Burchfield 1
Julie Burchfield
Professor Andrew Quicke
COM 505 Aesthetics for Contemporary Communicators
November 22, 2011
Film and Theology
Film has superseded its role as simple entertainment and has instead become an avenue
used by humanity to discover the meaning of life. Robert McKee describes this transformation
of film when he states in his book Story:
Day after day we seek an answer to the ageless question Aristotle posed in Ethics:
How should a human being lead his life? But the answer eludes us... Traditionally
humankind has sought the answer to Aristotle’s question from the four wisdoms –
philosophy, science, religion, art – taking insight from each to bolt together a
livable meaning. But who reads Hegel or Kant without an exam to pass? Science,
once the great explicator, garbles life with complexity and perplexity. Religion,
for many, has become an empty ritual that masks hypocrisy. As our faith in
traditional ideologies diminishes, we turn to the source we still believe in: the art
of story. The world now consumes films, novels, theatre, and television in such
quantities and with such ravenous hunger that the story arts have become
humanity’s prime source of inspiration, as it seeks to order chaos and gain insight
into life. (McKee 11-12)
People are searching for answers to the difficult questions that life raises. Film, being a
storytelling art, has the capacity to make an emotional connection with the audience and, in turn,
prepares the viewer for theological reflection (Johnston 106-109). Christians must somehow
Burchfield 2
reconcile the idea that humanity is capable of extracting virtuous and honorable life direction
from the movies. Many believers are becoming a part of the film industry. From viewing films
to creating and producing films, Christians are attempting to engage our culture through a
medium that is in high demand. In his book, Reel Spirituality, Robert K. Johnston describes five
different theological reactions that the church can have concerning film: avoidance, caution,
dialogue, appropriation and divine encounter (55-60). This paper will attempt to further define
these theological reactions by citing examples from both literature and film.
Dr. John R. Rice published his booklet entitled What is Wrong With the Movies? in the
year 1938. Dr. Rice was a Baptist evangelist affiliated with Bob Jones University who published
over 200 books, founded the fundamentalist newspaper The Sword of The Lord, and created the
radio program Voice of Revival (Brackney 481-482). So, what exactly was wrong with the
movies? Pretty much everything according to this aggressive fundamentalist. Dr. Rice was
adamant that “movies are made by sinful, wicked people” (Rice 22) and that “movies encourage
crime, endorse sin, [and] teach lust” (Rice 53). Dr. Rice certainly held fast to the avoidance
stance, the most severe of the reactions described by Johnston. According to Dr. Rice, movies
were “sinful amusement” and should be avoided at all cost (Rice 5). The problem with the
avoidance reaction to film lies in the attitude one carries toward film. It is undeniable that film
and the film industry is abundant in sin and is occupied by sinful people. But, so is the church.
Every person’s life and every person’s story is filled with shortcomings and overflows with
offense. As Christians and as film viewers, we can choose to see only the evil that exists in a
story, or we can look for the redemptive power of the blood of Jesus. The problem with seeing
only the wickedness is evident when one begins to find fault where no real fault needs to be
found.
Burchfield 3
I once heard it said that a local television guide advertised an upcoming movie with a
description that went something like this: A young girl runs away from home, murders a woman
with a large blunt object and proceeds to steal the dead woman’s shoes. She then meets up with
three older men, who become her traveling companions as they go in search of the dead
woman’s sister in order to kill her too. And which movie was this local television guide
describing? One of my childhood favorites, The Wizard of OZ (1939). The above account of the
film’s plot is not altogether inaccurate. However, if this is the lens you choose to view The
Wizard of OZ through, you have missed the entire meaning that was being voiced in the narrative
of this delightful film. The Wizard of OZ is about a young girl’s journey to find her place in life.
It is a story of a wandering heart finding its way back home, much like the Biblical story of the
prodigal son. It isn’t until she is taken away from the safety of her quaint Kansas farm, that
Dorothy realizes how important home is to her. “The search for home may be the search for
something not previously experienced” (Nathanson 220). At the beginning of the film, Dorothy
feels out of place and even unwanted on the busy farm belonging to her Aunt and Uncle. She
desires to experience a life she can only dream of that must exist somewhere just over the
rainbow. It is not until she has left home that she discovers her true appreciation for the love and
security that exists for her on the farm in her Aunt and Uncle’s care. Paul Nathanson in his book
Over The Rainbow : The Wizard Of Oz As A Secular Myth Of America, goes on to describe
Dorothy’s journey as representing the Christian’s journey of salvation first presented to us by
Christ’s journey here on this Earth and in his subsequent return to his home in heaven. The book
of John “indicates that the Christ originated in heaven (‘In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God’ John 1:1–2),
lived temporarily on earth as Jesus of Nazareth (‘And the Word became flesh and dwelt among
Burchfield 4
us’ John 1:14), and then returned home to Heaven (‘I am ascending to my Father and your
Father, to my God and your God’ John 20:17). This Johannine pattern, it seems, is implicit in
The Wizard. Dorothy could make a new home for herself in Oz, after all, but prefers to go back
to her old home in Kansas” (Nathanson 220). Every sinner must come to the conclusion that this
world is not the home we are dreaming of and, in turn, desire to go home to heaven to be in the
care of our Father. To avoid this film would result not only in a great loss of entertainment, but
the loss of a powerful message concerning the importance of returning our wondering hearts to
their true home.
