|
|---|
In my discussion of film and
culture, I identified the general thrust of modern secular liberalism and
its antithesis with Christianity. My reviews will deal with those themes
in general. Here I wish to be a bit more specific. What follows
are certain questions that are always in my mind when I go to
films. I would recommend that other Christian viewers ask the
same questions. I will not go through this whole list in each
review; I will only discuss the ones I think most important to
the particular film.
1. Who wrote the film? Who produced
it? Who directed it? Do we know through the writings and previous work of
these people anything about their philosophy of life? The previous works
of actors are also important. Actors contribute much to the
quality of a film, little to its fundamental conception. But actors
do tend to sign on to projects with which they have some
ideological affinity (assuming financial rewards are not
otherwise determinative). Mel Gibson almost never takes on films with a heavy sexual
element; Mickey Rourke almost always does.
The presence of certain actors, granting that they sometimes
go "against type," can tell you something about the message of
a film.
2. Is it well-made, aesthetically?
Are the production and acting values of high quality? These factors may
have little to do with the "message." But they do tend to
determine the extent of the film's cultural impact, and that is important
for our purposes. If a film is well-made, it can have a large
impact upon the culture for good or ill. (Of course some bad films
also have a major impact!)
3. Is it honest, true to its own
position? This is another mark of "quality." Generally speaking,
an honest film, regardless of its point of view, will have a larger cultural impact
than one which blunts its points.
4. What kind of film is it? Fantasy?
Biography? Realistic drama? Comedy? Obviously each film must be judged
according to its purpose and genre. We don't demand of a fantasy the kind
of historical accuracy we demand of a supposedly literal biography.
5. What is the world view of the
film? Is it theistic or atheistic? Christian or non-Christian? If
non-Christian, is its main thrust relativistic or dogmatic? How does it
employ the theme of "equality?" Is there any role for
providence, for God? Is the film pessimistic or optimistic? Does the
action move in deterministic fashion, or is there a significant role for
human choice?
6. What is the plot? What problems
do the characters face? Can these problems be correlated in some way with
the Fall of mankind in Adam? Does the film in effect deny the Fall,
or does it affirm it in some way?
7. Are the problems soluble? If so,
how? What methods are available to the characters so that they can find
the answers they need?
8. What is the moral stance of the
film? Is the film relativistic, dogmatic, or both in some combination?
What are its attitudes toward sex, family, human life, property,
truth, heart-attitudes? What is the source of moral norms, if any? Does justice
prevail?
9. In comedy, what is it that is
funny? What are the typical incongruities? Who is the butt of the jokes?
(Christians? traditional values? the wicked? the righteous? God? Satan?)
Is the humor anarchic? Is it rationality gone awry? Is it bitter
or gentle? Does it rely on caricatures? If so, of whom?
10. Are there allusions to
historical events, literary works, other films, famous people, Scripture,
etc. that would give us some idea where the filmmakers are coming from? We
should remember, of course, that allusions may be negative, positive, ironic,
or merely decorative. A biblical allusion does not necessarily indicate
acceptance of biblical values.
11. What are the chief images of the
film? Is there anything interesting about the lighting, the camera angles,
the sound, the timing which would reinforce a particular theme?
Are there significant symbols?
12. Are there any explicit religious themes? Christ-figures? [1] Does the film express significant attitudes toward Christ, the clergy, or the church? Does it distort Christianity or present it at its worst? Or does it present it with some insight and/or sympathy? Does it recognize the element of personal piety in people's lives? [2] There are exceptions. If so, does it approve or disapprove of it? What about Satan, the demons, the occult? Does the film recognize their activity in some way? Is the devil taken seriously? If so, how is he dealt with? _
[1] Steven Spielberg's "E. T." is, I think, a genuine Christ figure: recall the themes of pre-existence, growth, teaching, miracle, healing, death, resurrection, ascension. Spielberg denied this parallel, but in my view it is objectively there, even if Spielberg was unconscious of it. The reason is that the human mind has a need for a gospel like that of the New Testament. Those who don't accept that gospel often instinctively give to their idolatrous inventions powers parallel to those of Christ.
[2]
The character of Frank Burns in
the original M*A*S*H was a pious fellow who kneeled to pray at his
bedside, to the scorn of his fellow soldiers. Eventually, it turned out
that he was
an adulterer and hypocrite. That is fairly typical of the way Hollywood portrays Christian piety.