How are Christian films so awful?

[TevereNauta]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gospel_According_to_St.Matthew(film)

One of the best movies ever about Christ’s Life IMHO, and about the nature of Christ. Powerful, like TNT…and I don’t normally like ‘old’ movies either!

 

[patrick457]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gospel_According_to_St.Matthew(film)

One of the best movies ever about Christ’s Life IMHO, and about the nature of Christ. Powerful, like TNT…and I don’t normally like ‘old’ movies either!

Also a favorite of mine. Sorry if I quote myself:

1.) Il Vangelo secondo Matteo, aka The Gospel according to St. Matthew (1964): Widely considered to be one of the best films in the genre, poet-turned-film director Pier Paolo Pasolini’s film about Jesus is all the more remarkable considering that Pasolini was a nonbeliever, indeed a homosexual and a Marxist. Its cast of non-actors (all in the tradition of Italian neorealism), its black-and-white photography, and somewhat deliberate minimalistic, low-budget, dare I even say anachronistic, feel - worlds away from the grandiose epics - ironically gives out a sense of realism more than Hollywood could ever produce. Pasolini’s Jesus is far removed from the ‘meek and mild’ Christ of holy cards: here, He is on fire, always on the move while delivering His words in the strongest terms possible with revolutionary zeal and urgency. Take for example the film’s version of the the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) and the seven Woes to the Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23:1-39).

Pier Paolo Pasolini was a highly complicated figure: as mentioned, he is an overt homosexual, an atheist (though with Catholic roots), and a left-wing Communist, who had underwent a lot of grief a number of times because of his views. He had also made quite a number of controversial films, both before and after making Matthew: his final film, Salò (1975, Bbased on the 120 Days of Sodom by the Marquis de Sade), was literally one scene after another of excessive and intensely sadistic violence.

But ironically, despite being a non-believer, Pasolini had managed to make one of the best films about Jesus there are. Or should I say, precisely because he was a non-believer, that he was able to make the movie as it is: he apparently never had the baggage Christians usually carry (like the ones we’ve been discussing in this thread ) when portraying the subject. He just wanted to show the story itself, without any in-your-face preachiness.

 

[randy735588]

thanks dear this is nice information, i like this post…

 

[SGTTOM]

I am offended by this thread. Angels in the Outfield was one of the best movies of all time!

Its cheesy buts its not a horrid movie, not the best of all time either though .

A Wonderful Life is one of the best films of all time though

 

[KevinAK]

Has anyone seen the film Vito Bonafacci? It’s screening here this weekend and I was curious as to if it was worth the time?

 

[wondrousgnat]

I believe Hollywood is pretty reluctant to make Christian films. The ones we do see can be highly distorted theologically, low budget, written, produced and acted by amateurs.

 

[patrick457]

Speaking of which though, I find it quite telling that evangelicals prefer movies bad religious movies/fiction while having everything from no interest to outright condemnation towards anything with fantastical elements (even Disney movies). You’d think Prince of Egypt might be the exception but apparently it’s just as much a pro-Jewish movie as it is a Christian one.

Well, that film uses Jewish midrashim to fill in the gaps, after all.

 

[CesarAugustus]

Yep, that’s pretty much why I generally avoid films who carry the label. Though to be fair, I find some old Catholic films who carry the same feel (take the famed movie The Miracle of Our Lady of Fatima).

It’s because of the stigmas that I’ve come to avoid putting the Christian label on the things I write. I put in religious elements sure but only so I can have something to contrast against the more realistic concepts/elements and blunt concepts that I try to express in my stories.

Lots of “Christian entertainment” is Protestant or Evangelical, so maybe that explains the approach and the quality… and the sad thing is that some Catholics want to apply the same style to Catholic productions.

God Bless you!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Well, that film uses Jewish midrashim to fill in the gaps, after all.

Yep and apparently isn’t afraid to look up Egyptian mythology either.

