Larry Rutledge
Fest Master
I read this thread yesterday with a great deal of interest as the topic is something that is very near and dear to my heart.
There were a lot of great things said, but it would take forever to quote the different comments and respond to them. Instead I'll just lay out my thoughts on the subject and hope I don't re-tread any discussions from previous posts.
But first let me address the comment about the comparison between Fireproof and No Greater Love. I have watched both trailers and really don't see the connection, other than themes of love and God, but the story and content don't match up, IMHO. Also, having been involved behind the scenes during script development and editing I can verify that they are very different stories.
Ok, back to the subject under discussion . . . I believe that when you talk about Christian Films there are a couple distinctions that have to be considered. In my estimation there are three different types of Christian films and they fill very specific roles.
First, there is the film that should carry the moniker "Christian Film" as it is created by Christians and is created for Christians. Its sole purpose is as a ministry tool to encourage and build up a Christian audience.
Second, there is the film that is a proselytizing tool. It is made by Christians, for a clearly non-Christian audience. Its purpose is to propagate the Gospel and serve as a secondary tool to face-to-face witnessing (sharing the Gospel).
And, third, there is the message film. It is a film made by Christians, for a mixed Christian and non-Christian audience. It's purpose is to spread a message, whether a message of hope, correction, instruction, encouragement, etc is up to the story teller.
What all three of these have in common is that they are "made by Christians". That is not too say a non-Christian couldn't also make these films, but what we are discussing here is what makes a "Christian film". In my opinion that is it.
Where I think the church has, to date, failed in this endeavor is they assume that because they are doing a project "as a Christian" it is REQUIRED to force-feed the Gospel message; and, second, they assume that because it is a religious project they cannot expect, nor look for, proper funds to meet the need of the endeavor.
Film making is not cheap. To do properly it requires a great deal of money. The church, for some reason, has this mentality that to spend a lot of money is wasteful (the money could be used to feed poor kids, etc, etc, etc). But the expertise, knowledge, experience, and equipment that go into making a film are worth spending the money they demand. As a result, they resort to doing it "on the cheap" and the end product shows it.
We have seen some recent examples that show doing it the right way produces dramatic results (End of the Spear, Passion, etc).
Where I think the church, thus far, has failed in embracing the medium of film is just that...they have not embraced the medium of film. For every method of communicating information there is a specific method that works for that medium. For some reason, when the church gets a hold of a particular medium of communication they try to cram a sermon into that mold. When they brought drama back into the church it became a visual, acted out sermon. When they went to radio and tv they simply created segments consisting of sermons. And now, with film, they are creating visual sermons that are projected onto a wall.
The problem with this is that the people that don't go to church because they don't want to hear a sermon also don't go to church for a play (because its a thinly veiled sermon), turn the radio and/or tv channel because its just a sermon and don't go to movies that look like sermons.
As we know, the medium of film follows the adage, "show, don't tell" ... so if we want to convey a message using the medium of film we must find a way to show the Gospel message in action, not just have people force feed it via long speeches. And it must be believable, not these out of the blue, unmotivated conversions like we saw with Cameron's character in Left Behind.
I am reminded of my least favorite moment of all the Star Wars movies (I know, not a "Christian" film, but bear with me a moment). In Episode 3 when Anakin finally turns to the dark side he is in the room where Palpatine has tricked Mace Windu and ultimately kills him. Anakin says (and I'm strongly paraphrasing to make a point): "I won't do it, I won't change to the dark side...no, I won't do it ... ok, I'll do whatever you say". Yes, we "know" what was going on that drove him to that decision and ultimate "conversion", but we don't really "see" it. It's the same with Christian films, like the Left Behind example I cited above.
If you look in the New Testament, while Christ was here on the Earth, He had two methods for speaking to the people. When he was talking to the religious people he spoke plainly and used scripture in his message. But when he spoke to the non-religious he spoke only in parables.
This was not an attempt to disguise, or hide, the true message of what He was trying to say. But rather was a way to explain the Gospel in a manner that the people could readily understand. If you look at each of the parables, and their content, they relate to everyday activies that these people either were involved in directly and/or had witnessed in the world around them.