Dr. Rice felt that faith could only be hindered by the consumption of film and therefore
should be avoided at all cost. Many current films are unapologetically filled with cursing,
drinking, smoking, drugs, magic, mysticism, graphic violence, and explicit sex scenes. How do
we as Christians reconcile our faith to this seemingly sinful cultural medium? Can redemption
be found in the movies? In the conclusion of his book, Dr. Rice makes this plea to the church:
I am thoroughly convinced after long study and investigation that the movie
industry is the enemy of God, the enemy of the Bible, the enemy of true churches
of Jesus Christ. The movies lead men away from God, and away from heaven.
They lead men to sin, to unbelief, to outbroken wickedness, and eventually they
lead many to hell. CHRISTIAN! PUT CHRIST FIRST TODAY AND QUIT
THE MOVIES FOREVER! (Rice 120).
Very few today would adhere to such a strict level of abstinence despite the debauchery
prevalent in the film industry (Johnston 57). This fact brings us to the second of Johnston’s
theological approaches to film engagement, caution. Or, in other words, using discrimination in
choosing which films to watch (Johnston 60-64).
Burchfield 5
First, it is important to note that not all films are immoral. Pixar Animation Studios has
become the leader in producing high quality, non-offensive entertainment that has excellent
moral messages. In a personal interview, John Lasseter, founder of Pixar, reveals that the
studio’s ultimate ambition is to create films that portray honest, noble characters that will inspire
boys to develop into honest, noble young men (Junod 152-157). Cars (2006) revolves around
the idea that victory is not always synonymous with winning (Booker 96-97). In this computeranimated film, the cast consists solely of anthropomorphic cars. Lightening McQueen, a famous
and arrogant racecar, reveals his true character at the climax of the film when he is placed in a
high-pressure situation (McKee 100-109). Throughout the entire story, McQueen has one
ultimate goal; to win the Piston Cup. After several setbacks, McQueen has finally reached
California where his all-important race is being held. He is in the first-place position. The
antagonist of the film, Chick Hicks, causes The King, the elder competitor, to wreck. Suddenly,
McQueen is faced with the true test of his character. Will he ignore the need of the elder car,
The King, and continue on to win the race or will McQueen sacrifice the win in order to help The
King finish the race and in doing so give this elder car the honor of finishing? McQueen chooses
to help The King finish and as a result, loses the race and the Piston Cup. Yet, his sacrifice
brings him the respect of both the audience and the sponsors, proving that the greatest victory is
sometimes found in losing. Even though Cars is not specifically “Christian” by nature, it is easy
to identify the moral message portrayed in the film (Booker 96-97). When movies contain this
type of obvious ethical substance, their viewing is easy to justify. But how should Christians
react when a film’s meaning cannot be so easily identified? Johnston suggests that this in when
Christians need to enter into a dialogue with the film (Johnston 64-69).
Burchfield 6
Johnston describes dialogue as first viewing a movie and appreciating it for what it is; a
film. He encourages the audience to become immersed in the movie’s aesthetics and narrative
(Johnston 64). After truly experiencing the film, the viewer is then ready to step away from the
experience and ask themselves, what message was being portrayed? A wonderful example of
this is the film Inception, released by Warner Brothers in 2010. This film takes us deep into the
subconscious of the human mind. The lead character, played by Leonardo Decaprio, is a thief
who steals, not objects, but ideas. His profession has made him a fugitive and the only way to
find redemption is to attempt one last heist. Only this time he will not be stealing a thought; he
will be planting one. “The film's premise is that ideas are unstoppable once they have taken
seed, and can affect the world more than physical objects do” (Koch 32). The entire film focuses
on the power of our subconscious ideas. It lends itself to questioning reality. Do our beliefs
define or distort our reality? And where do these beliefs originate? When we are able to openly
dialogue about concepts such as this one, we will begin to see our faith grow and become
relevant to the world around us.
