The musings of Sean Paul Murphy: Editor, Producer, Screenwriter, Author. Or, Hollywood -- and beyond -- as seen from an odd little corner of northeast Baltimore, Maryland.
LaVonne McIver James, of the Churches Making Movies Film Festival recently interviewed Jennifer Healy Gloeb and myself about our screenwriting collaboration, Romy, which began over breakfast at the film festival last summer. I was attending the festival as a guest speaker, and Jennifer was attending as the winner of their screenplay competition.
Breakfast was good. And very productive.
I plan to write a blog about the writing of the screenplay we collaborated on because the process hits on many of the issues I have discussed recently in my ongoing series of writing tips. Keep checking back for that post. Until then, read the article here:
I have been writing Top 10 lists of various kinds of films. It's about time I get to the genre I know best: Faith-based films. Although I have written twelve-produced contemporary faith-based films, I will not be including any of my own or the work of my contemporary peers. Few of the films on the following list would fit within the genre as it exists today. These films were made by studios with a desire to entertain. They are not theological treatises or filmed sermons. These weren't designed to tell the "whole gospel." Some of them don't even directly mention God, let alone Jesus. Many of them are theologically flawed, but they all deal with issues of faith. And all of them made me contemplate my own beliefs, even if I didn't ascribe to the beliefs of the filmmakers.
A Jesuit missionary wrestles with his faith while on a perilous journey to convert a native tribe in 17th Century Canada.
Director Bruce Beresford seems drawn to films about conflicting cultures like this one. He goes out of his way to let the audience see the events from both perspectives, although neither the priest or his native escorts make much effort to understand each others' culture. In addition to being a film about faith, it provides a non-romanticized and often brutal depiction of life among the Native Americans at the time. It is a great depiction of the trials Christians endured in pursuit of the Great Commission, as well as the price native peoples paid for their contact with Europeans.
Bruno Ganz plays an overcoat clad angel invisibly watching and encouraging Berliners who falls in love with a trapeze artist.
This is a wonderfully lyrical German-language film. When viewed through the eyes of the angels, the world is seen in gorgeous black and white. It turns into color when viewed through human eyes. The film posits an odd angelic realm. Angels are all around us. They observe us, make note of things and even touch us in attempts to encourage us. However, no mention is made of God. It's not Biblical. It's not theologically sound, but I enjoy this journey into Wenders' angelic realm. It presents an interesting perspective. What would angels think of us after observing us for long centuries? What would they think was important? What would capture their imaginations? A beautiful and fascinating film.
Avoid the 1998 Nicolas Cage/Meg Ryan "remake" City of Angels.
A desperate mother seeks the aid of two priests to save her daughter who seems to be possessed by the devil.
A great film about spiritual warfare and the border it shares with mental illness. Despite being a great fan of horror movies, I was initially dismissive of this film. I thought it relied too heavily on the shock effects. (Even forty-five years after its release, the film is still not for the squeamish or faint of heart.) It wasn't until I got older that I appreciated the human side of the story. Playwright Jason Miller gives an amazing performance as Father Karras, the Jesuit priest educated as a psychiatrist, whose faith wavers in the boundary between religion and science. Emotionally bereft because neither his God or his medical training could save his dying mother from dementia, Karras resolves to save this little girl possessed by Satan himself at any cost. A great film.
The passion of the Christ is recreated in excruciating detail in this worldwide hit whose box office helped create the new faith-based film genre.
Mel Gibson's blood-drenched spiritual magnus opus was certainly heartfelt. He shot his own hands nailing Christ to the cross because he believes his sins put Christ there. I understand that. I found the film emotionally wrenching. It depicted the true horrors of crucifixion, and really made me appreciate Jesus' sacrifice. I'm glad Gibson made the film. I'm glad I saw it. I appreciate the artistry. But I must confess this is not a disc I throw into the Blu Ray player often.
Two determined British runners, one a Jew and the other a committed Christian, compete in the 1924 Olympics.
This true story contrasts the two men, Harold Abrahams, the son of Jewish Lithuanian immigrants, and Eric Liddell, the son of Scottish missionaries, who are both considered outsiders within the British class system with much to prove. Liddell, in particular, will be tested when he finds himself scheduled to race on a Sunday -- something his Christian values will not allow him to do. (Liddell would later be murdered in China as a missionary.)
The film was a huge, inspirational hit upon its release. It won four Academy Awards including: Best Picture; Best Screenplay, Written Directly for the Screen; Best Costume Design and Best Music, Original Score. Despite all of the awards and acclaim at the time, the film seems little discussed today. The aspect that made the biggest cultural impact seems to be the score by Vangelis. I was recently in my local Safeway grocery store when the theme came over the speakers. I swear everyone in my aisle instinctively started moving in slow motion. No kidding.
A widow running a motel, Tess Harper, reforms and marries an alcoholic singer songwriter, Robert Duvall.
This film is probably my favorite drama of the 1980s. It is sweet and heartfelt, but also honest. The structure is brilliant. It's mostly a series of brief vignettes, which leave out most of the bigger moments of their relationship in favor of smaller more telling ones. Although Duvall does get baptized, the film isn't explicitly religious. However, Tess Harper's character does much to epitomize grace Christians are called to exhibit. I also like that this film, unlike every contemporary faith-based film, attempt to answer every question about existence. It shows life as a mystery, lived one day at a time -- in faith.
I don't know why Christian filmmakers are so quick to pretend they have all the answers. Even the Apostle Paul said we currently only see things as if through a glass darkly.....
When small town savings and loan manager George Bailey, who feels he has wasted his life, attempts suicide, an angelic visitor gives him the opportunity to see what the world would have been like without him.
