How to Process a Movie Pt. 3

Movie Watching Opportunity #2

2. A good movie is an opportunity to discover effective methods of communication.

Whether we agree or disagree with the methods, movie creators are able to communicate on a deep level. Christians should be vitally concerned with communication. With a little discernment and awareness a movie can give us insight into the methods of some of the most skilled communicators of our day . When we ask ourselves “how does this presentation speak to people?” we are a step closer to being a better communicator.

For example, in the 70s Stephen Spielberg made Jaws. Because of technical problems he was forced to keep the viewer from seeing the shark until late in the movie. Luckily for him (and us as viewers) this omission of the “monster” in his monster movie greatly heightened the suspense of the film. By the time the shark is revealed our curiosity has increased exponentially compared to what would have happened if Spielberg had immediately showed us his movie villain.

What good does this knowledge do for us? It can remind us that sometimes it’s good to save the heart of our message until the end. Instead of immediately stating the big idea, it is sometimes acceptable to raise the anticipation. Perhaps we can see a little of this in the parables or in Proverbs. If you don’t give all the immediate answers it forces people to think about what you’ve said.

A second example…MTV. Pick almost any MTV movie and/or the television channel. Three second clips. Then, on to something new. Flashy. Restless. Impatient. And, yet it communicates.

Observing MTV allows us to study another communication tool. I’d argue that this flashy style is useful occasionally, but continued use of this method (or any method) will have negative consequences. There’s a point in using two examples here. Even though we’ve taken one step further in discernment (in that we have examined a communication technique), we still aren’t able to take our discernment antennas down. Some styles of communication are appropriate in different situations. You don’t see MTV producing Schindler’s List and you don’t see PBS creating music videos.

Christians are people who should be very concerned about their message and how to deliver it. This could be the most overlooked / under-rated benefit of movie watching that there is.

How to Process a Movie Pt. 2

Movie Watching Opportunity #1

1. A good movie is an opportunity to meditate, mull over, and ask hard questions about what we believe.

Notice the phrase “what we believe”. Theology shouldn't come from movies. Instead, a movie should be like that nasty professor who always asked you those difficult questions about your faith that made your brain hurt. A movie can provide us with an hour and a half of hard questions that (when handled properly) should send us to our Bibles for sharpening.

The easiest way to explain this principle is by providing some questions that reflect this type of thought process. For example:

Does this movie allegorize Scripture in any way?
In what ways does this movie align itself to Scripture?
In what ways does this movie veer away from the Bible’s Truths?

When we question movies in this fashion they can sharpen our knowledge of the Bible (especially when discussed with other people) because we are now thinking as we watch. Our brains are now searching for truth and error for 2 hours instead of laying dormant for 2 hours.

Again, this point highly implies that we have a knowledge of the Bible as we head into our movie of choice. A sign that something is amiss is a desire for entertainment without a desire for Truth. In this scenario your entertainment will soon become your truth.

How to Process a Movie Pt. 1: An Incredibly Long Post

There’s a way out of those awkward conversational pauses that we always seem to find ourselves in. In high school it seems I was more comfortable with this easy cheat, but as I became older I felt as though I should play by the adult rules. Lately, I’ve been reverting to my old ways. The cheat is “movies”. Ask a person what movie they’ve seen lately. It gets 95% of the population talking.

The question is: Why does it get 95% of the population talking? The answer is not a hard one, it’s because everyone is watching movies. Not only are people watching movies, but they’re being affected by them. This is no small influence, either. People light up when they have a chance to reveal the movies they have under their belt. A movie conversation is made of the same high-caliber stuff as a how-are-the-kids conversation.

There’s a problem, though. And, it’s a big problem. People don’t think. We make our trek to the movies, and return from our quest with a good plot outline and possibly some good quotes. We now have the ability to say We loved it or We hated it. But, the ability to say why we loved it or hated it seems to be missing. Sure, we can give answers like “special effects” or “it was funny”, but is this sufficient?

This is a problem for a good chunk of society. But, for Christians this should be an even deeper problem. If we assume that God is real and He’s intended His truth to be revealed through the Bible, then a Christian should consider carefully what they put in their brain (Romans 12:1-2; Philipians 4:8; 1 Peter 1:13-21).

The solution to this problem is not more drivel on how Christianity and morality and all things chipper and happy are seen in movies like Casablanca, Silence of the Lambs, and Napoleon Dynamite. My problem with this type of writing isn’t specifically with anything that’s been written. I enjoy the postmodern activity of ignoring all the artist’s intentions and rendering my own meaning. I’m concerned with the fact that few of these writers take seriously the activity that they are engaged in. Too often they look at the process of finding the spiritual in movies as a type of game. My argument is that movie-processing is more than a game, we should never turn off the device that filters what goes into our brain.

