Making movies
28/03/14 05:31
I have colleagues who go to quite a few popular movies and who are far more qualified to comment on film than I. I have never found movies to be my favorite form of artwork. The truth is that I am not the world’s biggest fan of the visual arts when it comes to interpreting the Bible. I could write paragraphs about how attempts to portray Biblical stories in visual arts limits instead of expands religious imagination. There is something distinctly powerful about language as a vehicle to explore religious truths that is fully engaging.
Having said that, I am aware that there is a powerful connection between art and religion. The years that we worked on The Inviting Word project with its deep appreciation for the visual arts have been formative in my understanding of faith. And I put a lot of effort and energy into the selection of visual images for worship bulletins. Additionally the relationship between music and worship is worthy of many blogs.
So I am not sure what makes me so skeptical when approaching a movie that attempts to portray parts of the Biblical narrative. It is accurate, I think, to say that I don’t expect much from movies when it comes to telling religious truths or interpreting the Biblical narrative.
I’ve watched the 1956 epic movie, The Ten Commandments, a couple of times, and I’ve watched portions of on many occasions. The movie now fails to capture my imagination when it comes to understanding the Bible. Maybe it never was much on that score. It is still interesting to me that so much effort, expense and passion was invested in a particularly narrow interpretation of the Bible. I guess I just don’t imagine that the voice of God would sound like Charlton Heston. Nor do I imagine that so many people of European descent would have inhabited Egypt in the time of the pharaohs. They spent a lot of money and they made a lot of money but it doesn’t seem that the movie really added anything to the deeper understanding of faith.
I had a similar reaction to The Passion of the Christ. I finally went to see the movie because so many people were watching it and I felt that I was at a loss to comment about something I had not seen. I guess I contributed to the whopping $612 million that the 2004 movie hauled in. I don’t think that it had much of an impact on my faith or my understanding of Biblical religion. Passion plays are a particular niche of religious drama and we in the hills have some experience with such productions, with the home of the Black Hills Passion Play nearby in Spearfish for so many years. For me personally, the reading of the actual biblical texts each holy week has had a much deeper impact on my understanding of the nature of faith than any movie. Quite frankly, I was distracted by the many and frequent deviations from the biblical narrative in the movie. The personality of Hollywood box office stars and the heroes of the Bible are not very similar and it takes more than good acting to mask the differences between called by God and out to make millions. King Solomon is perhaps the Bibles greatest seeker of fame and fortune, but it is impossible to understand his role in the story of the relationship of God and the people of God without a careful reading of the great prophets who call the people away from his excesses into a deeper relationship with God.
But it seems that there are big profits to be made from Biblical stories and the latest attempt is the just-released studio-made, mass-audience Bible epic, “Noah” staring Russell Crowe and directed by Darren Aronofsky. The stir of criticism that usually accompanies such movies has already started. Like any work of art, it strays from the Bible by filling in all kinds of details that are not part of the sacred text. As such it is easy to criticize such a venture as having strayed from Biblical truth. I don’t have to have seen the movie to have doubts arise in my mind. The press photos of Crowe with co-star Jennifer Connelly are enough for me to know that the way the movie portrays the story is distant from the way I read it. Despite copious amounts of black coloring in Crowe’s beard, the double fail to have the ethnic heritage of the residents of the ancient mideast.
I don’t know if I will even watch the movie. Frankly, it isn’t very appealing to me. But I often end up reading popular books or going to popular movies just to be able to intelligently discuss them with the people who have seen them, so I’m not ruling out a trip to the theatre at some future point. I just don’t hold out much hope for movies to extend the understanding of Biblical truths or contribute to the deepening of faith. The same applies to “Son of God,” “God’s Noe Dead” and the soon-to-be-released “Heaven is for Real.” It also applies to the much hyped prequel to “The Passion of the Christ” movie about Mary Magdalene co-produced by mega-church pastor Joel Osteen.
There is something about the intersection of religion, art and commerce that seems to lean too heavily on commerce and too lightly on religion for my sensibilities. I suspect that deep biblical faith leads one way from profits instead of toward wealth. And making money is a huge part of the process of making movies.
Having said that, I don’t think that the various movies are much of a threat to genuine biblical faith. I don’t think that the movie will turn non-believers into believers, but I also don’t think it will corrupt the faith of people who see it as only one source of interpretation of the Biblical narrative.
One cannot help but wonder, however, if the $130 million they spent making the movie might have had a deeper impact on the faith of people if invested in feeding hungry children or seeking justice for victims of human trafficking. That much we’ll never know. The people who invested in the film have no reason to seek my advice about what they should do with their money.
