking about "Oh, God" with George Burns. I know people who thought it was the best Christian movie EVER when there was nothing Christian about it but that it was about "God." If you never heard of it, think Jim Carrey and Jennifer Aniston's breasts… "christian" like that, except there may not have been breasts.
I think the biggest problem with "Christian" movies is that they are boring…and just kinda dumb. If you portray a real-life conversion…a conversion that many of us that are 'born-again" have gone through, you would NOT have a boring film but you may have a film that, in the beginning anyway, is pretty rough….and what church-going person can comfortably watch what sin does to people? Of course, the end of the movie would show what Christ can and does do for all of us and that's the message we want out there. I think one good example of a "Christian" movie is "The Apostle". Now that was warts and all…plus it had the greatest American actor living today: Robert Duvall!
In spite of my being a Christian I consider groups like Focus on the Family to be a huge part of the problem. Their complete disconnection from reality and absolute lack of tolerance for people who do not fit into their mold has marginalized the entire Christian community. I view them with the same ire and disgust as I view groups like the ACLU and MoveOn.org. They and their ilk are what has damaged Christian entertainment by ostracizing it from popular culture and making it irrelevant.
For the life of me I don't understand why Hollywood doesn't embrace and make films of some of the stories in the Old Testament. The story lines are engrossing and very relevant. The characters are extremely interesting. Combined with today's special effects technology, they would be amazing!
"The Passion" had both message and artistry. It was the Holy Grail (if you'll permit me) of Christian films. Hollywood can't replicate that because, though they have the talent and artistry, they lack the heart and conviction of beliefs to not water it down. And, as you pointed out, Christians have the message but they lack the artistry. "The Passion" was a rare meeting of both.
I'm waiting to hear back from Compass Film Academy to see if I've been admitted. I'm a Christian and I want to be a filmmaker. I don't want to make "Left Behind" movies, though. My goal is to lean more toward the art, but to make films that will make people think and ask themselves questions, not try to pound the answers into their heads. I hope I can do that. I hope Compass can help me learn the art well. I guess we'll see
That's a very good point. The Bible is jam-packed with exciting stories…if they can make "300", they can make something fantastic with those stories in the Old Testament.
Eh, they were just an example because they are one of the few groups that have the money to do such an endeavor…. I take the good parts of Focus on the Family and leave the bad… But I agree that they are a part of the problem and not the solution.
and I meant to say but by Christian… my fingers are typing faster than my brain can think again.. :/
Now that I think about though "One Night with the King" wasn't that bad either… It followed the story of Esther in the Old Testament… And I know it took some artistic licensing with that movie was well… And another that everyone in my little circle of friends liked was "Extreme Days"… It wasn't overtly and blatantly Christian, but you could definitely see a message there that could apply to everyone.
Richard Gross, former president of Gordon College, was fond of saying "Christian shoddy is still shoddy." By this he meant that just because we are Christians doesn't mean that it's only the effort that counts, as if God will make up the difference. Not that He can't or won't ever, but He has given us gifts and talents and we need to use them to the fullest. There are some Christian colleges/universities that have decent film schools—BIOLA comes to mind. There is also the Los Angeles Film Studies Center, which is a off-campus program of the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities located in LA. It's only a semester long, but schools students in the ins and outs of Hollywood and provides internships. Alumni have and are working on productions both big and small and at all levels. But, I agree that more can and should be done to encourage Christians to enter the film industry.
The last "Christian" movie I saw was Bella – which was excellent. However it was shown only in a few theaters for a short time. I would call it a movie with a Judeo-Christian value (anti abortion). It wasn't "preachy" but simply detailed the life of a child that a mother decided to save (without giving away the plot). As with the few good movies detailing Iraq distribution is the key. I read here somewhere that Sony started a "faith" division after the runaway success of the Passion, but distribution isn't part of the deal. They'll make the movie for you but you have to decide how to get it into theaters.
This issue reminds me of a quote I just read attributed to Marylin Monroe:
"Hollywood is a place where they'll pay you a thousand dollars for a kiss
and 50 cents for your soul"
The reason these movies aren't being made is that there are few movie people with these values.
Ditto, Ditto, Ditto!
When I began reading all of the comments, "The Human Comedy" immediately came to mind. Also, "Since You Went Away", starring Claudette Colbert, is exceptional in it's effectiveness in depicting a society ennobled by Christian faith and ethics without being preachy. Take a look at the screen adaptation of G. K. Chesterton's "Father Brown", starring Alec Guinness. Titled "The Detective", it tastefully tells the story of a thief's spiritual transformation by the unrelenting efforts of a meek priest/amateur sleuth, to reform him.
A work of art doesn't have to have 'Christian' as a subtitle to communicate the Christian message or worldview. One of the depressing developments in evangelical Christendom has been the notion among many of the faithful that if a movie doesn't quote Bible verses, then it doesn't reflect a Christian worldview. As a painter, this trend is especially evident in the paintings that are hung on the walls of the faithful. Certain 'painters' have begun appending scripture references on the actual painting. Somehow, this touch makes the painting, no matter how questionable in quality it is, worthy of inclusion in a Christian home. Apparently, the ability of many Christians to judge artistic quality is so stunted, that such tricks are very effective among the gullible.
It will indeed require "divine intervention" to reinvigorate the arts. I pray that I live long enough to witness it.
More movies made by Christians — add my agreement to that. More movies made by people who respect the human race, at the least, and who have some traditional morals.
I recently saw a good movie – Saints and Soldiers – that was made on the cheap (less than a million dollars) and yet it was good. It dealt with a small band of soldiers at the Battle of the Bulge and an ongoing discussion with one – who was a Mormon missionary in pre-war Berlin – and a medic who was an atheist. It wasn't "preachy" at all but just a discussion between a man of faith and one who didn't believe in God.
I found it it was made by the Mormons and filmed in the mountains above SLC. You can see it on Hulu.
The big problem with Christians making movies is dancing around the ludicrousness of the Fundamentalist "plan of salvation." I don't mean to blaspheme. I lost a very important decade-and-a-half of my life to Bible-based American Jesus-ism, having been roped in at age 17.
There are "Christian films" that really do lay out the Roman Road salvation plan explicitly, and they are impossible to take seriously. They are ridiculous.
The super majority of Bible-believers are mentally crippled because of their view of the Bible and their approach to studying it, treating it like it fell out of heaven in its completed form, when it certainly didn't. And most of these Bible-believers find their way to moments of comfort thanks to carefully constructed study bibles with built-in commentaries and cross-references.
Spend as much as you want, but if you lay out, in the light of day, the fundamental beliefs of most American Protestants Christians, you can hardly keep from laughing.
I had to walk away from my Americanized Jesus experience for that reason. My respect for Jesus did not die, though. It just changed in a healthy way. I became free to really think about him and what he taught rather than worrying constantly about whether I was in "right standing" with God.
Jacob Wrestled with God. David's life was up-and-down. Peter argued with Jesus. We must all work through our own salvation "with fear and trembling."
A fine, thoughtful, bold column, Mr. Jenkins. May it be forwarded to people who, in good faith, will act on it.
as an atheist, i get really tired reading about poor, abused and ignored Christians in this country, and how oppressed they are. i'm also amused by the part about gay and Christian film. heh. you do know there's some overlap there, dood? anyway, one cannot escape monotheistic ideology in our visual and material culture if you tried. believe me, i have. it's implied or assumed if not directly and proudly stated in just about everything. it's sort of like how you probably don't notice there aren't many asians in mainstream visual culture, unless you're asian. christians have been given so much, but it's never enough for them. the rest of us have to endure it no matter how uncomfortable we are. only christian sensibilities and feelings matter.
want to talk about a dearth of representation in film, and when it gets some, it sucks and is unfair? try counting the times proud, heroic atheists get starring roles. or in which religious people are portrayed with historical accuracy. or are about a religion that isn't monotheistic.
don't get me wrong, i loved "prince caspian" and i like fairies, monsters and goddesses in my films. film should be about fantasy sometimes, and religions provide ample material. but i laugh when i hear Christians complaining that their share of the pie isn't big enough. please. try walking in the shoes of someone who doesn't share your faith, and see what that's like. you'll stop complaining.
I agree. There are so many compelling stories to be told out there that don't have to be so in your face non-christian. Most fo the profanity in films isn't neccesary (not everyone in America uses the f-word, though you wouldn't know that by watching movies). as is most of the sexual content. (you don't have to show the actors getting it on in order to move the story along, the audience will know what happened). Let me give you an example. I'm wanting to us some seens from "The Blues Brother's" at a Christian Camp this summer, but the film is rated R. The only reason is for the language. Now I ask you, what exactly do all the F-bombs add to the movie? nothing. DOes it make it funnier? maybe for a 5th or 6th grader (he. he. he. he sad F*&^) Does it make more realistic? maybe, but since the Blues brothers survive multiple explosions and crashes I don't thinl realism was the point of the film. SO why have it in there? Any thoughts?
Except 90% of the movie is completely made up and isn't in the Bible…..
Also, it drives me crazy that Moses's wife says Ruth's lines!
{grin}
I made a film I am very proud of called Joseph's Gift (1998), a modern retelling of the Joseph and his brothers set in modern day Los Angeles. It starred Freddy Rodriguez and featured the last film performance of Marcel Marceau.
It is available on DVD but sadly had very limited release. Hollywood history is woven from its inception with films based on biblical stories. Obviously there is a difference between a "Christian" film and a religious themed film. However, whether you are an atheist, an agnostic or a believer surely any mass entertainment that examines the question of faith should be encouraged. Commercial pressures are relentless and this sadly accelerates the trend to movies that are nihilistic in the sense that they are about nothing.
They are a tricky group to measure because I respect their "mission" as it were and fully support their efforts to further Christian values and inform their audience of media content so that people can make an informed decision. My line is drawn by their escalation of that wherein they attempt to force the government to legislate those values to everyone. I'm a firm believer in values and morality being an individual's decision and right, any attempts to collectively legislate a given set of morals always strikes me as a bit…I don't know…Iranian.
First of all, there is no dearth of material for Christian or any other film makers to plumb, that have direct or indirect Christian or Jewish for that matter, themes. Want another blockbuster along the lines of Gibson's Passion? The Acts of the Apostles is a mega-hit in waiting. The post-ressurection lives of Peter and Paul have all the markers of a great story. And about there being no traing for young Christian artists, all I can say is this. i am an architect and consider architecture to be a greater form of art than just about anything. The reasons I won't elaborate on for the sake of space considerations. But in everything I design, buildings, furniture, interiors, outdoor spaces, I make a concious effort to integrate something of God or Christ into the design. We don't need Christian training for young artists, we need artists who will express their Christianity, or Judaism into their art.
Taking control of the entertainment industry is just one of the steps to destroying our culture . . . (along with controlling all mass media (most recently the proposed control of the internet) and taking control of the educational system, financial system, etc.
