Hollywood and Holy Films- Closer Than You Think (Part 1)

Are the majority of Hollywood made films "evil"? This is the assumption that is driving the new interest in so-called faith-based films. Over the next few weeks, I will analyze movie released in 2011, 2010, 2009, and 2008 to determine if, in fact, this widely held assumption, by religious and agnostics alike, holds any truth. For the sake of my unscientific study, I'll assume "evil" means lots of nudity and profanity. I may expand the study to include other pertinent data, like critical acclaim.

My early film education consisted of 8 basic genres: Drama, Action, Comedy (includes Spoof), Romantic Comedy, Comedy-Drama (or Dramedy), Horror, Suspense (Thriller), and Animated. Informal genres, like Chick Flick (i.e. romantic comedy) also exist. Obviously, genres overlap all the time with varying levels of success. 


For example, The Adjustment Bureau garnered mixed reviews because critics and viewers alike seemed confused by its classification. Many viewers on Yahoo Movies felt that the film was really a romantic drama, but how then to explain the bumbling (but funny) comic relief of the bureaucratic "bad guys" and the incredible CGI effects? Thelma and Louise? Obvious Chick Flick right? I'm not so sure when you consider the attempted rape and emotional ending.

The "genre" of Faith-based film baffles and irritates me because it raises tricky issues. For one, it adds yet another genre to an already clogged film classification system. Two, it fails to describe what the tone of the film is. Can faith-based films include comedy and romance or is it strictly relegated to heavy family dramas like Fireproof? And finally, whose faith are they based on? For now, it applies mainly to Christian films, but will other religious filmmakers be allowed to encroach on "our" territory?

As an avowed film buff, I see tons of movies of various ratings and can assure you that many R-rated films should have been rated PG-13 or lower and many G-rated Animated films should have been rated R because of all the suggestive adult humor (Hoodwinked, Too).

My general experience with films made in the past 5 years or so is that the majority are low on profanity and nudity and high on incredibly bad stories, mediocre acting, and lots of hype. I don't believe I'm desensitized to film but I am absolutely certain when a film of any genre is merely trying to pull on my heart strings in lieu of delivering quality entertainment. 

I feel that Hollywood is being unfairly bullied to some extent because plenty of inappropriate films are on the unregulated bootleg market and no one has mentioned much about the straight-to-dvd market. Let's not forget about the uninspired, crass leftovers that pass for tv shows these days.

Films are, first and foremost, entertainment. The early days of film were of a man riding a giant tricycle or someone tied to a train track silently screaming; not exactly intellectually stimulating material. But in the course of time, human ingenuity refused to be satisfied with such meager fare. Films began to be based on books by serious writers who didn't care to have their hard work visually mocked.  

So here we are in 2011, with movies (films is considered passe) produced by "deep" thinkers and self-proclaimed idiots. Movies must have messages, the Oscars demands. Directors and actors strive to make avant-garde movies. Producers want to be known for producing something "meaningful". Even the MPAA rating system is collapsing under the pressure (remember NC-17?). Most of the time, I can tell what a movie will offer just by the reputation of the director and lead actors. After all, Denzel is never going to star in a slapstick comedy (it ain't gonna happen) and I don't see Quentin Tarantino directing "Smurfs-Part 2".

I'm curious to see what my statistics prove, if anything. Do "evil" movies really make more money than more sanguine ones? Is the faith factor so woefully overlooked by Hollywood that the faith based film "genre" must exist in a separate sphere? Do we need Sunday Services to become its own movie? 

Or is this all a terrible misunderstanding? Are Christians self-alienating from the movie industry for no reason? Are there plenty of faith oriented films in theaters that are inadvertently ignored or misclassified?

There's one thing that this undertaking will certainly prove: Hollywood and Holy Films may be on the brink of overlapping a little too close for comfort.

Books Without Borders

After a lengthy series of tremblings, death tolls, and other harbingers, Borders has finally succumbed to the same fate that it dealt Waldenbooks years ago. Ten years ago, the closing of a bookselling giant would have meant a significant void for avid readers, but now Borders demise is simply a small, but inevitable footnote in the disappearance of books.

The popularity of Ebooks has been blamed for Borders death, but I disagree (I hate e-readers). E-reading's growth trend resulted from the isolation of the dedicated book reader. The overwhelming unpopularity of books in bookstores is truly to blame. I've railed before about the cacophonous layout of Borders- its landscape littered with games, stationery, cds and, of course, the trademark in house cafe-Borders looked more like the Word Market from The Phantom Tollbooth than a proper bookstore.

For me, finding books was the trick.

Richard Nash has suggested, in his CNN Blog, that Borders could have maintained its profitability by being  "...less of a retail experience...focused on selling stuff and more about an event, occasion, a vision..."*
He is, of course, referring to a transition of bookstores from being mere sellers to community resources presenting book discussions, enrichment classes, reading groups, and self-publishing resources; in short, a bookstore about all things BOOK.

I am old enough to recall the days of the traditional bookstore, when all that bookstores sold were books. The spectacled, soft-spoken clerk (who had worked there for years) knew the right book to recommend to anyone from 5-50. I agree that the time is certainly ripe for a new kind of bookstore. A bookstore that serves the needs of readers and not just blindly flings out merchandise and cappuccino at passersby.

Future bookstores, be they megastores, or small local undertakings, must become book experts as once they were. Holding frequent events, such as promoting local authors, will re-energize patrons by introducing new authors and works to the public, even those who don't consider themselves "readers". Hosting writing classes and having theme nights will make the literary experience feel accessible to all. Including the patron in book discussions that go beyond "Are you going to buy that?" will make book buyers understand what they are buying and how it actually contributes to the local good.