I view the brain as a storehouse. The senses are the loading docks for this storehouse. And, there’s this guy…at least it’s a guy in my mind…and he examines everything that makes its way into this storehouse. By nature this guy is a pretty lazy dude who doesn’t like to work.

This character exists in all of our minds. So, perhaps one person views a Die Hard movie coming in on the loading dock and their storehouse manager says: throw it over there in the action movie pile. Harry Potter…toss him over there between the kid’s-movie pile and the fantasy pile…yeah…right there near where Lord of the Rings is sprawled out. We allow this guy to be lazy as the information enters our minds and therefore our brains look like a lazy teenager’s messy bedroom.

This storehouse doesn’t need to look this way, though. The great thing about our brains is that these movies I mentioned can be sent to more than just one part of our mind. For example, as Lord of the Rings enters the brain-storehouse it can be flagged fantasy. But, if the guy (or gal) waiting on the loading dock is properly prepared, they can immediately send it to a dozen other departments at the same time: friendship, loyalty, good vs. evil, appeal of power, mission, leadership. If our loading dock character stays busy after they’ve directed the movie to its appropriate locations then, it can continue flagging it at later dates.

Our job is to train the loading dock character properly. This guy’s training is a two-part task. One, he needs to know what he’s on the look-out for and, two, he needs to know how to process it. Both are difficult tasks. But, both tasks are essential and should be part of our daily lives anyway.

Think about politics. We typically don’t allow the guy on the loading dock slouch time when a politician is speaking to us. We’ve sharpened up what we stand for politically and we place all the information that we attain in the appropriate brain compartments. We don’t listen to Presidential candidates and think…oh, that was a nice speech, I’ll put that in the nice speech corner. No, instead we put it in the Republican corner or the Democrat corner. We fine-tune the filing system by stapling a note stating the items we agreed/disagreed on. We can further filter things by stacking them according to health care, social security, military policy.

My encouragement is to get that lazy guy directing traffic at the loading docks to stand up and get ready for action. We need to make sure he’s alert and prepared. Here are some basic principles that he/she should be aware of.

1) We need to make the most of our time. (Eph. 5:15-16)
2) We should do everything as though we’re serving the Lord. (Col. 3:23)
3) We should seek cross-worthy thoughts and activities. (1 Cor. 2:2)

These three principles are intricately related to our whole life…which includes movie watching. I’m pleased to inform you that these questions do not suck the “fun” out of the movie watching process, instead it propels you to exciting new levels.

A good movie is an opportunity. The next three-ish posts will list of some of the opportunities the movie-watcher is provided with.

Why D minuses Don't Matter to "Christian" Art

There are few things more overrated than Christian entertainment. Of course, it’s only overrated in the Christian bubble…and, of course, it’s hard to argue with the many spiritual defenses without straying too far into the boundaries of judgemental-land. I have two theories why the Christian arts are so weak...

Theory #1: The Ratio Theory
This theory rests on the premise that most “secular” art is of low quality as well. However, because there’s such a huge mass of secular art there’s still a lot to choose from. Let’s look at music as an example. And, allow me to make up some figures. Let’s assume that for every 10 albums put out in a year 1 of them is a winner. That’s a ratio of 1:10…or a percentage of 10%. ...stay with me, arithmetic is not my favorite genre, either. But, if 1,000 albums come out in a year, then 100 of them are of high quality.

Let’s feed this same ratio into the Christian music industry. Let’s assume that 500 albums are produced in the Christian world…this means 50 albums are of high quality. This means there’s half the number of quality albums, making this music harder to find. I think there’s something to this theory, but it needs to be counterbalanced with Theory #2.

Theory #2: The Grandmother Theory
This theory states that there is a ridiculous amount of grandmother-izing in the Christian music industry. A Christian musician makes an album or a Christian author writes a book and suddenly the grandmother comes out in everyone. All of a sudden Charlie’s in jail after robbing a liquor store for his crack habit and grandma is on the phone to Charlie’s parents telling them that he’s not that bad, he’s still a good boy…etc. Similarily...a “Christian” puts out a CD that sounds like Mickey Mouse in a Britney Spears costume and suddenly it’s worth listening to because “the lyrics are good” or because “it’s pretty good for the Christian world”.

Both these theories put together make for a low percentage of quality art in the Christian world. Generally, I find that it’s not worth my time to wade through the scummy waters of the Christian entertainment sub-culture and/or train myself to like the truck stop coffee they typically offer.

I’m not forsaking my Christianity by saying this…I’m all signed up for whatever promotes “Do all things for the glory of God”. I think this is fully possible in the “secular” world. I find that it’s much harder for me to justify my time when I spend it listening to low grade Christian music than it is when I listen to folks like Pete Yorn, Wilco, or my favorite, Bruce Springsteen. Some people would argue that the reverse is true for them.