Anyway, re: entertainment, maybe it can be reclaimed.
At the risk of igniting a Catholic-Evangelical flame war, maybe this is a theological problem.
In our daily life, God doesn't come out with a shovel and hit you in the face too often, if at all. God is revealed to us, but many people do not see. A movie good movie is like this. A good Christian movie is obviously Christian to the viewer, but an non-believer may totally miss it. And a non-believer can produce a movie open to Christian interpretation. Donnie Darko, Groundhog Day. And some even are an argument for the existence of God: any Jessica Biel movie.
P.S. Why hasn't anyone made a rated-R Bonhoeffer?
I just don't warm to this argument at all. There is a ton of Christian imagery and messages in modern film. Forgiveness. Tolerance. Love your enemies. The righteous man beset on all sides by the cruel and selfish. You just need to readjust your viewing glasses. The movie "Contact" for example — it's about the atheist finding God.
Great discussion. My wife and I are careful in what we see. We don't like films that glorify the bad of our society, useless violence is out, graphic nudity and foul language is not needed to tell most stories.
But there are some great films out there with Christian themes that can tell the story better than most preachers. Spiderman and Spiderman 2 are shining examples of self sacrifice and redemption, they are no Ben Hur, but they are entertaining and get the message across.
Speaking of Ben Hur, if you've only ever seen it on TV, rent or buy the DVD, see what's cut out. It'll blow your mind.
I was thinking along these lines as I read the post. Remember when The Taylors went to church on The Andy Griffith Show? When everyone went to church on Little House on The Priairie? And countless other TV shows and films of years gone by?
They were good people. Their acts portrayed them as moral people. They went to Church and worshipped God in what was portrayed as Christian congregations. It was simply who they were and what they did.
If I was a filmaker — as a Christian — I would integrate acts of Christian faith just as a part of everyday life. Just as all of us do as seamlessly as possible in our every day lives. Not all good, faith based messages need a flag and a neon sign. It is just what we do and what we are.
Dallas, this is a good post and very thought provoking. Thank you.
Well, the "holier than thou" attitude in Hollywood comes just as much from the left as from Christians, and the "in your face evangelism" comes MORE from the left than from Christians.
Regarding BPT's comments…
I don't buy the "Christians were driven out" argument. For one thing, Christians have just as much right and opportunity to run a studio or provide financing as non-Christians do. The Jews have been the most hated people in the world, yet they've managed to practically run Hollywood since it began; so why could they succeed while Christians couldn't?
Same thing with being forced out because of the drugs and cults. That's the problem with the Christian community in general–we tend to cut and run when things get rough in America. Why is it that parents will proudly send their kids to the jungles of Africa, which are more godless and cultish than anywhere in America, but they won't send their kids to Hollywood because it's too "risky?" The reason Hollywood leans to the immoral side is because Christians have forsaken any influence. Let's change that.
Finally, I do agree with you that many Christians simply don't value entertainment over other pursuits, and their priorities can be different. I hope they now realize that the media has a huge influence on culture and that making an impact on Hollywood is not only good for art (even an athiest artist could agree that we need more balance), but good for society.
Ditto, ditto, ditto!
We are a family with three boys. Do you realize how hard it is to find quality movies to watch as a family? Movies that are entertaining yet have no sex scenes or curse words every three seconds? (On a related note, why on earth is "Top Gun" PG?!?!?!?!?! We thought it would be good to watch with the boys …. oh no!!!) We're almost to the point where we watch no modern movies and have relied on pre-1960s black and whites.
We love Sergeant York over here as well as "Follow Me Boys", "Run Silent, Run Deep", "Destination Tokyo", "Swiss Family Robinson", etc.
Why thank you for asking!
"Hometown Legend," "Midnight Clear," and "Though None Go With Me" are the films I've produced or directed. All available on DVD, can be in your home for just pennies a day!
Religion is a waste of time, That's why
The real problem is, Christians don't think they're a problem at all. In fact, they're so sure they're right that when an opposing view is presented, they feel threatened and start screaming persecution (see: War on Christmas).
The fact is, the Church as it has existed since ~300 years after Joshua (Jesus for the ignorant) is a very big problem. It was the Church who initiated wars like The Crusades (including one comprised of children, thousands of which died before ever leaving Europe), hate and propaganda campaigns like the Spanish Inquisition (which no one expects!), and general life-meddling malarky like removing books from libraries, working against gay marriage, the abortion debate, and the contents of science education texts.
And yet, for all these problems they either create or perpetuate, they're never wrong, are they?
As a secular humanist, I honestly love being told I'm going to hell by a SuperChristian. "Well," I say, "at least you won't be there…"
Back on topic: Kirk Cameron was never very good. He's the only "name" Christian Entertainment has, and that's not something to be proud of. Just look what he did to poor Meg Griffin!
I've never seen any movies that were specifically made to be "Christian movies," I don't think, but I saw "Amazing Grace" (does that count?) and I thought what was good about that movie was that it didn't seem like it was trying to preach at anyone, it just told the story of William Wilberforce's life and included how Christianity had been important in his efforts to end the slave trade in Britain. I think there might be a lot of potential in making movies about historical figures who were Christians.
I'd agree that the left can be worse than the right, but it doesn't justify the right's bad behavior. Some of that "holier than thou" attitude puts off other christians as well.
Why pay ten bucks to be preached at when you can sit in church and get it for free?
I love this article, I just wish I had more to add. Churches' youth groups and college/professional groups don't encourage their students to look towards the "artsy" professions for those same reasons you listed above, and it's a shame. You can't affect the culture if you aren't IN the culture. The Bible says to be in the world, just not "of" it or living for it. Missionaries don't just live in huts in Africa.
The idea that "Christian" films have to be all about message, and little – if anything – about craft and art is pure baloney. But in order to have decent films, Christians are going to have to have THE final say about the message and the content, absent the meddlings of Hollyweird "artistes" and studio heads, otherwise we'll have the gratuitous insertion of the closeted gay Christ, sadomasochistic disciples, and institutional child sacrifice in every "Christian" film Hollywood tries to foist on the religious community.
And until Hollywood gives up that kind of overtly anti-religious blasphemous sabotaging and control-freak level of oversight, you will continue to have the divorce so well described. Which is a net plus for Christianity.
Movies like "Fireproof" are ramming the point home to Hollywood that studio production isn't necessary, and that Christian films can mature and improve quite apart from institutional Hollywood's "help", and the Christian community is learning the lesson with full marks courtesy of the Sherwood Baptist Church, and not the USC Film School or the Actor's Studio.
Do you think that Christian filmmakers could ever back a film like "Gran Torino"? I think if the Christian community could reconcile "worldly" and salty language with a powerfuly redemptive story, it would solve this issue.
Also, Dallas, as an outsider to the movie business, the answer to why Christian movies are awful is simply a matter of the size of the talent pool. Hollywood's has tremendous capacity to create an excellent production. How many Christian directors or producers are there?
Yeah, there's a reason we like the Facing the Giants-type films, even though they're not high art. They reflect our values and are uplifting. But for sustained success, we need to get better, me included.
Aaron Sorkin's fantastic. He's got a strong Catholic background, and because he's a good artist, he knows the value of portraying diffferent perspectives. Of course, it's a leftist viewpoint, but it's better than nothing.
Bah, that was another point I wanted to make. Good point. The fact that we have to always be "clean and safe" (something the Bible is not) limits the artistic potential.
You're right, there's definitely a strong shift towards more education, but as you said, it's not always great art that's emphasized. We're getting better, but we have a ways to go.
And by the way, Dallas, as good as this article was, it's majoring on the minors.
Try a column, as an evangelical Christian, on "Why *Hollywood* Movies Are So Bad", and as other posters have noted, on "The Death Of Virtue In Hollywood", both in front of the camera, behind it, and offscreen.
Then the wonder won't be that there are no Christian films, but why the church, en masse, has bothered to have anything to do with Hollywood whatsoever, other than using it as a good negative example.
Because you get what you pay for, and what you receive freely you esteem lightly.
What separates the good Christian (or gay, for that matter) writers from the bad is that the good are writers first, Christians second, at least when it comes to their art. Tolstoy, Graham Greene, Robert Bresson, and TS Eliot were writers/directors with Christian themes. Likewise, Walt Whitman and Elizabeth Bishop were poets who happened to be gay; both would have been appalled to have seen their books stocked in the Gay Literature ghetto. This self-imposed marginalization has had a profoundly negative effect on the quality of the literature. It amazes me that anyone would seek the Christian comforts of Left Behind garbage when you have Anna Karenina so readily available to you.
On a different note, I'm going to say something that some of you may find heretical on the basis of the persons who were responsible for this movie. Are you read? The best Christian movie from the past 20 years was Dead Man Walking, Tim Robbins's wonderful adaptation of Sister Helen Prejean's elegant and moving reflection on her spiritual work with condemned murderers. The book and movie are both about heeding Jesus' most difficult command–to love and to forgive one's enemies–without neglecting why those persons are our enemies in the first place.
I think Top Gun pre-dated the existance of "PG-13," so pretty much everything that wasn't Friday the 13th would still get a PG.
I try to do my best, but really, I'm not the best writer sometimes. Collaboration works well, but is risky unless you're lucky enough to have a good writing partner.
Is there someplace to go, a discussion group, a facebook page, something where Christian filmmakers can get together and discuss ideas, spitball, maybe connect to work on a project? I've been involved in a few of these groups, but they usually end up turning into mini church services or gripe sessions.
"Constantine" has holy-water hand-grenades. And a crucifix that's a shotgun… that fires bullets made of melted holy relics. It's like someone watched "Bibleman" and said "okay, so… what if this was GOOD?"
"If a young Christian wants to become a filmmaker, they are often either discouraged to do so because Hollywood is so dangerous, or if they do find encouragement, they have a hard time getting proper training… We can complain all we want about how Hollywood doesn’t reflect our values, but we lose that right if we’re not producing great projects and artists of our own."
Yes and no. I tried to go into filmmaking in college and after graduating. I worked on it for a couple years and here were the problems:
a) It's damn hard to raise a family and work in the entertainment industry. Most Christians I know prefer to start a family in their 20's rather than start in their 30's. That's going to push a big chunk of talented people out of the industry.
b) Success in the movie industry is tightly tied to social connections. There is no better way to destroy your social connections in Hollywood (and the corresponding theater industry) than to do something like donate money to Prop 8. And even if you don't donate, preferring to keep a low profile by not mentioning it (which I did), someone will ask you point blank (thank you, Perez Hilton) and you have to choose between lying and potentially damaging your career.
c) The people suck. This is what ultimately got me out of it. I was surrounded by vapid, selfish, angry people all the time. For the most part, they took joy in mocking political positions with which I had sympathy and the word "blasphemy" was a cynical joke rather than something that was actually offensive to real people. It is tough. It took a toll on me and I ultimately gave the whole industry the middle finger and left for a new career.