Books will survive without Borders, but in the future, we must be very careful about what borders are defining our books.




*Nash, Richard. (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/21/nash.borders.books/index.html?iref=allsearch)

Celebrities are Just Like US... You Wish!

Why is it so important for us to imagine that celebrities are just like us? We love the blunt speaking celebrities who "keep it real" and tell it like it is. We, the working class, console ourselves with the thought that celebs have bad hair days, tense family holidays, and occasionally even get fired. Social networking and reality shows have made celebs so accessible that we continue to believe that the carefully edited sound bytes and slideshows actually represent how the celebrity really is.

This delusion is so prevalent that someone posted an online comment praising First Lady Michelle Obama for making her girls make their own beds and do their own laundry...right before their personal limo driver and security detail escorts them to school.

Celebrities are not just like us. 

Primarily because they're famous. While millions of people can identify a celeb, even in sunglasses, most of us blend anonymously into any crowd. Nor should they be just like us. Why should I buy movie tickets for someone who lives just as I do? Where is the excitement of standing in line for hours to buy concert tickets for an everyday joe? Who quotes a politician who's never held an office?

There is a quiet desperation and malicious glee in believing that famous people suffer the same indignities that most of us endure on a daily basis. But indulging in this fantasy for too long unmasks deep seated hypocrisy. Isn't the reason we admire celebrities because of their undeniable beauty and talent? Don't we love them because they stand out from the crowd?

I understand that celebrities are still human beings and may feel a need to try and stay connected to more humble roots, but I don't believe such efforts deserve public praise. After all, their humility is not my gain. After a long day of interviews or rehearsals, the rich and famous go home to fabulous mansions and have access to large bank accounts, no matter how humble they may be. 

So let's not confuse the reality with our reality. Celebrities are people, yes and they do put their pants on one leg at a time, but if they don't, they can always hire someone else to do it for them.

Are Christians Entitled to Hook-Ups?

I recently witnessed a troubling episode where a fellow Christian resorted to somewhat crafty means to get a "freebie" from another Christian. I wish I could say this was the only time I noticed a Christian get something for free from another Christian based on "brotherly" love, but it isn't. As a matter of fact, I believe it is a disturbing and embarrassing misuse of Christ's love when one Christian uses the guise of Christianity to get something for free that they would otherwise have had to pay for.

Abusing biblical teachings of unconditional love, hospitality, and turning the other cheek for selfish and undeserved gain is just wrong. 

Being offered a gift, a discount, or a free stay is one matter. I believe if someone offers you something, even if it is with bad intent, you should accept it gratefully and thank the Lord. Expecting that fellow Christians "ought" to give you things that you want or believe you need is near to extortion. Take the Christian who won't buy a car because they don't "want" a car payment, but gladly accepts gas-free rides from others. Or the Christian who invariably takes 2 or 3 plates from every gathering, but has yet to donate one can of food. How about the Christian who holds up every service or event by being late, then asks for prayers?

Love is not a carte blanche excuse for Christians to take gross and unfair advantage of each other. Rather, it should be used as a means for each of us to serve one another. This means that you don't invite yourself to someone's home for hours or days without asking first and bringing a gift. Sorry, just your presence is not a "blessing." And don't tell them how to run their house while you're there. If you know a Christian who works at a store you like, you don't barge up to them and demand a discount. You don't "borrow" things and never return them. In short, you "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

If you don't have suitable living quarters, you shouldn't be at other people's homes 24/7, Christian or not. Get your affairs in order. If you find you can't afford many things, perhaps you should inquire of the Lord about an additional income opportunity so that you can bless other people. If you need a car, don't hope and pray that someone gives one to you. Instead, look for an honest way to pay for it yourself.

The world's model is to "borrow and not repay", but the Godly model is to "give and it will be given unto you".

Temporal freebies indicate a cycle of lack and desperation, instead press and believe for the many free and lasting blessings God already has for you.

MSN NOT SO HOTMAIL

It happened to me. After 10 years, my Hotmail account was hacked. I found out the news this morning as I was doing my once weekly review of my less active email accounts, having switched to Gmail long ago.

To my chagrin, I saw dozens and dozens of suspicious emails with bizarre links. I quickly took action to change my password and inform my friends (from my gmail account) of the incident, but my trust in Hotmail is finally and forever broken.

Out of all my email accounts, including Yahoo, Gmail, and Web accounts, Hotmail has always been the ugly stepchild,  especially for the past 2 years. Checking my Hotmail account has become an unpleasant study in perversity. Hotmail spam is always riddled with pornographic and profane spam. No matter how many times I click "Mark as Spam", the junk keeps coming back, like a pesky bloodthirsty mosquito.

So it finally got me. After doing a Google search, I discovered that lots and lots of other people, including software experts, have been subjected to these annoying email attacks where your entire contact list is sent a series of malicious links.

I am angry at Hotmail for allowing this. They went to the trouble of changing their entire email interface to include such nonsense as the ability to social network through Hotmail (why, when I have Facebook), but couldn't take the time to create better security for their own email system.

Hotmail routinely bombards its email users with absurd ads every time you check email. Even after clicking "full view" the ads continue to display while you commit the cardinal sin of just trying to read your email in peace. I guess that was the writing on the wall.

So the love affair is over. I have no immediate plans to ever again enter the despicable Hotmail domain. Checking email shouldn't be a dangerous undertaking. It shouldn't even be all that interesting.  Just a routine part of today's technological landscape, like anti-virus scanning. Hotmail has clearly trailed behind, sad considering it was once a leader. When criminals can easily access an established email account, that's just too hot for me.