Talk about theological problems.... Practically every American who contemplates the existence of angels believes they were once normal human beings. Why? Mainly because of this film.
This film is now regarded as one of the greatest family films of all times, but the audiences at the time rejected it. Not surprising. A weary nation didn't want to watch Jimmy Stewart driven to the point of suicide in the immediate wake of World War II. However, this film had the perfect message for all times. Every life has meaning. Everything happens for a reason. And God is watching.
That's all any faith-based film ever needs to convey.
I couldn't find the trailer, but here's the ending. (Do I have to say spoiler alert? You know you've already seen it.)
Jesus is promoted from Son of God to Superstar in this rock opera about his last week leading up to the crucifixion.
Theologically, this film is a mess. It is as if Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber read the gospels to jot down the events of the passion, but completely ignored their meaning. Their Christology is an utter disaster. The Jesus they depict doesn't seem to know the purpose of his life or death. The writers seem to think his death only had value because it brought attention to his words. Christians would disagree. That said, their choice nearly works narratively. The film is told mainly from the perspective of Judas. Judas, obviously, didn't understand Christ or his mission. Had the film viewed the events entirely from Judas' perspective, the lack of understanding would have been natural. However, we often leave Judas' direct perspective.
Since the film is such a theological mess, we should throw it out? Right? No.
Both the original rock opera and the film proved to be the gateway drug to Christianity for a huge number of believers in the early seventies and beyond. This film came near the end of the "Jesus Movement" revival that swept through many American universities during the late the sixties in reaction to the excesses of the free love and drug culture. Many of those folks had previously rejected the staid Jesus taught in mainstream churches they attended in their youth. They wanted a more passionate, flesh and blood Jesus. This film gave it to them, and put them on the journey to finding the real Jesus. This is a common story you will find in Internet groups discussing this film. I will confess it had a huge impact on me as well. I went to Catholic School. I paid enough attention to know there were problems with the depiction of Jesus. However, nothing had ever swept me up as emotionally into the passion as this film did at the time.
The musical still retains its power. A very dear friend of mine, who always rejected God because of terrible tragedies she experienced during childhood, texted me while watching the recent live television presentation. Her words: "Now I can see why you follow Jesus."
The life of Moses and the exodus of the Israelis from Egypt is brought to life in this classic Hollywood epic.
I remember watching this film every Easter on television since my earliest childhood, and liking it even more when we finally got a color TV. This is the most epic of the Hollywood's great Biblical epics. Director Cecil B. DeMille pulled out all the stops. It's scale and grandeur has not been duplicated. It's still impressive and fun to watch. It is also, let us admit, a big soap opera too, with Anne Baxter's Nefretiri playing Yul Brynner's Rameses off Charlton Heston's Moses.
It's funny. The modern Christian audience massacres any contemporary Biblical film that adds or subtracts anything from the Biblical story. Yet it loves this film, which does exactly that! Not only does it add the soap opera, it also adds a distinct Cold War message. Trust me, Moses is not going forward to proclaim liberty to the world. If I'm not mistaken, there is another fate in store for the folks the Israelites would find in the Promised Land.
Ah, who cares? This is great, old Hollywood storytelling.
The life is Christ, as depicted in the gospels, plays out in this two-night mini-series.
If you want to do Jesus right, you have to call in the Italians! I've tried many times, but I have found it difficult to sit through Nicholas Ray's 1961 film King of Kings or George Stevens' 1965 film The Greatest Story Ever Told, which actually felt longer than Jesus' earthly ministry itself. During Hollywood's sword and sandal period, depictions of Jesus tended to be too dry and reverential. Franco Zeffirelli's two-night television mini-series gave the story life and vitality. The film was anchored by an amazing performance by Robert Powell as Christ. Although I am a little tired of white guys with blue eyes playing Christ, Powell really nailed it. (I have to admit he was better than Bruce Marchiano in my film The Encounter.) If you only want to see one film about Jesus, make it this one.
BTW, am I the only one who noticed that the screenwriter also wrote the novel A Clockwork Orange? How about that....
Watch it here:
Honorable Mention:
GODSPELL, 1973. Another Jesus rock musical, this time set in the streets of New York. This one is more theologically sound than Jesus Christ Superstar, but not as much fun. (The nuns took us to see this one, too. Nowadays I watch mainly for the great dance scene that ends on top of the nearly-finished World Trade Center.) BEDAZZLED, 1967. Fry cook Dudley Moore sells his soul to the Devil, played by Peter Cook, in this great British comedy which makes some nice theological points. (Avoid the remake!) BEN HUR, 1959. Another Biblical epic that still holds up -- except for the miniatures in the naval battle. Almost made the list, but it didn't have quite enough Jesus. THE RAPTURE, 1991. A hedonistic woman, Mimi Rogers, finds God but later rejects him at the end after a series of tragedies, some self-imposed. Carl Theodor Dreyer's THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC, 1928, a moving silent masterpiece told predominately in close-ups. CALVARY, 2014. Brendan Gleeson plays a good, small village priest threatened with murder for the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church despite his personal innocence in this compelling Irish drama. Pier Paolo Pasolini, a Marxist, atheist, homosexual was inspired by Pope John XXIII to make IL VANGELO SECONDO MATTEO, 1964, which stays pretty close to the Gospel of Matthew, in a semi-documentary, Italian neo-realist style.
And, of course, no blog would be complete without some self-promotion. So feel free to check out my favorite faith-based memoir The Promise, or the Pros and Cons of Talking with God, published by TouchPoint Press. It is my true story of first faith and first love and how the two became almost fatally intertwined.