As a whole, yes, it would be nice if we had more Christians working in the movie industry. But on an individual level, quite frankly, the quality of life for a Christian in Hollywood sucks. I don't regret my decision at all.
This is one of the best-written, best-reasoned articles I've read on this blog. cheers!
Just for grins: what "bad behavior" are we talking about? Spanking a child without explaining why gives the child no reason NOT to do the bad behavior again–aside from fear of pain. Nothing is learned. If you are going to spank the right, at least educate.
Just cuz they mention God doesn't necessarily mean they are lifting Him up, giving Him praise, or teaching anyone about Him. Gotta listen to the words with the same scepticism you watch (or don't watch) Christian movies.
It's interesting that you consider yourself a secular humanist. Do you know why you have to put "secular" on there?
It's because the first "humanists" were Christians fighting against social injustice, slavery, child labor, illiteracy, hunger, abuse and war… all those classical liberal concerns. "Sunday schools" were formed to teach children in poverty to read… in fact the push toward universal literacy in England and Europe was all about faith and religion and Christianity. Whole languages and cultures have been recorded and preserved by people who recorded those languages and even created them in written form from scratch, preserving what was previously only available as an oral language, for the purpose of providing scripture in the language of the people. No secular agency has done, or wanted to do, anything like that.
Clocks and time keepers were developed by people for religious reasons… so they'd know when to pray.
If we talk about the ignorant, we can talk about those who refuse to see the contributions to literacy, medicine, science (how better to understand God?), technology, art and music, and human equality engendered *directly* by the desire of people to serve God, and who see only the destruction and perversion. For those (ignorant) people the underground railroad and vast literature condemning slavery from a Christian perspective does not exist… only religious white plantation owners exist.
This sort of willful ignorance can not be cured.
I would add a factor to the causes listed – the tendancy of the Christian community to eat their own. If one were, for instance, to make a movie based on the sons of Jacob, not excluding episodes like that of Judah and Tamar in Gen 37-38, you'd find a lot of Christians upset about it. At least, if the response to my using those chapters as the basis for a couple sermons is any indication, you would get some strongly negative responses. Even a movie like the Passion found some Christians with their panties in a wad and that was pretty much a straight-forward presentation of the Gospel texts.
Christian audiences need to accept the realities of sin, suffering, and death that are portrayed in the words of the Bible itself and not try to shoehorn life into a Dudley Doright shoe that's 4 sizes too small. Then maybe they'll allow Christian story-tellers to in fact tell their stories.
My issue with the statement that "the Christian community abandoned Hollywood a few decades ago" is that it doesn't have a long enough time frame. Many Christian denominations forbade their members from attending movies going all the way back to the twenties, and even earlier when many of the first moving pictures were associated with burlesque shows. When my grandparents church actively supported the release of "Chariots of Fire", it caused a scandal, as many of the members grew up with "thou shalt not attend movies" right up there with "thou shalt not drink" as part of their membership covenants. Indeed it has its roots in the iconoclastic tendencies inherent in protestantism. Protestantism generally eschewed the arts from the get-go: painting over Renaissance frescoes, smashing statues, seeing them as crossing the line into idolatry.
It is something of a chicken and egg argument. Recognizing the generally gutter nature of pop culture (just read the Canterbury Tales sometime) the church has generally distanced themselves from it. This opens the door for pop-culture to grow even more crass, which drives the church farther away. There is also the divergent standards as to what makes art "good". I know a number of people who bemoan how "bad" Christian music is, because Christian music focuses on inspiring worship. They don't understand how auditoriums full of people sway and sing along with what they consider to be the most banal music, while that same audience won't even listen to some of the "greatest" music, because they find the message in it repugnant.
I'm not sure if a person can be a Christian without being a Christian first… but I heartily agree about the self-imposed marginalization. Just the other day I compared the marginalization of feminist and ethnic-minority novels to Christian literature (the lack of recognition of minority writers was the subject of the discussion.)
If what one is producing (not the person him or herself) is Christian *first* or feminist *first* or ethnic-minority *first*, or gay *first*, then there will be self-imposed marginalization and no one ought to complain or fuss about being marginalized.
My point is not that these songs teach theology but they get people of all persuasions to at least think about God and isn't that half the battle.
This is coming from the folks who's entire religion is based on the idea that God required a perfect human sacrifice to cleans the world of sin, despite being the same being who damned the human race in the first place, right?
I mean, what was to stop him from just snapping his fingers and fixing things? Why would a god require blood and death to act?
Even in the old testament, he required animal sacrifice in exchange for blessings. Why would a god require you to kill it's creations in exchange for favors?
Lets not forget the idea that if you don't follow the faith, he has you tortured for all eternity.
I'm no atheist, being a well grounded Deist, but you have to admit, the religion is a bit twisted at it's core.
This is coming from the folks who's entire religion is based on the idea that God required a perfect human sacrifice to cleans the world of sin, despite being the same being who damned the human race in the first place, right?
I mean, what was to stop him from just snapping his fingers and fixing things? Why would a god require blood and death to act?
Even in the old testament, he required animal sacrifice in exchange for blessings. Why would a god require you to kill it's creations in exchange for favors?
Lets not forget the idea that if you don't follow the faith, he has you tortured for all eternity.
I'm no atheist, being a well grounded Deist, but you have to admit, the religion is a bit twisted at it's core.
Agreed–you accurately say what I meant to say.
The movie about Peter & Paul's post-resurrection lives was made some time ago. Called PETER and PAUL – starred Anthony Hopkins as Paul and Robert Foxworth as Peter (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082900/). Pretty good, too.
Actually everyone who has faith at one point did not. So they did indeed do the walking. You would be surprised by the stories you'd hear.
So, you are a relativist?
Yeah dude way to miss the point entirely
If you'd like to retreat to a cave somewhere and curse the major media while having absolutely no effect on the broader culture, though, by all means–be my guest
This is easily the most thoughtful version of this discussion I've seen.
If I may: I think that if you were to see the "power center" of Christianity in America change from it's current form (antiseptic, sealed-off, introverted, self-removed from the broader culture) into something a little more engaged with the rest of country a change in Christian entertainment (i.e. not sucking anymore) would shortly follow.
What I've seen of the Christian entertainment scene right now is more interested in preaching to the converted – providing "safe" material that is largely self-congratulatory ("good for you for resisting the popular culture!") in nature. This is why "Christian Music" is bad, this why "Christian fiction" is bad, etc. The author is correct that the biggest problem is that the Christian "scene" is so far cut off (by choice) from the real art and culture scenes that they don't even know where to START making good stuff.
(cont)
Thank you for your tolerance.
The passion of the Christ was a christian movie? Not really. It was a catholic mystic movie, by a catholic man. Catholicism is not christian, and the movie was not biblical. Just because a movie has Jesus in it, why do unsuspecting christians assume it is a christian movie? How can an unsaved catholic who based his movie on an unsaved mystic nun make a christian movie about Jesus accurately? And that is not even counting the graven image sin, and false swearing, praying to God and not meaning it as acting. Or being an idol, the idol of a man playing Jesus. Plus too many things to mention here.
Just my observation from my years in the church, as a police officer, as a classically trained actress at a secular University, and as someone who has tried to find good scripts while directing in a church setting. My opinion about Christian film: mostly meatless. I haven't seen any of your films (although we recently bought "Midnight" so I will be watching it soon.
so I'm not saying that comment applies here. What I am saying is life is not necessarily pristene. Some of the most inspirational stories I've heard that would make great projects would receive R ratings if produced. These stories touch on all of the tragedies of life yet in the end, when there was no hope for these people, they reached up and found redemption. But then I'm the one who wanted to put Dr. Faustus up on its feet at church one Halloween so I may be off the wall here. (May–ha!)
I think we should put Ray and Christopher in a room and sell tickets.
(cont)
If I were directing Christians on how to "make it" in the film world, my advice would be to first and foremost consider whether they are Christians who wish to make films and who's vision is influenced by their faith OR if they want to make "Christian films" as-in "commercials for Jesus." If the honest answer is the second one, they need to find a different goal because they will never be good filmmakers. If you have a cause or goal higher than "make a good movie," you will fail. Every. Single. Time.
Secondary advice would be to grow a thicker skin. Yes, most of the arts communities are not especially Christian. You may hear some mean jokes about it. Also, you will encounter people who's faiths and/or lifestyles are opposite yours. It's a fact, so grow up about it. Whenever I hear about Christians and/or conservatives who flee the business because they couldn't stand meeting gay people at parties or hearing jokes about Bush my immediate thought is "this person didn't want it bad enough, so their films wouldn't have been very good anyway. Good riddance."
Oh yeah: Dallas–Keep pushing the envelope. Keep it up. I'm glad you're out there directing and producing and making films with the message in it. I'm also glad you're asking for a critiqueof the genre in an open forum like this. Maybe we should stop classifying our stuff as a separate genre? I think someone already said something similar. I do know that my favorite projects are character driven with the arcs of the characters are clearly defined, their choices seen and understood. I'm praying for you brother. I'm praying for all of us in this business, you there, me here and everywhere else in between.
We damn ourselves. It was our choice. Which we freely choose again and again. Without that choice we could never really love. We would just be machines.
Those things were fun. I was mostly thinking of the fact that the girl (can't remember her name) was a believer. Absolutely. (Constantine was too, but for him it wasn't a matter of faith, but empirical knowledge.) And suicides really went to hell. (Not something I believe is true, but…) And it very much was about choices and where one goes when you die and the battle over who owned Constantine's soul.
It really was a very good movie (not that I'd recommend it for children!) and mostly because there was a very strong and compelling story to go along with the uber cool holy-weapons and truly exceptional special effects.
Mainstream movies reflect the culture, they don't influence it, except as they coarsen it.
Better Christian movies aren't going to influence culture broadly except negatively, because the better they get, the more the world will revile them. God didn't send people out and tell them to win converts by beguiling them with pleasant and artistic entertainments. So either Christianity gets watered down in the process, or the movies turn more and more people off to Christianity entirely because they're so penetratingly clear in their message about who God is and who man is.
That leaves using them as an affirmation of public virtues, most of which are so rarely found in Hollywood that to portray them on the screen would tax the talent and art in Hollywood so severely that the exercise would become rapidly futile.
But it would demonstrate where the problem lies.
The theme of redemption (an almost universal one in films, at least until recently) is a very Christian one. Another theme very popular in heroic movies is self-sacrifice (also a very Christian theme). Perhaps this explains the rise of the anti-hero; it's a reaction against Christian ideals.