When asked why he spoke in parables He would say, "Those who have ears to hear, let them hear". He knew that whether he spoke plainly or in stories, it mattered little if the people listening didn't care to hear/comprehend the content of the message.
This is what a Christian film should do. It needs to tell a story that makes sense in the world we live in, but at the same time has an underlying meaning that is clear to those who are interested in looking deeper.
Another big issue that Christian films run into is the issue of Deus ex Machina ... or salvation from the gods. Because if you look at a film like Facing the Giants, that is what you see. On the surface the message of that film is, if you turn your life over to God everything will go your way and you'll get all your hearts desires.
Without getting into a theological discussion, suffice it to say, that is not a true depiction of the Christian life. But on the flipside, as a Christian you do have God working for you, not against you, and so there are times when a matter is resolved because God steps in and makes it happen ... the parting of the Red Sea, for example. When the Israelites were fleeing Egypt they came upon this great sea that was impassable and the Egyptians were hot on their heels. Then God tells Moses to stretch his rod over the water and when he does, God parts the water and they pass on dry land. That is the true account, but it plays as deus ex machina in storytelling.
Obviously, when telling a true account, such as the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt you can rely on the fact that people know the true story so it works. But when telling a fictional story about a high school football coach who suddenly gets to keep his house, gets a new truck (gratis), his wife gets pregnant, he keeps his job, and they win the big game because the wind suddenly changes direction at just the right moment ... sorry, you lost me. Even as a Christian who knows God can do all that, while watching the film I found myself at the end praying that the wind wouldn't change .... but of course it did.
So, I've said a lot here ... and I hope I haven't wandered in circles like the Israelites did in the desert
I think about this a lot so I have a lot to say ... I just hope I said it in a way that was coherent and can be followed
I think as Christians we need to understand what kind of film we are making. Just because we are a Christian doesn't mean we have to make a "Christian film" either. It is possible to just make a regular film that people will enjoy (e.g. Ralph Winter - producer of X-Men and Fantastic Four).
I guess I'll stop there ... I could probably go on and on and you're probably hoping I don't
Peace,
Larry
There were a lot of great things said, but it would take forever to quote the different comments and respond to them. Instead I'll just lay out my thoughts on the subject and hope I don't re-tread any discussions from previous posts.
But first let me address the comment about the comparison between Fireproof and No Greater Love. I have watched both trailers and really don't see the connection, other than themes of love and God, but the story and content don't match up, IMHO. Also, having been involved behind the scenes during script development and editing I can verify that they are very different stories.
Ok, back to the subject under discussion . . . I believe that when you talk about Christian Films there are a couple distinctions that have to be considered. In my estimation there are three different types of Christian films and they fill very specific roles.
First, there is the film that should carry the moniker "Christian Film" as it is created by Christians and is created for Christians. Its sole purpose is as a ministry tool to encourage and build up a Christian audience.
Second, there is the film that is a proselytizing tool. It is made by Christians, for a clearly non-Christian audience. Its purpose is to propagate the Gospel and serve as a secondary tool to face-to-face witnessing (sharing the Gospel).
And, third, there is the message film. It is a film made by Christians, for a mixed Christian and non-Christian audience. It's purpose is to spread a message, whether a message of hope, correction, instruction, encouragement, etc is up to the story teller.
What all three of these have in common is that they are "made by Christians". That is not too say a non-Christian couldn't also make these films, but what we are discussing here is what makes a "Christian film". In my opinion that is it.
Where I think the church has, to date, failed in this endeavor is they assume that because they are doing a project "as a Christian" it is REQUIRED to force-feed the Gospel message; and, second, they assume that because it is a religious project they cannot expect, nor look for, proper funds to meet the need of the endeavor.
Film making is not cheap. To do properly it requires a great deal of money. The church, for some reason, has this mentality that to spend a lot of money is wasteful (the money could be used to feed poor kids, etc, etc, etc). But the expertise, knowledge, experience, and equipment that go into making a film are worth spending the money they demand. As a result, they resort to doing it "on the cheap" and the end product shows it.