The next few posts are going to be about processing art and entertainment. Movies will be the activity of choice, but I think the principles are true of any artistic medium.

Honey Nut Scooters

I realize most people exit this stage of humor development around 4th or 5th grade... But, I noticed Honey Nut Scooters at the store the other day and bought it, just because it made me laugh and because it reminded me of an old Phil Hartman SNL skit. For what it's worth...

Jesse Malin - Glitter in the Gutter

Until further notice the best rock and roll record of 2007 is Jesse Malin's Glitter in the Gutter. This album gives me a buzz I haven’t felt since the first time I watched Top Gun. Its perfect pop coating allows each tune to go down easy while still pumping disgruntled fists with vain rock-and-roll promises that everything is going to be alright. Jesse Malin tugs, pulls, pushes, shoves…takes you by the hand and says “Hold on tight, this is a crazy ride”....and he does it without all the pretencious smarm of the last few sentences. It’s probably the best rock and roll record in 20 years…but, who’s keeping track?

http://www.jessemalin.com/

10 Best Albums of 2006

1. Modern Times - Bob Dylan
2. American V - Johnny Cash
3. Post War - M. Ward
4. We Shall Overcome: The Seeger Sessions - Bruce Springsteen
5. This Old Road - Kris Kristofferson
6. Continuum - John Mayer
7. Suprise - Paul Simon
8. Pearl Jam - Pearl Jam
9. Stuck Between Stations - The Hold Steady
10. Sam's Town - The Killers

An Ode to the Weak Mind

Matrix-like downloading into the brain
    we wish for this
A mind trained to remember quickly and never forget
    we wish for this
Our past has always wished for our present
    we're still wishing for more.

Maybe the beauty comes from the in-between
    it doesn't come from the knowledge.
We might cure disease and vanquish evil
    but the future would provide more and new.

Our best...our focus...our motivation
    the importance rests here.

Daniel Johnston vs. Frank Gehry

What makes an artist good? I've seen a couple documentaries lately that relate to the subject, The Devil and Daniel Johnston and Sketches of Frank Gehry. It's quite debatable whether Daniel Johnston or Frank Gehry are "artists", I'm of the persuasion that they are...artists.

But, maybe they're not...which makes me ask my question: "what makes an artist good?".

If myself and two others are inspired by a someone's indie-rock band does that mean they've created a praise-worthy piece of art? Or, should I be given credit for using their personal expression for good in my own life?

Maybe we should do a head count? Whoever's art speak to the greatest number of people...they are the great artists. This seems faulty, because Britney Spears is a pretty popular person, but she is the anti-thesis of good art, in my opinion.

Is this discussion even possible? Are there any "absolutes" to art, or is it a truly subjective experience? If it means something to you, should you stamp it, label it with personal quality, and move on?

How do Daniel Johnston and Frank Gehry play into this discussion? Daniel Johnston's music is unproduced garbage to most people. But, in a way, that's part of the beauty...the other beauty is a guy 100% expressing himself and vulnerably clearing the brush away for everyone to see what life is like in the mind and heart of this one person.

Frank Gehry is different. He creates buildings outside the societal norm. He's aware of the difficult process of expression. He sees the balance of creating something you like versus something someone else likes and he works within that equation.

Both Gehry and Johnston are creating things that are different from the norm. But, does different-from-the-norm mean art, or does it just mean "different" and "interesting point of view"?

With all those questions, I have few dogmatic answers. Here's my current hunch, though. There are several variables to keep in mind when it comes to art. 1) Does the expression touch someone? If it does, to what degree? 2) Do levels of investment exist? In other words, is commitment to the artist's work rewarding?

So, you factor these things together...Britney Spears is art, however, she gets low points, because a) her "art" only speaks to American 8th grade girls and b) the entirety of it is comprehended in one listen. Now, let's shoot Shakespeare into the equation... a) this art has spoken to multiple generations, cultures, and age groups, and b) people are continuously being inspired by it and discovering new aspects for why it speaks to them. Shakespeare has a high level of investment capability, if you put in a lot, you're going to get out a lot.

If that paragraph is confusing to you, just picture the old Sunday school song "Deep and Wide". The best art is wide, in that it touches a wide number of people...and, it's deep, you can dive far below the surface and discover things.

I'm not sure where Frank Gehry and Daniel Johnston fit in the scope of my mathmatical equation...I may need to do some fine tuning. However, I think the two elements are key in the discussion of art. I think there's a subtle difference between personal expression and art and this deep/wide idea seems to help my mind grapple with the concepts.

The Devil and Daniel Johnston