And those ideas resonate with movie audiences, not just in America, but around the world. But I don't think it's because the world is predominantly Christian and sees its religion mirrored in some small sense on the screen. I think it's because Christian ideals are true, and something inside every human resonates with the truth, sometimes with joy, sometimes with fury, no matter what you believe.
In Addicted to Mediocrity by Franky Schaeffer V, one idea that stuck with me was the idea that what you believe will infuse whatever you create; you don't need to force it into your script. The rest of the book was mainly an unmitigated rant, but the idea that our beliefs permeate our creations helps, frees, and explains a lot for me.
I think it also explains why Hollywood can't duplicate the success of films like The Passion of Christ; their beliefs get in the way.
Thanks for demonstrating the ultimate futility of presenting the Christian message, no matter how artful or high-quality the attempt.
To the fourth point, just think of all the good they could have done with all the "artistic spoils". We lose out because of our lack of pragmatism. Besides, artistic training takes a ton of money, and many artists can't make ends meet, so this isn't an avenue for the poorest of the poor to start with. Your other points are well said, from my own experience. When I tried writing – and I even had an editor at Zondervan once considering my novella but passed because it was too experimental and I was an unknown – people immediately were put off that it had any basis in the Christian faith at all, not even a subtle one. Now when I dance, I notice I am get more eye-rolling than other dancers who do similar experimental things but who live a wild lifestyle. So it's clearly more than substance.
"Christian movies should not be timid in dealing with disturbing themes or images."
This is key. Don't people realize that holy scripture has some very disturbing elements? Rape, incest, murder, genocide (Esther and the Jews in Persia), etc. When Christians try to sugarcoat their messages in films, trying to avoid "R" ratings for fear of turning off congregations, they do a disservice in portraying the world in an unrealistic light.
Now, this doesn't mean that the torture porn of "Hostel" or the "Saw" franchise is realistic; it isn't by a long shot. But our world, while filled with some beautiful and amazing elements, also has plenty of dark corners. We need to explore them.
I was watching The Ten Commandments the other night and wondered what they could do with that movie today. I would love to see the plagues done with the special effects technolgy that they have today. It might make some people think.
Read Andrew Klavan, either here at Big Hollywood or at Pajamas Media and PJTV. He is a Christian, and a successful novelist (two of his novels became Hollywood films). He said exactly what you're saying now. Not Christian movies, but movies made by Christians.
And you're right, Lewis' Space Trilogy would be a fascinating film series. I've been imagining a CGI Perelandra for a long time.
It's just the way things are now. I do some work with a film festival, and categories are big when you look at the way those are set up. I've also noticed an inordinate percentage of some I've sampled elsewhere are gay films. You don't see any Christian category at those festivals, but maybe we should push for one. You know, equal representation.
One more thing in addition to my other comment. My writing and dancing are not supported by the Christians I know for the most part. They won't even come see me dance, and they never said a word about my writing when I gave them a copy.
What continues to be overlooked generally is that Hollywood would run screaming in revulsion at anything that honestly presented the Christian message.
So the better the quality of the "product", the higher the vitriol would run.
Alternatively, Christianity would become so watered down in an effort to appease the Perez Hiltons of the industry (which,m in truth, is 90+% of it) that the effort would be disastrous, and set Christianity's presumable work back a century or more.
Under those conditions, "not playing" by making your own content according to your own rules is clearly the only viable option for the church.
The closest Hollywood could come to tapping into that demographic would be to return to lauding public virtues in films, which effort would so certainly bankrupt the talents and art of the current crop of town reprobates that they'd never recover.
The Sopranos, Rome, and Dexter, all television shows with rather frank–and often brutal–themes, but celebrated in the media establishment. Each show in its own way plumbs the depths of human nature. Are we basically good and do bad? Are we born bad but have the capacity to do good? How easily do we play on this boundary between humanity and inhumanity?
While these might be natural human questions, they're also essentially Christian and even biblical questions. My wife and I watch Dexter, and we're constantly brought back to the theme–at least to us–of original sin. The media arts want such depth, and Christian theology and tradition are built to address such themes. We just need to start allowing Christian artists to plumb these depths as well. When we do that, we'll have not just Christian films, but Christians making films.
That's a great point, and one of my favorite book series growing up was co-written by a Mormon who used a strong anti-hero to make you think. It's Tracy Hickman and Margaret Weis' Dragonlance Chronicles and Dragonlance Legends. Can't say I love the tons of other books in that world published later, but these are Lord of the Rings quality if you're looking for a good read.
Willful ignorance, eh? And yet, look at how you vehemently argue the Christian plus-sides. YOUR ignorance to Christianity's crimes is woeful at worst, and laughable at best.
Yes, Christians have done good things. But at the same time, it always comes at a cost: You have this insatiable need to spread the virus. You're so enthusiastic about trying to make other people happy the way you've been made happy that you overlook one very important point: How selfish that is.
I call myself secular because I claim no religious belief. God is on par with Faeries, Gnomes, The Boogeyman and the modern depiction of Santa Claus: it's entirely too fantastic to be anywhere near reality.
Your ignorance is evident: You still call him Jesus, don't you. It's Joshua. Allow me to explain in as simple terms as I can, lest you think I'm trying to poison you with your liberal agenda:
Yeshua (his Aramaic name) became Iesu (or Iesus) in Latin, which in turn became Jesus (HAY-soos) when the Church spread to Spain. This in turn became JEE-zus when the arrogance of the Anglo-Saxons was factored in (which spread to America as a consequence of the Anglo-Saxon "new world" arrogance).
So why not call him Joshua? Answer: Sunday School.
The Sunday School, which in the past may have helped to prevent illiteracy, is now nothing more than something on par with brainwashing. The Church, realizing that people are waking up and walking away from its BS, is desperate to keep itself going, so they drill all this drivel into the minds of innocent children when they're most impressionable.
Do the children have a choice? No. Selfish, ignorant, WRONG.
Just because Clocks were created to give primitive people the notion of when to face East and bow doesn't mean we should be jumping for joy because God gave us a timepiece. In fact, I do believe that the sun dial predates Christianity, unless you're one of those whack-jobs who assumes that the storybook known as Genesis is a literal history of the fabrication of the world in a week 6,500 years ago.
Now then, I do believe you have a tenant: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged Yourself. Remember, you Christians have just as much blood on your hands as the extremist Muslims have…
I would say that's true in music as well. Some of the interesting, Christian messages I've heard that were a draw before I got serious about my faith were Martika's "Love Thy Will Be Done", and even 80s British Goth like the Sisters of Mercy's "Floodland" album or even sometimes the Mission UK.
If by "Christian" you insist that a film or music proselytize, you're going to lose the audience. I am a Christian, in that I believe in Christ, and I sure do wish that Hollywood would not feel so compelled to spit in the faces of those of us who believe in leading a moral, upright life. But a film (or music) doesn't have to be in-your-face evangelical in order to be appropriate for family viewing. One of the reasons I have pretty much abandoned Hollywood films is because the people in Hollywood can't seem to make a movie without sticking gay characters in where they aren't necessary, or having in-your-face nudity, bad language, etc. And I think that one reason there aren't more good, family films is because too many people in Hollywood truly are so messed up in their own lives they don't know how the majority of people in this country live, or they were raised in a Christian home and are still so busy rebelling against their upbringing 30 – 40 years later, they can't bring themselves to make a decent movie because it wouldn't be "cool." Grow up, Hollywood!
I second the vote on Constantine, and I rarely go to R films. However, the DVD version added some extra scenes in a special, separate segment to dilute that, from what I could see.
I disagree. "Facing the Giants' and "Fireproof" were good movies. Both of them were made to preach and bring people to Christ. They weren't made to make "Only a Profit".
The line in "Facing the Giants" speaks to the point of the movies and the Christians that made them,
"If we win, We praise G*d! and if we lose, We STILL Praise G*D!"
It depends on the context in which God is mentioned in songs as well as in all media. If the song or whatever says some sort of bizarre thing about something God has done, I ain't for that. I will have to say that my favorite song about God that received a rash of bashing by the Church was the song "What if God was one of us?" I don't remember off hand who the artist was. I was telling people to lighten up a little. If Jesus truly is God incarnate, then he was in fact one of us. That song was great because the very nature of the song caused people to think directly about the question. There was no oblique reference to God. You have to look at context.
"Hometown Legend"; isn't that the one that starred Lacey Chabert? Now there's a talented and beautiful young actress who was getting a lot of mainstream film work (Party of Five, Lost in Space, Mean Girls) while still being outspoken (at least the last time I heard) about her faith. What has she been doing lately?
We need a lot more good actors and actresses like her and Patricia Heaton getting steady work to really make a dent in the Hollywood armor and to maybe show other Christian thespians that they can have a career in Hollywood without compromising their faith. Also, if anybody needs to hear the Gospel, it's Hollywood. It's awfully hard to give that Message to them if we're afraid to go in and get our hands dirty. After all, Jesus hung out with the whores and thieves; surely we can handle a few actors. ;o)
Another angle to take this conversation to would be the use of propaganda versus art. Check out how the Soviets handled art and artists, look into definitions of "socialist realism", etc. Some of what the problem is in the Christian community is they want propaganda. I actually liked "Fireproof" and sometimes even like the cheesier Christian films, but when I was looking to submit my fiction to magazines, I saw requirements on content like it must be a fictional story about Our Lady (for a Catholic mag). Nowhere else to go but the more occult publishers if you want to publish Christian fantasy back then. Maybe things have improved now.
Hollywood should not be making Christian movies, yet I wouldn't object if they do. Instead, they should be making Christian-friendly or non-offensive movies or (as other have said) more redemptive movies. I go to see movies to escape as everyone else. A good movie does not need to appeal to my Christian faith, but it does help to have a little Christian-like dramatic turn in it like the Matrix series with Neo and the saving of the world (funny how saving the planet is a big deal these days in non-Christian approaches).
To address the article's premise, Christian movies are bad because they are terribly written, have shallow characters, and have low production values, and too message driven. Also, they are one size fits all. Not all Christians approach their faith the same way. Frankly, I don't get involved in the Christian subculture as my tastes demand more variety.
This article seems to be similar to another one on Conservative films, which are not successful in the same way as Liberal films. The public does not want to be lectured to.
"The passion of the Christ was a christian movie? Not really. It was a catholic mystic movie, by a catholic man. Catholicism is not christian, and the movie was not biblical."
Of course Catholics are Christians. Catholics are the ORIGINAL Christians. And Mel Gibson isn't even a real Catholic, he belongs to some split-off sect that denounces Vatican II.
They did, they just never hit the theaters. I think it was Ted Turner's people who made new ones. They're good, but sometimes you need other types of stories.
My observation is that many seem to confuse a "Christian" film with a "family-friendly" film. A family-friendly film is one that all ages could watch and comprehend without being offended in their basic values and beliefs. But this does not necessairily make it Christian. We publish Bible story books for our children because we know that they might not understand the full implications of the Bible's message yet, but this is an easy way to get them started down that path. But adults need more "meat". Simply telling them to watch another morally pristine film that does not challenge their thinking but keeps them "safe" is ultimately going to bore them to death.
