I found this article to be very interesting, especially when the author mentioned that many films regarding Christianity are based directly on scripture, but are instead directors and writers taking a general framework and "inventing a few days for yourself." I have always wondered why religious movies - often of the same or similar stories - are consistently released and (normally) do well in theaters. Other than the religiousness of the movie-going audience, I think this article also enlightened me to another reason why: it adds to the Biblical stories in more personal ways, perhaps allowing people to relate to their faith more closely. However, there often seems to be a thin line between intriguing audiences and offending them, which must be a difficult position for filmmakers.
The author of the article mentions that religious cinema has come a long way mostly because Christian movies of the past didn't necessarily have to be great movies; they just had to contain the Christian message in order to appeal to Christians, and therefore score big at the box office. Since then, people have become more critical and want an actual movie, rather than a story they've heard a thousand times as a kid or in church. By filling in these blanks (which are numerous, given the holes in the Bible), filmmakers are able to create actual original works of art with their religious films. I would think this acts as a win-win for the filmmaker and the audience; by creating better movies, Christian filmmakers and the Christian film genre in general receive more respect in the industry, and Christians get a sense of legitimacy surrounding their beliefs, due to the fact that their movies aren't necessarily just a point of ridicule anymore. Although I don't think some Christians will be very happy with this new "Jesus" movie that doesn't seem to want to mention anything "Jesus" or "God" by name. Noah pissed off enough people by not having anyone in the movie mention God (just "The Creator"), so I can imagine that this could garner even more controversy.
I found this article to be very interesting, especially when the author mentioned that many films regarding Christianity are based directly on scripture, but are instead directors and writers taking a general framework and "inventing a few days for yourself." I have always wondered why religious movies - often of the same or similar stories - are consistently released and (normally) do well in theaters. Other than the religiousness of the movie-going audience, I think this article also enlightened me to another reason why: it adds to the Biblical stories in more personal ways, perhaps allowing people to relate to their faith more closely. However, there often seems to be a thin line between intriguing audiences and offending them, which must be a difficult position for filmmakers.
ReplyDeleteThe author of the article mentions that religious cinema has come a long way mostly because Christian movies of the past didn't necessarily have to be great movies; they just had to contain the Christian message in order to appeal to Christians, and therefore score big at the box office. Since then, people have become more critical and want an actual movie, rather than a story they've heard a thousand times as a kid or in church. By filling in these blanks (which are numerous, given the holes in the Bible), filmmakers are able to create actual original works of art with their religious films. I would think this acts as a win-win for the filmmaker and the audience; by creating better movies, Christian filmmakers and the Christian film genre in general receive more respect in the industry, and Christians get a sense of legitimacy surrounding their beliefs, due to the fact that their movies aren't necessarily just a point of ridicule anymore. Although I don't think some Christians will be very happy with this new "Jesus" movie that doesn't seem to want to mention anything "Jesus" or "God" by name. Noah pissed off enough people by not having anyone in the movie mention God (just "The Creator"), so I can imagine that this could garner even more controversy.
ReplyDelete