We have seen some recent examples that show doing it the right way produces dramatic results (End of the Spear, Passion, etc).
Where I think the church, thus far, has failed in embracing the medium of film is just that...they have not embraced the medium of film. For every method of communicating information there is a specific method that works for that medium. For some reason, when the church gets a hold of a particular medium of communication they try to cram a sermon into that mold. When they brought drama back into the church it became a visual, acted out sermon. When they went to radio and tv they simply created segments consisting of sermons. And now, with film, they are creating visual sermons that are projected onto a wall.
The problem with this is that the people that don't go to church because they don't want to hear a sermon also don't go to church for a play (because its a thinly veiled sermon), turn the radio and/or tv channel because its just a sermon and don't go to movies that look like sermons.
As we know, the medium of film follows the adage, "show, don't tell" ... so if we want to convey a message using the medium of film we must find a way to show the Gospel message in action, not just have people force feed it via long speeches. And it must be believable, not these out of the blue, unmotivated conversions like we saw with Cameron's character in Left Behind.
I am reminded of my least favorite moment of all the Star Wars movies (I know, not a "Christian" film, but bear with me a moment). In Episode 3 when Anakin finally turns to the dark side he is in the room where Palpatine has tricked Mace Windu and ultimately kills him. Anakin says (and I'm strongly paraphrasing to make a point): "I won't do it, I won't change to the dark side...no, I won't do it ... ok, I'll do whatever you say". Yes, we "know" what was going on that drove him to that decision and ultimate "conversion", but we don't really "see" it. It's the same with Christian films, like the Left Behind example I cited above.
If you look in the New Testament, while Christ was here on the Earth, He had two methods for speaking to the people. When he was talking to the religious people he spoke plainly and used scripture in his message. But when he spoke to the non-religious he spoke only in parables.
This was not an attempt to disguise, or hide, the true message of what He was trying to say. But rather was a way to explain the Gospel in a manner that the people could readily understand. If you look at each of the parables, and their content, they relate to everyday activies that these people either were involved in directly and/or had witnessed in the world around them.
When asked why he spoke in parables He would say, "Those who have ears to hear, let them hear". He knew that whether he spoke plainly or in stories, it mattered little if the people listening didn't care to hear/comprehend the content of the message.
This is what a Christian film should do. It needs to tell a story that makes sense in the world we live in, but at the same time has an underlying meaning that is clear to those who are interested in looking deeper.
Another big issue that Christian films run into is the issue of Deus ex Machina ... or salvation from the gods. Because if you look at a film like Facing the Giants, that is what you see. On the surface the message of that film is, if you turn your life over to God everything will go your way and you'll get all your hearts desires.
Without getting into a theological discussion, suffice it to say, that is not a true depiction of the Christian life. But on the flipside, as a Christian you do have God working for you, not against you, and so there are times when a matter is resolved because God steps in and makes it happen ... the parting of the Red Sea, for example. When the Israelites were fleeing Egypt they came upon this great sea that was impassable and the Egyptians were hot on their heels. Then God tells Moses to stretch his rod over the water and when he does, God parts the water and they pass on dry land. That is the true account, but it plays as deus ex machina in storytelling.
Obviously, when telling a true account, such as the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt you can rely on the fact that people know the true story so it works. But when telling a fictional story about a high school football coach who suddenly gets to keep his house, gets a new truck (gratis), his wife gets pregnant, he keeps his job, and they win the big game because the wind suddenly changes direction at just the right moment ... sorry, you lost me. Even as a Christian who knows God can do all that, while watching the film I found myself at the end praying that the wind wouldn't change .... but of course it did.
So, I've said a lot here ... and I hope I haven't wandered in circles like the Israelites did in the desert
I think about this a lot so I have a lot to say ... I just hope I said it in a way that was coherent and can be followed I think as Christians we need to understand what kind of film we are making. Just because we are a Christian doesn't mean we have to make a "Christian film" either. It is possible to just make a regular film that people will enjoy (e.g. Ralph Winter - producer of X-Men and Fantastic Four).
I guess I'll stop there ... I could probably go on and on and you're probably hoping I don't
Peace,
Larry