I would also caution about developing a snobbish attitude towards those who enjoy "Left Behind" and its ilk. I know for a while I developed an attitude about those believers who were not as sophisticated in their film tastes as I was. But all that did was make me seem like a jerk anytime I opened my mouth about film. Now I simply find creative ways to steer people towards more thoughtful works.
And your opinion.
Just my observations as a Traditional Anglican Catholic (no female priests, no gay marriage) : Too often fellow Christians want the Sweetness and Light of Christianity without any of the blood and pain and darkness that many people walk on their journey. No one likes to hear about the depression one suffers or the pain of loss. I personally think its a symptom of an illness that has beset not Christianity itself, but those who call themselves Christian. It seems to me that a majority of people calling themselves Christians only choose churches where they know they wont go away feeling "sad or depressed" ie don't make me think about how badly Ive fallen away from God, but only keep me in my Happy Happy Joy Joy state. I cannot tell you the number of times I have talked with friends who proclaimed themselves Christian, but did not want to delve into the deeper aspects of doctrine or theology or simply explore The Walk any further than how the Sunday Service makes them feel. I have been told they dont want to go to a church that makes them "sad and depressed – they want to feel good about themselves." I think a lot of so-called Christians are in denial about what The Walk involves and they dont want to see it crop up in film either.
These are just my observations. I think too often a lot of Christian communities try to keep people in that state…and it always rings hollow for those of us who are trying to genuinely walk the Christian life, those of us who know what the shadows are like. I want to be affirmed in the way that 1) I am not alone in my journey 2) that the shadows that cover me CAN be dispelled by light but sometimes its hard to come out from those shadows. I think a real Christian message should be exploring why we as Gods children keep choosing to stay in the shadows. A lot of these Happy Happy Joy Joy Christians need to get over the idea that simply because we show someone who has fallen to the Rock Bottom doesnt mean we advocate that Life. Children SHOULD be receiving that message – our charge as parents should be education in that regard – to equip our children with the armor to defend against that – but it doesnt mean they wont ever be in shadows themselves.
Sheesh – this is what FAIRYTALES used to be for…and a lot of Christians have excommunicated THAT means of storytelling from their dialogue as well…
I think Point # 4 hits the nail on the head. Unfortunately, evangelicals have generally designated the increasingly vapid and prosaic “praise song” as the only acceptable art form for public worship. Why can’t film, poetry, storytelling, visual arts, theater, etc. be used to glorify God at church?
It deeply saddens me that the Church, a once great patron of the arts, has denigrated to outputting some of the most artless entertainment to today’s media-craving audiences.
For one it's Yeshua not Joshua (did not see that you clarified that until later)… You are confusing people that use Christianity and the name of Christ to serve themselves instead of the other way around.
Not every Christian acts in the ways that you describe… and with that I have to wonder if you have actually met a REAL Christian that does their best to truly follow God and His Son or if you just think we are all like those you see on TV or on the news…
As a Christian, I have my opinions and reasons for being against Social issues such as homosexuality and abortion and such (and not all of them solely based on religious beliefs), but that doesn't mean that I (or even Christians in general) are going to act with such intolerance towards different opinions and beliefs….
You are looking at the name that the horrible acts where done under but dismissing the fact that not all Christians believe nor act this way.
And it's funny to me how you suggest that Christians deem themselves as always correct, but you sir/madam are doing the same damn thing. You are no better than those you refute. It's funny that you tell people not to judge yet here you are judging an entire belief system… and based on what? People of the Classical era's that mixed Feudalism with religion?
I hate Anna Karenina and other more literary figures mentioned in these comments. Personally, we need to also discard the idea that speculative fiction is just automatic crap and literary giants are figures of the past. Nothing wrong with Spiderman at all unless you are like my old creative writing professor's colleagues, the silce of life novel is the only "real" art.
As an atheist myself I suggest most of the Christian movies are bad because they are not entertaining and the story that they try to tell is a rehash of what is written in the stories of the Bible. Most people can guess whats going to happen in the films before it actually happens.
I am very tolerant of others beliefs and respect everyone's right to practice what they wish no matter how badly I think most people have been tricked into believing. I don't think commandments are wrong I think the Christian believe system are nothing but a set of rules to keep people in control. I am not for taking religion out of the Schools and believe if a student decides to not participate well then they can stand in silence and respect others.
Ms. Sharon,
Thank you for illuminating the christian life. This is a way of life not just something you "Do on Sunday".
People forget this in marriage too!
Nicely said, Skip, I couldn't agree more. Angels is one of my favorites, and the Cagney character at the end is all about redemption for himself and the others. I never thought about that before.
Point b: I've noticed that you even raise eyebrows if you stay silent during discussions of the issue. It's a strong a statement as if you said you were against it, and at the very least, they know you're "not one of us". It hasn't caused me to be pushed out, it just means you don't get as many friends in the field.
I am a Christian and also new to the film making industry, and currently working on a documentary on abortion. However, after this film I would like to make a film that has Christian values. In my opinion if you have Christian values in a film, it doesn't mean you have to cleanse it to make it pure. If a film were made of the Bible there would be a lot in there that would cause its rejection by Christians (murder, sex, incest, adultery, bloodshed).
A mature Christian should be able to hear most swear words and not have to swoon over in shock. Or see things and not be offended. That does not mean you take them to the extreme but I think portraying the world as it is, and can be an important part of conveying Christian values. That is not to say you have to include them, but if they are an integral part of the story not having them could be more harmful to the overall project. I guess it is a question of balance. I think to eliminate bad things completely is to say one can't overcome sin, or that sin does not exist. Does the moral of the story matter the most, or the story?
http://www.tahfilm.com
You make some good points, but i have a couple thoughts.
In point #3 you point out that "Add in the fact that the average heartland Christian couldn’t care less what a critic thinks–if anything, they assume they’ll feel the opposite of a movie critic–and you’ve got even less incentive for Christian filmmakers to be obsessed with quality."
I think you miss the fact that among the Christian media subculture, "Hollywood quality" is often seen as a sign of caving to "Hollywood message". So in fact many times a Christian movie COULD be better than it is, but its dumbed down so as NOT to appear that the film maker has sacrificed some of their principals to make a more "Hollywood Quality" movie.
Also, great art must make you think, it requires a bit of interpretation by the audience so a certain bit of ambiguity. This becomes difficult (if not impossible) in Christian media because of the fear that their work will be misinterpreted as secular work masquerading as Christian (many Christians fear this type of work more than outright evil secular work as they believe it is there to seduce Christians to the dark side).
Finally, there is also a tendency for Christians to create "Christian alternatives" to things that are popular in secular culture, and usually end up making second rate schlock copies (much like the "B" movie industry in Hollywood). This problem is even worse in Christian Music where every Christian band has to be the "Christian Version" of [insert secular band name here] so there's rarely any real original music.
No he's not – he's saying exactly what I was trying to say in another post, and I am very involved in my little church. I personally, every day, "walk the line" – its a shadowy line. God delights in upending all our little precious notions about Him and The Walk.
David – you said what Ive been thinking and wanting to say.
Red Dawn was the first major motion picture to get the PG-13 rating, it came out two years before Top Gun.
But in the early days of PG-13 I think they were still working out the parameters of what gets PG, PG-13 and R.
Hollywood in present context does not like Christians and certainly reviles Christianity. Thus, to make any film that's genuinely representing both or either, the very huge Hollywood budgets and distribution offerings are not available.
Thus, you don't get the theatrical-leftwing oohing and ahhing and going on press junkets and throwing fake kisses before cameras and all that.
Youd be surprised at how many fairy – tales were Christian in their concepts. Check out East of the Sun, West of the Moon.
@ BPT (Australia): very, very right, what you wrote. Being a Christian in Hollywood is to experience abject hatred and it's often so immediate and presumptive that you're out the door before you can even say, "why" or "what" or even, "well, uhh, nice to meet you."
It's a spiritual thing, it really is. Darkness hates the light.
I haven't seen anyone mention a very fine Christian movie made a few years ago called "A Perfect Stranger", a "My Dinner with Andre" premise with a woman invited to dinner with an affable, urbane Jesus. It was very well done, with an intelligent script and likable actors.
I think its ignorant that you just regurgitate the agitprop that Christians were the ones that started the Crusades, as if they just woke up one day and decided to get real mean and nasty to people theyd never even heard of! There wouldnt have been a need to take back Jerusalem if the Moon-god worshippers had not decided to invade country that wasnt even theirs and had no causal relation to worshipping the piece of rock that fell out of the sky and into their stupid sand pit.
What if I one night dream of entering your home through the window and sign papers on your kitchen table proclaiming your house is my property and the most efficient way I can do this is by taking a dump in your toilet and leaving it for you to flush…that gives me the right to show up the next day and say youre on my property doesnt it? Wouldnt YOU launch a crusade to beat me back?
The best Christian movies I've seen were the Narnia movies–based on the best Christian novels I've ever read. But it's quite possible to watch them and not even realize they're Christian, which is probably the best type of Christian movie anyway.
I'll disagree slightly, A film doesn't have to be overtly religious to be a film that Christians will enjoy and won't find offends their religious sensibilities, but in order to be called a "Christian Film" it really does have to have overt Christian themes and message.
Years ago I worked for a small printing company that did a lot of Christian printing (they had their own line of Christian T-shirt and printed for several Christian artists, Rich Mullins being probably the best known). They were members of the Christian Retailers Association, and I remember dealing with those folk several times when we'd market T-Shirt designs that were ambiguous in their Christianity … in general they didn't like us displaying such items at their conventions and tradeshows.
This is why I'm kind of on the fence in this article.. there are quite a few movies that still have while not "Overt" Christian references, some good Christian references… Of course, some have overt ones that are a little (Fargo) or a lot (Bruce Almighty) more obvious.
I'm guessing my problem is that the Christian "fundamentalists" having problems with movies that have Christian messages that have one or two bad scenes or words in them. (for instance, I know a few raised holy "he–you know what" with Bruce Almighty because of the one scene about breast size… completely ignoring the potential message, or the Fargo/Matrix issue because of some of the language/violence.).
They only seem to be happy with movies that go from point a to point b.. with no variety in them. Instead of worrying about getting the message out as best possible, they want ot make sure the message is "cookie-cutter blah" everytime… (Passion and Narnia probably being the only two exceptions I can truly think of.)
Re: what DallasJenkins wrote:
That particular group is also responsible for creating a great deal of animosity toward Christianity and grotesque content that offends Christians and even non-believers who may be modest in their tastes.
