The Greatest Trick

After reading a few of the recent comments, I thought it might be best to state my criteria for recommending or not recommending a film when it comes to potentially objectionable content, either with regards to aesthetic or moral/spiritual worldview concerns.

Perhaps I should explain why I feel it is important for Christians to participate in debate regarding films. I consider cinema to be the modern equivalent of parables – with the potential to spread a good or bad message. To deny the power of storytelling to my mind is foolish at best, given that Jesus himself used parables to expound on his message. I think the reason he did so is because as powerful as any sermon may be, a personal story (either true or fictitious) has far greater power. Consider for example the debate over euthanasia. Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby puts that issue centre stage in a powerful story that has the potential to emotionally persuade people far more than any political speech.

To my mind, there are only four logical ways a Christian can respond to popular culture when it challenges or is in blatant opposition to their beliefs (whether in film, theatre, music or any other art form); to comply, ignore, protest, or engage.

By comply I mean that by silence and/or compromise, the Christian viewer does not challenge the worldview of the artist by speaking out. They simply accept what they see and even praise it because of its aesthetic qualities, without raising any questions about its moral or spiritual validity. Many Christians choose this path because they perceive it to be a form of “turning the other cheek”, something I believe they are deeply mistaken about.

The second Christian response to popular culture is to ignore it completely. This is what I often term the “Amish” response; to see anything secular as fundamentally wrong. To my mind, this drives the church into religious isolation; a club that’s nice and cosy for its members but has nothing of relevance to say in the modern world, because it cannot use the language it understands.

The third response is protest, which to be fair is sometimes a valid response. However, most Christians involved in this unilaterally condemn the film (or other work of art) without even seeing it or doing any kind of research. If I had a penny for the number of times I’ve heard Christians trying to protest or get a film banned because it was supposedly offensive, yet refuse to even watch it to understand what they are protesting about, I would be a very rich man.

The fourth response is to engage, and this is what I try to do. Having seen the film (or work of art) in question, I am then in a position to respond without being accused of ignorance. This is why some of the Christians among you may question my decision to see certain films which you would otherwise choose to ignore. A good recent example would be Brokeback Mountain. I saw this film for one reason only: so that from a position of authority I could criticise the film and speak out in my limited capacity against the homosexual lifestyle. This film has had a seismic effect on popular culture and Christians need to engage with it so their voice can be heard. I am not suggesting that all Christians need to see the film, but those who publicly speak up against it ought to.

However, I do not think every contentious film requires engagement from Christians. For instance, I will not be seeing Basic Instinct 2 as I do not personally feel this to be a “culturally significant” film in the same way Brokeback Mountain was. Every Christian who feels led to engage with culture in the way I do will need to develop their own code of conduct to decide what they are and aren’t happy to expose themselves to. Given that Basic Instinct 2 is likely to contain strong pornographic imagery, I will choose not to see it, as exposure to such material would be a stumbling block for my thought life. However, as I am not even remotely tempted by the homosexual lifestyle, watching Brokeback Mountain did not cause similar stumbling blocks. Of course, what is a temptation for one person may not be the same for another and as such it is important Christians engaging with popular culture are wise in what they choose to allow into their spirits. It will not be the same for every Christian, and I am sure Mark and Heidi will have different thresholds to me for what they will and won’t watch in good conscience before God.

With that somewhat lengthy explanation out of the way, I wish to reiterate that generally speaking I will not dismiss a film purely for reasons of sex, violence, etc as I believe such things can sometimes be contextually justified. Schindler’s List, The Passion of the Christ, The Untouchables, Saving Private Ryan, The Godfather films, Munich and others are films I would happily defend as “noble, lovely and true” for their strong morality and Judeo-Christian worldviews. Jesus himself occasionally used extreme violence in his parables to make a point (such as in The Good Samaritan), and whilst I concede that there is a significant difference between word and image, I maintain that it is absurd for Christians to automatically dismiss a film “because it’s rated 18”. However, I will always point out the presence of sex, violence, bad language, etc and warn where I feel they are gratuitous, because I recognise for most people this will be a primary concern.

The most important thing for me when engaging with any film is to unpack its worldview and stimulate discussion. Obviously, I do not expect to always agree with other Christians as to what the worldview of any given film is, but debate is important, as I am sure Mark and Heidi will agree. By all means feel free to disagree with what I have written here, but I felt it was important to clarify my position.

Simon Dillon, March 2006.