By the power of Ra! >BD

Lots of “Christian entertainment” is Protestant or Evangelical, so maybe that explains the approach and the quality… and the sad thing is that some Catholics want to apply the same style to Catholic productions.

Agreed. It’s gotten to the point that the only good ‘Catholic’ movie or story for me is one that’s not afraid to shift more than half the focus to its non-religious elements.

 

[mamaslo]

Tyler Perry’s movies are campy, melodramatic fun - like a really bad Joan Crawford movie - and he manages to have Christian messages in all of 'em. I loved his latest movie “Good Deeds,” which will remind most people of that Will Smith movie “Seven Pounds.” However, I do think Tyler Perry’s dramas are infinitely superior to his comedies. (I still don’t “get” those Madea movies.)

I like the Madea character and the Mr Brown character, but I cannot stand Tyler Perry’s Theology…bah.

You don’t have to “get” Madea, she is total comic relief. She has some things in there that are good, but mostly she is just funny.

 

[patrick457]

Lots of “Christian entertainment” is Protestant or Evangelical, so maybe that explains the approach and the quality… and the sad thing is that some Catholics want to apply the same style to Catholic productions.

God Bless you!

Unfortunately, yes. In many areas, the term ‘Christian’ seems to be used as a synonym for ‘Evangelical Protestant’.

 

[Diotima]

Blogger Simcha Fischer just posted some thoughts on this topic:

ncregister.com/blog/simcha-fisher/good-for-you-vs.-just-plain-good/

 

[LovePatience]

Here are 6 reasons young people leave the church.
christianitytoday.com/le/2012/winter/youngleavechurch.html

Isolationism. One-fourth of 18- to 29-year-olds say church demonizes everything outside church, including the music, movies, culture, and technology that define their generation.

Shallowness. One-third call church boring, about one-fourth say faith is irrelevant and Bible teaching is unclear. One-fifth say God is absent from their church experience.

Anti-science. Up to one-third say the church is out of step on scientific developments and debate.

Sex. The church is perceived as simplistic and judgmental. For a fifth or more, a “just say no” philosophy is insufficient in a techno-porno world. Young Christian singles are as sexually active as their non-churched friends, and many say they feel judged.

Exclusivity. Three in 10 young people feel the church is too exclusive in this pluralistic and multi-cultural age. And the same number feel forced to choose between their faith and their friends.

Doubters. The church is not a safe place to express doubts say over one-third of young people, and one-fourth have serious doubts they’d like to discuss.

These are cultural problem in the Church that are reflected in the films made.

 

[Dale_M]

Has anyone seen the film Vito Bonafacci? It’s screening here this weekend and I was curious as to if it was worth the time?

I haven’t seen it, but the film reviewers for the Catholic News Service liked it.

Were the Catholic Church to begin giving cinematic imprimaturs, few films would be better qualified to receive one than “Vito Bonafacci” (Cavu), writer-director John Martoccia’s meditative – and theologically impeccable – exploration of Scripture-based doctrine and spirituality.

While not for the impatient, since it unfolds at a leisurely pace, the drama thus set in motion features some eloquent poetic reflections from Vito’s deceased mother (Emelise Aleandri) – who visits him during that transformative dream – as well as beautiful cinematography of the lush landscape surrounding Vito’s home.

catholicnews.com/data/movies/11mv051.htm

The film reviewer for the New York Times also like it

Between Hollywood’s reliable mining of the exorcism vein (as in “The Rite”) and its coming appreciation of the vampire-slaying action hero in “Priest,” recent studio releases suggest that men of the cloth are needed only to deal with the supernaturally horrific. So “Vito Bonafacci,” an earnest film about a lapsed Roman Catholic in spiritual crisis, is a welcome reminder of religion’s true work.