The original big-Hollywood producers, however, were not only Jewish but were Orthodox in many cases, at least remained in touch with a reverant appreciation of faith in civilization's developments (thus, the big period productions, many of which were respectful of faith beliefs, values associated with that, and remain popular today, like, say, Ben-Hur [remake] and The Ten Commandments).
What's changed is that films with a high degree of "message" about them in the context of humanity are all, today, written from the "anti" point of view: Christianity, Christian values and believers are "bad" or shaky; U.S. military is not heroic and even cryptic; U.S. as a nation is generally treated as creepy; Capitalism and Capitalists are always the very bad to satanic characters, etc.
What changed Hollywood from, say, after John Wayne's years?
@ shooglenifty: more than likely, that criticism issue is difficult because non-Christians criticize "Christian films" by criticizing Christians and Christianity, the theology is criticized as are the associated values and actions associated with that theology. The criticism is then not relevant or realistic criticism.
I guess I should clarify that there is a very big difference between the Christian Media and the Christian Audience.
I lawled @ this. . . this topic is giving me my own ideas for my own set of stories.
*MissQuinn*
That was more a makeup issue and the limitations of such of the times. Heston remains a fantastic character actor and his work in Ten Commandments can stand the test of time, in my view.
They tried to make the story of Dvid into a TV series : Kings. . . I know I watched it, and I believe either MovieBob or Maatkare had plenty good to say about it. . . It was GREAT!
But I think it's been cancelled.
*MissQuinn*
Yes! Amazing Grace was awesome. It didn't preach, it just said. . . this guy's Christianity moved him to see if he could end slavery. And he had a wicked bad laudanum addiction he had to overcome. But he did it, cause he + God= Badass. :p
*MissQuinn*
Dallas,
You make some good points but I see this perhaps changing in the coming years. There are more Christians in Hollywood than you think. Heck, check this site for starters…
I think part of it will be when "Christian" Filmmakers feel that they can make great art with a positive spiritual message even if it's not exactly adhering to what the church would whole-heartedly endorse. I'm sure many filmmakers shy away from the tag of faith-based because they feel their film might be marginalized. When this fear goes away, or becomes irrelevant perhaps (preferable) then Christian themes in cinema will thrive and compete critically and commercially with any other genre.
-M
I agree that the quality of movies that Hollywood is producing is terrible. It isn't only Christian values and Christians that are missing. Previously, many American military veterans were actors, Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable, etc. Even in the tv series "Get Smart" both Don Adams, Maxwell Smart, and Edward Platt, the Chief, were military veterans. I have enjoyed "24", but I wonder how the show would develop with some former SEALS in there; frankly, I'm getting tired of the bad guys always being crazy right wingers. I believe Christian and American ideals are represented in movies like "Rocky" which give an opening for discussions without the movie being billed as "Christian".
Christians need to financially support quality entertainment if we want more of it. Buy someone a ticket to a great movie if you don't want to go, buy the DVD, etc.
Reminds me of a quote:
"We do not fear censorship, for we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we may illuminate the bright side of virtue."
~ from "The Birth of a Nation"
A lot of the problem with "Christian films" is the quality of the product. A perfect example of how things go wrong is with any production by Peter and Paul LaLonde. The quality of their films are generally poor, the scriptwriting is incredibly lackluster, and if they decide to make a movie based on a successful book series, they screw it up by changing things around and adding things that aren't true to the original story.
One can make a film with Christian ethics and morals in it, and can make it not only entertaining but presentationally palatable. It just takes people who are hard workers and who have knowledge of what works and what doesn't.
Dallas, an excellent article which I agree wholeheartedly with. I would also like to applaud the incredible comments – the comments and your article have now become the classic example of why I visit this site.
God bless – and thank you, Dallas, for fighting the fight.
Excellent post, Joe S.
"This problem is even worse in Christian Music where every Christian band has to be the 'Christian Version"' of [insert secular band name here] so there's rarely any real original music."
So, SOUTH PARK was RIGHT!
We're not here to discuss who is more "Christian" than another. We're how to affect a culture that does not include Christ. Go take your snobbery somewhere else.
Are you positive that you were not in my film classes at APU ten years ago? Well, hopefully the rest of the Christian world is finally starting to clue in to what you are saying here. You are dead on.
I can make a better apologetical argument using Clockwork Orange than I can Fireproof.
I think youve summed it up nicely MovieBob
– I think even those of us Christians who love movies and want to see more "meat" would agree the movies should be made by Christians who's vision is influenced by their faith. Commercials For Jesus turn me off too. Somehow, the Great StoryTeller Himself would ask for a better means of getting a point across.
Tolkien was once asked if he had meant LOTR to be a Christian/Catholic story – he said something to the effect that he had no intention starting out, but that by the time he finished it had become that, unconsciously. That's at the heart of his debate with CS Lewis – should a Christian story be a deliberate allegory or should it 'rise from the spirit.' Makes for interesting thought…
Good thought. Still, let's apply some free market principles here. 1. If your audience does not demand a certain level of art, you won't strive too hard. 2. If the talent pool for Christian writing and filmmaking is too small, and the compensation too thin, you'll attract idealists but not necessarily talent. 3. If ideology is more important than art, than art loses and craft suffers. 4. if your business is meant to be a kind of safe haven for people with certain ideas, then firing people cuz they can't cut is really difficult. 5. The writer, the writer, the writer. I bet above the line script compensation is not much of an inducement in this genre. The business model should support it though, so I'd love to hear what the numbers are.
I'd be interested in some war stories from your producing/directing experience.
Good thought. Still, let's apply some free market principles here. 1. If your audience does not demand a certain level of art, you won't strive too hard. 2. If the talent pool for Christian writing and filmmaking is too small, and the compensation too thin, you'll attract idealists but not necessarily talent. 3. If ideology is more important than art, than art loses and craft suffers. 4. if your business is meant to be a kind of safe haven for people with certain ideas, then firing people cuz they can't cut is really difficult. 5. The writer, the writer, the writer. I bet above the line script compensation is not much of an inducement in this genre. The business model should support it though, so I'd love to hear what the numbers are.
I'd be interested in some war stories from your producing/directing experience.
To be fair Constantine is based off a comic.
He just attacked a whole institution. You're covering for him. True faith is a daily walk with God. I know this. You know this. The only thing I can take away with from what he said is that we are too comfortable and that is not the Christian life.
@The Lost Prophyt
I'd be careful of making sweeping generalizations about any group of people. After all, I could use mass murderers like the Columbine killers as "proof" that all atheists are bloodthirsty, gun-toting lunatics.
@S Mulder
I'm confused by your post since there already are movie adaptations of Chariots and LOTR.
@Solid Snake
That's the truth. Some of the greatest defenders of the Christian faith from the old (e.g., CS Lewis) to the new (e.g., Lee Strobel) started out as hardcore atheists.
So, plenty of Christians like yours truly can relate to walking in ChiDy's shoes.
The Spider-Man films are indeed great examples of a "secular" film with Christian values. Each film deals with how HARD it is to put others' welfare ahead of one's own comfort. The first movie underscores this point as a newly empowered and selfish Peter Parker refuses to catch a thief, who then kills his uncle. This hard lesson forces Parker to use his power more responsibly and selflessly.
The idea of men being inherently selfish and self-absorbed is definitely biblical.
Let me guess Chris, your favorite authors are Alexander Hislop and Jack Chick, right?
Let it go. Your rant is a textbook example of why the popular culture sees Christianity the way it does.
Actually Crimson, being Eastern Orthodox I would beg to differ with you on the entire "original Christian" argument, but I share your distaste for the kind of religious bigotry that Christopher Nelson espouses, if for no other reason that the same diatribes, by extension, are also leveled at the Orthodox world.
This very good article fell just short of excellent because it never said what a lot of comments went on to say – too much Christian film is pablum because too many Christians are offended by anything that strays from a simplistic juvenile vision. Jesus can't sweat, can't stub his toe, can't hit his thumb with a hammer back home in the carpenter shop, can't say anything not in the Gospels or that might call some doctrine into question. And Jesus is always handsome, even though the Bible says there was nothing comely about him. Never has a wart, or a mole, or a crooked nose, or a scar.
I am surprised than none of the comments (I admit I haven't read all) mentioned the Lord of the Rings. These are films based on novels by a Christian writer, and while they're not explicitly religious, I doubt they can be topped for virtue. Courage, loyalty, honesty, integrity, determination, they're all there. The final charge at Helm's Deep, Aragorn's speech before the Iron Gate, Faramir's obedience to his father's suicidal order, Theoden admitting they can't defeat Mordor, but "we shall meet them nevertheless." The movies celebrate the refusal to submit to evil regardless of the cost, and the determination to go down fighting in the face of overwhelming odds.
Schindler's List was R-rated and had a bare breast or two, but what a virtuous film. My wife and I saw it, then we took our two sons, then in their early teens, to see it. An older couple (probably Jewish) told us how pleased they were to see us bringing our sons. And when it came on TV, "Christian" groups protested the attempt to show it uncut.
I'm still waiting to see a list of the so-called Christian films that are so bad… I'm not even sure what a "Christian" film is–I think it's in the eye of the beholder. There are so many good examples, cited here, of films that illustrate Christian beliefs without being overt; and, to me, they qualify for the definition.
One I've not seen mentioned is The Mission. What a tremendous film, and it certainly wasn't pious in it's depiction of the Church and its faults. But, it also presented how Christ can enter the heart and change a person in unimaginable ways.
Agreed 100%.
"Christian" is a noun, not an adjective.
And yes, the community of Christians here in Hollywood is growing, slowly. This city is just a big mission field as third-world countries, and slowly I see the Church embracing that.
Many Christians still want to work in Hollywood, but have been driven away because Hollywood won't allow them to live by their own values. While they are working their way up, they have little power and no one will allow them to make the choices of what jobs they will or won't do. And if you haven't built your resume, how are you going to get the bigger roles/jobs? If a Christian actor doesn't want to play a role that he finds objectionable (for language, character ,sex or morality reasons), the actor's agent will drop him like a lead balloon. The same happens with writers and directors – the producer wants more profanity added to a script (for example), and if the artist won't do it, out they go. Even technicians are stuck working on movies/shows that are opposed to their beliefs.
Everyone thinks that Christians should just drop their beliefs when asked to. However, no one would expect someone to drop his political beliefs when asked, so it's definitely a double standard.
Pick a message you like. Clothe it in metaphor. Magic is particularly useful here because you can make up any rules that please you.If you want to elevate Capitalism, forex, make magic around the Phoenix Cycle of Creation and Destruction which matches Schumpeter's ideas of Creative Destruction. If you want to talk about the power of love and forgiveness vs. hatred, send forth some Transformative Magicians against some hateful monsters who are defeated by being restored to humanity. If you want to talk about treasonous 'friends' and perception, then you can have a village infiltrated by vampires, and a detective hunter armed with divine intuition, logic, and miracle working faith (this would be a way to discuss the Treason on the Left as the peacenik vamps would claim to want the best for the village).Magic is an infinitely flexible tool.