So far, that has worked out pretty well. We have not needed such big amounts of money to practice our faith in our little corner of God’s world.
The real question is whether I’ll spend the money on a ticket to see the movie or instead add it to my gift to the next Habitat for Humanity project. Right now, I’m leaning towards investing in the house.
Having said that, I am aware that there is a powerful connection between art and religion. The years that we worked on The Inviting Word project with its deep appreciation for the visual arts have been formative in my understanding of faith. And I put a lot of effort and energy into the selection of visual images for worship bulletins. Additionally the relationship between music and worship is worthy of many blogs.
So I am not sure what makes me so skeptical when approaching a movie that attempts to portray parts of the Biblical narrative. It is accurate, I think, to say that I don’t expect much from movies when it comes to telling religious truths or interpreting the Biblical narrative.
I’ve watched the 1956 epic movie, The Ten Commandments, a couple of times, and I’ve watched portions of on many occasions. The movie now fails to capture my imagination when it comes to understanding the Bible. Maybe it never was much on that score. It is still interesting to me that so much effort, expense and passion was invested in a particularly narrow interpretation of the Bible. I guess I just don’t imagine that the voice of God would sound like Charlton Heston. Nor do I imagine that so many people of European descent would have inhabited Egypt in the time of the pharaohs. They spent a lot of money and they made a lot of money but it doesn’t seem that the movie really added anything to the deeper understanding of faith.
I had a similar reaction to The Passion of the Christ. I finally went to see the movie because so many people were watching it and I felt that I was at a loss to comment about something I had not seen. I guess I contributed to the whopping $612 million that the 2004 movie hauled in. I don’t think that it had much of an impact on my faith or my understanding of Biblical religion. Passion plays are a particular niche of religious drama and we in the hills have some experience with such productions, with the home of the Black Hills Passion Play nearby in Spearfish for so many years. For me personally, the reading of the actual biblical texts each holy week has had a much deeper impact on my understanding of the nature of faith than any movie. Quite frankly, I was distracted by the many and frequent deviations from the biblical narrative in the movie. The personality of Hollywood box office stars and the heroes of the Bible are not very similar and it takes more than good acting to mask the differences between called by God and out to make millions. King Solomon is perhaps the Bibles greatest seeker of fame and fortune, but it is impossible to understand his role in the story of the relationship of God and the people of God without a careful reading of the great prophets who call the people away from his excesses into a deeper relationship with God.
But it seems that there are big profits to be made from Biblical stories and the latest attempt is the just-released studio-made, mass-audience Bible epic, “Noah” staring Russell Crowe and directed by Darren Aronofsky. The stir of criticism that usually accompanies such movies has already started. Like any work of art, it strays from the Bible by filling in all kinds of details that are not part of the sacred text. As such it is easy to criticize such a venture as having strayed from Biblical truth. I don’t have to have seen the movie to have doubts arise in my mind. The press photos of Crowe with co-star Jennifer Connelly are enough for me to know that the way the movie portrays the story is distant from the way I read it. Despite copious amounts of black coloring in Crowe’s beard, the double fail to have the ethnic heritage of the residents of the ancient mideast.
I don’t know if I will even watch the movie. Frankly, it isn’t very appealing to me. But I often end up reading popular books or going to popular movies just to be able to intelligently discuss them with the people who have seen them, so I’m not ruling out a trip to the theatre at some future point. I just don’t hold out much hope for movies to extend the understanding of Biblical truths or contribute to the deepening of faith. The same applies to “Son of God,” “God’s Noe Dead” and the soon-to-be-released “Heaven is for Real.” It also applies to the much hyped prequel to “The Passion of the Christ” movie about Mary Magdalene co-produced by mega-church pastor Joel Osteen.
There is something about the intersection of religion, art and commerce that seems to lean too heavily on commerce and too lightly on religion for my sensibilities. I suspect that deep biblical faith leads one way from profits instead of toward wealth. And making money is a huge part of the process of making movies.
Having said that, I don’t think that the various movies are much of a threat to genuine biblical faith. I don’t think that the movie will turn non-believers into believers, but I also don’t think it will corrupt the faith of people who see it as only one source of interpretation of the Biblical narrative.
One cannot help but wonder, however, if the $130 million they spent making the movie might have had a deeper impact on the faith of people if invested in feeding hungry children or seeking justice for victims of human trafficking. That much we’ll never know. The people who invested in the film have no reason to seek my advice about what they should do with their money.
So far, that has worked out pretty well. We have not needed such big amounts of money to practice our faith in our little corner of God’s world.
The real question is whether I’ll spend the money on a ticket to see the movie or instead add it to my gift to the next Habitat for Humanity project. Right now, I’m leaning towards investing in the house.