Effectively a tutorial on some basic Catholic rituals, this isn’t a great film — too many scenes are static or clumsily acted — but it is elevated by the touches of neorealist style in its small-bore focus and its soundtrack of classical compositions and Italian music from the 12th and 13th centuries. In a world fixated on bombast, “Vito Bonafacci” offers a quiet haven for meaningful meditation.

movies.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/movies/review-vito-bonafacci-directed-by-john-martoccia.html

Steven Greydanus, of Decent Films Guide (who also makes frequent appearances on Catholic Answers LIve) apparently hasn’t reviewed the movie

In contrast, the film reviewer for the VIllage Voice thought it was typical of the worst of Christian movies.
villagevoice.com/2011-05-04/film/believe-it-or-not-vito-bonafacci-preaches-to-the-choir/

 

[Neildown]

Just watched Voyage of the Dawn Treader yesterday. It was honestly the best Christian film I’ve ever seen, next to Passion of the Christ. It’s practically all symbolism and you’ll need to watch the movies chronologically if you want to get the most out of it [or at least read the books], not to mention you need a head for philosophy/theology & fantasy.

I thought it was fantastic though - its apparently been getting flack for changing a few things in the story-line but they actually worked perfectly with the theme in my opinion.

Otherwise, the CGI was great, the story-line is nearly parallel to the book, great actors, even greater character development… I’ll leave it at that, but I could ramble for awhile more actually.

 

[maryjk]

Just watched Voyage of the Dawn Treader yesterday. It was honestly the best Christian film I’ve ever seen, next to Passion of the Christ. It’s practically all symbolism and you’ll need to watch the movies chronologically if you want to get the most out of it [or at least read the books], not to mention you need a head for philosophy/theology & fantasy.

Maybe the title should read,

“Why are Christian produced films/movies so awful?”

Dawn Treader is a movie produced by a major production company, Fox. (Although I had thought that Disney had something to do with the first movies of this series.)

 

[MrZoom]

Maybe the title should read,

“Why are Christian produced films/movies so awful?”

Dawn Treader is a movie produced by a major production company, Fox. (Although I had thought that Disney had something to do with the first movies of this series.)

Disney did in fact release the first two films in the series, but after Prince Caspian underperformed at the box office, they decided not to continue with it. The production company, Walden Media, then took the third film to Fox.

 

[Della]

Disney did in fact release the first two films in the series, but after Prince Caspian underperformed at the box office, they decided not to continue with it. The production company, Walden Media, then took the third film to Fox.

The reason Prince Caspian under-performed is because they turned Lewis’ story into your average sword and sorcery flick complete with “storming the castle” and it just didn’t work. All the charm and spirituality of the original material was cut out for more action scenes. So, even the pros can make mistakes and go in the wrong direction with films with spiritual themes.

 

[Tobuscus]

I found this in the book, “How to Build a Great Screenplay”, by David Howard.

Summary of what it said: The worst thing you can do is to base your story on a phrase. Example: winner takes it all, loves always conquers, and the good guy always wins.
The book says that stories should rather be made on a theme. Example: love, friendship, revenge, etc.

As you implied, the point of such films is to press home a point, not tell a story. This is nearly always a mistake in any form of popular medium. I forget which Hollywood studio head said this back the '30s, but it’s still revelant: “If you want to send a message use Western Union.”

Also, these sorts of films are usually very low budget, acted by near amateurs trying their best, and directors with a “purpose” instead of a “vision”.

There are Hollywood efforts that are just as bad, though. These days it’s the left putting out films trashing some conservative or conversative ideas that are so over the top and silly you want to scream at the screen, “Really?!”

So anyone can be guilty of this, but it’s usually the sincere group with an agenda that makes this kind of mistake. They sacrifice good story telling for moralizing and it just doesn’t do what they had hoped, but rather puts people off.

 

[KevinAK]

The reason Prince Caspian under-performed is because they turned Lewis’ story into your average sword and sorcery flick complete with “storming the castle” and it just didn’t work. All the charm and spirituality of the original material was cut out for more action scenes. So, even the pros can make mistakes and go in the wrong direction with films with spiritual themes.

DIdn’t help that they made the mistake of releasing in the summer “blockebuster” season instead of the holiday season like they did with LWW and Dawn Treader