Another tool is to flip things around. Look at a typical liberal story, and then ask how you would use those elements in the exact opposite way………………..Dan Brown had 1)Saturday morning matinee/Indiana Jones stuff. 2)Glossy culture vulture stuff 3)Secret messages buried in plain sight. 4) A formula—'Good' guys attacked by 'bad'. 'Good' guys (conservatives, Christians, Catholics) revealed to be actually bad. Triumph of the real good guys who were thought to be the bad guys. 5)A widely known fact is revealed to be false, but at the last moment the heroes decide not to disillusion the world…………………………….Now can we 'flip this' and do unto them what they are so avidly doing to us? I think we can.
Can you look at Handmaid's Tale, and come up with a flip that has devout Christian poor families losing their children to trumped up charges by the Child Protective Service, and then the babies being sent out to rich liberal families who got to be rich by not having children when they were young, and being maniacally ambitious? Have five highly driven characters…Mom who's suicidally depressed, Dad who is deeply in mourning but willing to accomodate until he realized he's going to lose his wife as well as his child when she kills herself, a young 'on the make' CPS agent trying to make his quota so that he can afford "Proper Child Insurance" which most people can't, a rich mom who loves the new baby but hates it as well because its a rebuke to all she agreed to, a maniacally wealthy man who finds that he enjoys showing his 'baby' around the office that the baby will one day inherit. Its the year 2035, and worrying about AGW is official policy even as Los Angeles braces for its first May snowstorm.
I thought about mentioning Dead man Walking when I posted waay back on the first page and mentioned The Apostle. Dead Man Walking was one great movie…and very balanced. Heartbreaking. And yes, Christian. I am a fundamentalist Christian (oh, the horror I hear people thinking!), and I am not anti-death penalty. Nor am I really PRO death penalty either…and that movie is why.
My, aren't you just so "well-grounded" though. Egoist rather than Deist…or is that one and the same depending on the "deity"?
I agree and that is basically what I posted on the first page…showing people before salvation would require-in most cases (definitely mine and my husband's) R-rated, heartbreaking, frustrating scenes of tragic SIN. But, followed by a redemption and a path towards wholeness and new life…TRULY new life.
I don't want to open a can of worms here but when is a gay character unnecessary? Can't he/she just be a character who happens to be gay? And is that so offensive? I'm not talking about Brokeback Mountain; I'm talking about your everyday harmless romantic comedy with, for example, a secretary character who's a lesbian. Is that so bad? Or is the problem not too many gay characters but not enough religious characters? (Balance is always nice.)
As for religious films, I agree: Christian doesn't have to equal family friendly or vice versa. I'm no prude but, as a 26 year old, even I remember more family friendly movies from as recent as ten years ago. If I were 7 or 8 years old today, I'm not sure what my folks would be taking me to. Harry Potter, Spiderman, sure. But I can't think of much else. When I was a kid, we had the Muppets and Ernest Goes to… and The Sandlot and Amblin movies (like The Goonies). They weren't all squeaky clean (nor should they have been) but they were plentiful and more importantly, they were good!
It's a safe bet that myself and Christopher Nelson don't agree on a damn thing, but… man, for some reason stuff like this just makes me smile from ear to ear
This is good
Act One is an excellent program that exists to train Christians to be EXCELLENT writers, producers, executives, etc.
http://www.actoneprogram.com/
I have one response: "A Man for All Seasons."
I mean, what was to stop him from just snapping his fingers and fixing things?
Free will? Interfere with that and it's no longer free will. So, people will do bad things, terrible things, or even mildly annoying things because they can choose to do so… or not do so.
Your questions seem to indicate a desire to be taken care of, a magic wand–or snapped fingers and PRESTO! Everything's okay. How… boring.
Really? I'm an agnostic and I've noticed some unfair treatment towards Christians.
Usually it's from nitwits like yourself who feel so threatened by another belief structure that you have an overwhelming urge to post multi-paragraph, poorly-edited rants, seizing upon some perceived slight as an excuse to be a jerk.
Lacey's got a good supporting role in the new Jennifer Garner/Matthew McConaughey movie; you can see her screaming at her wedding cake's demise. And yes, she was in Hometown Legend.
I have to agree. I saw "Fireproof" and thought the themes were great but not the art. Ed Morrissey of Hotair said it did have a Lifetime Movie quality to it. This movie and others like it are going to appeal to the already-Christian audience but come off as as foreign and off-putting to others. Now Sherwood's other film "Facing the Giants" was still very Christian themed, but had a much better story and characters.
There are many other films out there that one wouldn't peg as "Christian" but have a lot of Christianity weaved into it. I think the best example is "Most," which played at the Sundance Film Festival to critical acclaim. Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0345672/
I agree that Hollywood has become an open sewer and that lack of traditional moral values is a big part of it. It's a good movie year if I find *one* movie worth bothering to see.
However, I can pretty much sum up my unease with "Christian" film in two words:
September Dawn.
The Year of the Warrior and Wolftime are both very good and very tough books. I found 'Wolftime' to be demented, but in a good way. It shows the craziness of humanity. Another very good book was The Shattered World by Kathy Tyers which for sheer craft deserves an award. Tyers wrote some less skillful, and more obvious books earlier (she does SF), and this shows the pattern of increasing skill. A writer begins usually not so hot, and then progresses to greatness or not.
[...] own movies. The other day Dallas Jenkins, director of the movie “Hometown Legend,” also helped shed some light on the subject. “The fact is, Christian movies have been pretty bad for a few decades. Yes, Hollywood had [...]
From my experience, I have to disagree. We went to see Fireproof at a theater in Athens, GA, home of the Dawgs, and a typical college town–very liberal. This was after the initial offering (actually the $1 movie) but the theater was at least 3/4's full and I was curious to see if anyone would leave once the "Christian" part became obvious. Not one person left before the movie ended. At a dollar a pop, I don't think anyone would have stayed if they had a problem, and it was a mixed audience of all ages.
Christianity has great depth- yes.
So should Christian movies – yes.
But do Christians have great depth? ummm
Art requires depth, and layers of truth and layers of reality.
If you watch Lord of the Rings and think it's just a fantasy film, your sorely mistaken.
Anyone who doesn't get this point, and is able to move past it and even if it isn't their
taste of genre probably is someone lacking depth, and doesn't care to go deeper.
Christians in general just don't go 'further up and further in' as C.S. Lewis wrote in "The Last Battle."
Going further up and further in is recognizing the desires of our hearts, and surrendering whole heartedly to the mystery of God's heart, etc. So much more to be said on this, but essentially….
When Christians find depth, and become disciplined artists who study with their hearts & their minds, then you might see a decent film. I refuse to call a film Christian, I never got the idea of calling something that isn't an individual human being Christian (which means basically, little Christ).
A G chord is a G chord.
I was giving those movies, Chariots of Fire & the Lord of the Rings series, as examples of successful movies that depict Christian values. My point is that there are similar great true stories that can be produced without attempting to make up some "Christian" movie that seems contrived. The same is true of a lot of the great literature – it promotes Christian values while entertaining, not lecturing. Agatha Christy's work, much of which hasn't been made into movies, depicts evil versus good. Alfred Hitchcock also shows a fight between evil and good. Did you see the latest Hallmark show about the life of Irena Sendler – how many untold stories are there? At a different post, I cited "Rocky" – it is entertainment that still shows core values. Again, my point is that the problem with Christian movies is that they are attempting to be Christian, Christian, Christian – not entertainment with a strong message. Entertaining movies with a strong message have been shown to be very successful – let's use the excellent resources available.
Dr. Francis Schaeffer was a Watchman on the Tower during 60s-70s-earliest 80s….Christ in the Totality of Life! If we live as a Noun (Christian), rather than Adjective (christian author, christian mom, christian cookie baker, etc.) than we will embrace all of our Creator gifting and revel in making the most of it for man's pleasure (uh, the good kind of pleasure, mind you) and God's glory. Stepping off soap box.
I have been able to talk about more Christian truths and have great conversations that provoke deep thought with my kids about the Harry Potter movies than any other movie I've seen yet. For instance, in Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix, the scene with Snape and Harry practicing Occulmency where Harry is in essence keeping out the evil mind powers of Voldemort, he is exhausted and begs Snape to let him rest a minute; but Snape's response is "The Dark Lord DOESN"T rest!". That is so powerful, the spiritual idea that as Christians we should constantly be on guard, especially if we are effective in our walk. That challenges me as an adult christian! But most of my christian friends at church shudder to think I would let my kids watch Harry Potter, let alone find christian truth in it. Perhaps part of the problem rests in Christians whose faith is too narrow, flimsy, or threatened to withstand new ways of seeing TRUTH. So, we water everything down to something safe, but it winds up being so safe in the end its unbelievable and undesireable.
Very true!
[...] Someone’s gotta ask it: Why do Christian movies suck so much? – Dallas Jenkins (Big Hollywood) [...]
Now, I'm definitely going to have to check those out. Thank you!
[...] on the Big Hollywood blog, Dallas Jenkins asks the question: “Why are Christian Movies So Bad?” Jenkins, a filmmaker and the son of “Left Behind” novelist Jerry Jenkins, points to a [...]
I am far more worried by the fact that currently, the ONLY way to present Christian truth and morality and get it green-lighted is to wrap it up in some cotton-candy confection a la Narnia, LOTR, Harry Potter, etc.
Wonderful as those movies are, and entirely counter to the entire Hollywood culture, they relegate Christianity to the ghetto of children's fairytales.
And wonderful, adult, and grown-up as "A Man For All Seasons" was, try to recall that it was made 43 years ago, before most of the Hollywood powers-that-be were even born.
Given the current crop of mediocrity posing as film, perhaps if the New Testament were presented in comic-book form, someone could find a way to film it. And then we'd be treated to Hollywood making the Gospels as boring and badly presented as most of the comic-to-cinema offerings have been.
I simply can't understand why that prospect doesn't have church leaders falling all over themselves to embrace Hollywood productions.
[...] is a good article by Dallas Jenkins in Big Hollywood about why Christian movies are so bad. He is referring basically to the US market, and raises some [...]
It's so exciting to see this many concerned Christians with such similar viewpoints. My husband and I often discuss the need for more Christians in Hollywood. I know we're here but our presence is surely not known. I agree with so many of you that our point of view does not need to come from a place of preaching. But it should come from a place of relating and reaching out to others. It needs to be a good and stimulating form of art; not only a message. If it is just a message film, it will reach such a smaller audience. If it is a film that has artistic benefit, so many others will come see it. Like Heather stated earlier, if Christians are writing, producing, and acting in films, the films will already have character. That is what we are lacking in today's movies. We can produce that! If there are this many of us out there; why aren't we coming together and doing something about it? Thank you Dallas, for putting this out there for discussion.
Apparently you must have gotten me wrong. I was not talking about who was more christian. I was talking about what was not christian, including catholicism and the Passion of the Christ. A christian only has to worry about getting souls saved. The culture is the culture, and it is what it is. Jesus was not an activist, and the bible never declares christians become activists. Just to go out and preach the word to get people saved from this dead and sinful world. I said nothing false.
I also do not know who Alexander Hislop is. As far as Jack Chick, I am against Lordship Salvation. I do not believe the bible requires one to turn from their sin to become saved in Christ. Repentance is about a change of mind about who you are, about sin and about Christ. Accept that you are a sinner doomed for hell, accept Christ as savior from your sins, free from all religion, or good deeds, or anything else. Simply faith alone through grace alone. My rant was biblically true.
I did NOT get you wrong – in fact I will go one further: you are a bigot for calling Catholics non-Christian and automatically lose any credibility in your argument about the meaning of following Christ. People like you are TEDIOUS. Go get a real education in the history of the church before you engage in a thread like this.
GOOD BYE
A bigot? No, I am accurate. Catholicism is not christian. Read any bible for two seconds and you should come to the same conclusion. Sorry if I am not into the whole ecumenical thing, but I rather be biblical, thanks. Get a real education in the bible before you call me names. The problem is, I do know the history of the catholic church.
Chris,
If you had any knowledge at all of Church history you would know that it was that one, ancient, undivided church that gave you the Bible in the first place. Christ did not say he would write a book, he came to build His church. The Church was an organized body for years before any new Testament writings were penned. The Bible did not just fall out of heaven. It is a product of the Church. The books of the Bible were carefully chosen, codified, and canonized by the learned Saints and Fathers of the Church after many years of intense scrutiny and through a series of Councils of Bishops to ascertain which documents were authentic and which were false. But you know better than they did, right?
I am at my wits end constantly trying to explain these simple facts to Biblical fundamentalists like yourself who seem to believe that I am going to hell if I refuse to believe that the Earth was LITERALLY created in six 24 hour time cycles. Newsflash, many of the greatest Saints of the Nicene period did not believe that either. The Bible is not the source of Christianity. Unfortunately too many worship the book rather than God.
For the record I should state that I am not even Roman Catholic. I am Greek Orthodox, and as such I have many disagreements and criticisms of Rome as many Protestants do. But when I see theis kind of inane ignorance being spouted I cannot keep silent, as it usually by extension is levelled at the Orthodox as well
I am glad you are an expert on christian history. But that has nothing to do with catholicism and the fact that it is not biblical. I know full well about the bible and how it was formed. Again, this has nothing to do with catholicism, so I don't see your issue. I would say that the bible is the product of many many inspired men, including jews such as moses with Genesis. Writing it, and putting it into order are two different issues. Strange you bring that up anyway.
You are going to hell if you are an unrepentant, unsaved sinner. Not taking Genesis literally just makes you wrong. You obviously lack basic biblical understanding. The bible is the very word of God, God breathed. So again you confuse me with your bible bashing.
For the Record, I do not find Greek Orthodox very biblical either. So that may be a reason why I upset you. I am a bible believer, I actually believe the bible. I don't use man made traditions, I use the bible to guide me. I don't perform 7 Sacraments for my salvation, which is completely and only through Christ Jesus alone. Catholicism and Orthodox are very closely related anyway. Nothing ignorant about the truth.
To begin with I am willing to bet that you are completely ignorant of Orthodox theology. Name three Orthodox Saints from The Nicean period.
And no Chris, you don't believe the Bible, you believe in your OWN interpretation of the Bible. Big difference. There are over 20,000 different Protestant denominations that hold fast to Sola Scriptura. It is still incumbent upon you to explain why your understanding of the Bible is correct and twenty centuries of unbroken Orthodox teaching is wrong.
And give the cliche about "man-made traditions" a rest. Christ introduced these through his Apostles. FACT: Sacramental, liturgical worship was how the ancient Church operated. There are volumes of written evidence to prove this. Look up a document called the Didache for starters. I do feel that Rome has deviated and introduced flawed teaching, but that us another argument.
Let me reiterate: Christianity does not come from the Bible. The Bible is the creation of Christianity. As such there are many things which the Bible does not explain, but the Holy Tradition of the Church does. The Church would still exist even if the New Testament had never been written.
Christ's admonition was against FALSE traditions. He himself kept every law and commandment of the Old Testament perfectly and followed every external rule of worship. I don't expect that I'll change your mind. But if you won't listen to me at least listen to St. Paul:
"Therefore brethren, stand fast, and hold the TRADITIONS which you have been taught, whether by word or our epistle." 2nd Thessalonians 2:15
"We command you brethren, in th name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the TRADITION he received of us." 2nd Thessalonians 3:6
These are all part of HOLY Tradition, of which the Bible is a part. 1st Timothy also states that the Church, NOT the Bible, is "the pillar and ground of the truth."
"'Keep the TRADITIONS as I delivered them to you." 1st Corinthians 11:2
Sola Scriptura is a man-made tradition.
Straw man my friend. I am not bashing the Bible. I simply refuse to make it into something it was never intended to be. What you are doing is practicing Bibliolatry. I agree, the Bible is God breathed. So was the Oral teaching of the Apostles and those who followed them, so were the Ecumenical Councils who put the many books of the Bible together and who defended true doctrine against various heresies that plagued the early Church. The Holy Spirit abides within the Church, and as Jesus said it is the Holy Spirit that will guide it into all truth, NOT the Bible.
You shouldn't believe in Christ because the Bible tells you to. If you do then the Bible is your God and not Christ. You should however, believe and revere the Bible because it is one of Christ's gifts to us through His Church.
The first Christians in the Roman Empire had no New Testament for decades. By your reasoning then they are less Christian than you, right? And again, some of the greatest minds of the early church did not take the Genesis account of creation literally. Why are they wrong and you right?
Christ Said: Matthew 5:17 , "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil". Then ofcourse Paul said :
'Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." Colossians 2:16-17
The bible is : 2 Timothy 3:16 , All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
"the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35
Thus there is only one written source from God, and there is only one basis of truth for the Lord's people in the Church.
"Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God" (Matthew 22:29)
Christ Jesus continually castigated and rebuked the Pharisees because they made their tradition on a par with the Word of God. He condemned them because they were attempting to corrupt the very basis of truth by equating their traditions to the Word of God. So He declared to them in Mark 7:13 "[You are] making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such things do ye." Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the ultimate authority ,and it alone is the final judge of Tradition.
Sola Scriptura is biblical.
Isaiah 8:20 is: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." The truth is this: since God's written word alone is inspired, it and it alone is the sole rule of faith. It cannot be otherwise.
Proverbs 30:5,6 "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
If the traditions are not biblical, then they are not of God, period.
I know that you are a devout Christian, and I respect your passion in this argument, so it pains me to ask this, but are you blind or just stupid? You obviously have not paid attention to anything I have stated, instead being content to repeatedly set up your straw man to knock down.
Explain how Traditions that came before the Bible, which the Apostles themselves practiced and taught, could be compared against the writings of Scripture when said writings DID NOT EXIST.
Do you believe in the Trinity? The word never appears in the Bible. Do you worship on Sunday? There is NO command in Scripture to do this.
We are going in circles here. Until you can explain to me why except for your own pride you believe you are right when fifteen centuries of scholarly unbroken Church teaching are wrong, you have no argument. Until then your argument is that of a kindergartner covering his ears chanting "lalala".
Sigh. I really wish I hadn't initiated the throwing back and forth of Bible quotes.
NOT ONE of those Scriptural quotes gives your argument any creedence. None of them states that ONLY Scripture is to be obeyed. NOWHERE in the bible does it say that the Bible is the sole authority. You keep ignoring the fact that no almost New Testament writings existed at the time St. Paul wrote his letters, and he did not expect them to be canonized as Scripture.
If you remove the Bible from the context of the Church's Tradition, one can make it mean whatever they want. You should listen to St. Peter in this regard:
2nd Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation."
Unfortunately interpreting Scripture the way that every individual sees fit is the basis of Protestant theology. If Sola Scriptura is Biblical, why are there over 20,000 different denominations who all claim to follow it, but none of them can agree? Martin Luther (who in case you didn't know, tried to remove the book of James because it contradicted his opinions) even stated that instead of one Pope he had created a thousand Popes.
"Sola Scriptura is Biblical."
Really? Quote me chapter and verse where this is stated. You are beginning to sound like a child on the playground: "Is not!" "Is too!" "Is not!" "IS TOO!" And you don't seem to understand the difference between the false traditions of men and the Holy Tradition of the Church.
"Scripture alone is the ultimate authority."
You are partially correct. Scripture is part of the Holy Tradition, albeit the most important part. All other parts of Tradition are measured against it. But you can't claim to understand what the bible teaches if you doon't know the context of its formation. Most people are completely oblivious to what the Consititution means because they are completely ignorant of earlier documents ike the Federalist Papers.
"Scripture alone is inspired."
Sorry. Dead wrong. You are making the Bible sound like a magic book. The MEN who wrote and taught were inspired, whether their teachings ended up in the Bible or not.
Why didn't Jesus just write the New Testament himself? He appointed the twelve Apostles to spread the faith, and He didn't demand that they do it through writing. Only four of those men penned Biblical books. But they all had the Holy Spirit breathed into them, they all went to far away lands to establish the faith, and eleven of them met agonizing deaths for their faith. But by your reasoning they were not authentic because they didn't have the New Testament. Apparently the many thousands of martyrs in the Empire are less Christian than you because they had no Bible. is this what you are saying? I'd really like an answer.
you can check out a great Christian movie at http://www.nglmovie.com – coming out very soon.
[...] Blogger Dallas Jenkins writes and insightful piece for Big Hollywood, asking, “Why Are Christi… [...]
[...] Why are Christian Movies So Bad? Filed under: 1 — jesusfreak7 @ 5:29 pm Why are Christian Movies So Bad? [...]
I can't agree with you more – on all of your points. As an evangelical Christian, and raised in a very strong Christian home, I faced all of the obstacles you mentioned. It took me years to get up my nerve to say I wanted to study film – and *gasp* do so in the secular market. I'm privileged that my parents did not discourage this (much to my surprise) and I was able to attend one of the best film schools in the world.
To this day, when I return home, family and friends ask if I want to work in Christian film. And my answer is always NO! – because the quality of "Christian film" is almost always horror-inducing. Of course, by doing this, I'm contributing to the problem, not the solution; it would be a pleasure to see the rise of a Christian film genre that's not embarrassing – and, best of all, the integration of Christian characters into secular films. That's something I could sign up for!
[...] the title of an article written recently by Dallas Jenkins, a friend and filmmaker. He makes great points [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.