In a 1962 interview with Guideposts magazine, Walt Disney defends the presence of the
villain in Disney animated films:
Children are people, and they should have to reach to learn about things, to understand
things, just as adults have to reach if they want to grow in mental stature. Life is
composed of light and shadows, and we would be untruthful, insincere and saccharine if
we tried to pretend there were no shadows. Most things are good, and they are the
strongest things; but there are evil things, too, and you are not doing a child a favor by
trying to shield him from reality. The important thing is to teach a child that good can
always triumph over evil, and that is what our pictures attempt to do. (Detweiler 222)
Burchfield 7
Many films deal with this age-old battle that wages between the forces of good and evil.
Johnston would refer to interacting with this type of film as appropriation. In appropriation, “the
focus is no so much on encountering God as on finding ourselves, our spiritual center” (Johnston
70). Films that pit good against evil, give “us the reflection of our darkest potential, of showing
our need to integrate light and shadow, in declaring that we all are capable of both extraordinary
good and extraordinary wickedness” (Johnston 71). I can think of no better film example that
narrates humankind’s capacity for both good and evil than Star Wars, specifically the character
Darth Vader. Darth Vader is the embodiment of Paul’s struggle with right and wrong which he
so passionately relates in the book of Romans:
“So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in
my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war
against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within
me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to
death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I
myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of
sin” (New International Version Bible, Romans 7:21-25).
Anakin Skywalker, who is led to the Dark side by the Emperor, does not begin as the villain of
the story. Nor do I believe that he ever becomes the villain, but rather the victim of the narrative.
There are several determining factors that result in Anakin’s demise into Darth Vader, the
greatest of which is his desire to be in complete control of his destiny. He foresees the death of
Padmé, his wife, and is convinced by the emperor that turning to the dark side will provide him
with the power to prevent it. So Anakin, much like Paul, wants to do good but evil is right there
with him. In Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983) Luke tells Vader that he can feel the struggle
Burchfield 8
within him and that he believes there is good in his father although Vader has committed himself
to the dark-side. Vader denies the existence of any good within him. Nevertheless later in the
film we see that there is indeed good that lives buried deep inside him. Once again it his love
that causes a change in his soul. Initially, Vader gives into evil in an attempt to change what is
truly out of his control. When Vader realizes that he is not in control, but rather the evil is
controlling him, he is able to free himself from its power. “Evil and death have not conquered,
the good man who Vader was once lives again – forever” (Anker 237). He destroys evil in order
to save his son, Luke, from a similar fate. This stories embodies the idea of appropriation and
that film speaks “to the existential conditions of our times and to the spiritual conditions of our
souls” (Johnston 71-72).
The fifth and final way Johnston suggests Christians can engage film is through divine
encounter. Johnston defines a divine encounter with film by quoting Edward McNulty, author of
Praying the Movies, as saying that a divine encounter is “that elusive moment...an ‘Aha!’
moment, when the spirit awakens us to something special in the film. It may be an act of one of
the characters, a word, a song, an image, or the way all the elements of a shot or scene come
together in the perfect way, making us aware that we are on holy ground” (Johnston 76). When I
first read the idea of film as divine encounter, I was skeptical. I watch movies to be entertained,
right? Then I watched, for the third time, The Return of the King from The Lord of the Rings
trilogy. When we were almost to the scene in which Sam carries Frodo up Mount Doom, I
looked to my husband and said, “Oh, I love this part.” As the scene unfolded, I realized why it
was one of my favorite parts of the entire trilogy: it is, for me personally, a divine encounter with
God. Seeing Sam pick up the exhausted Frodo and hearing him say those words, “Come on, Mr.
Frodo. I can't carry it for you... but I can carry you!” (Lord of the Rings), touches me deeply and
Burchfield 9
moves me to tears every time I see it. This scene is a beautiful picture of our walk with Christ.
It shows how, in our deepest, darkest hour Christ doesn’t leave us, but rather He is there to pick
us up and carry us, to give us the strength to do what we are not capable of accomplishing on our
own. In a film which on the surface appears to have nothing to do with Christianity, I found
Christ and a tremendous reminder of His love for me. This is the power of story and this is the
power of film.
Christianity is more than a mere list of facts. When a believer recounts a special moment
they have shared with Christ, they do not simply state the time and place. Although this
information may be revealed, it is not the crux of the telling. I could tell you that I was saved
when I was about 10 years old in Connersville, Indiana while attending a Church of God Church,
Cleveland Assembly I might add...touching, isn’t it? No, not really. If I want to move you to
feel the love of Jesus that I experienced on that night, I’m going to have to give you more than
just the facts. I’ll have to chronicle the events that led up to that special moment, relate to you
my emotion, communicate every detail of what I saw and heard in order to enable you to live
that experience with me all over again. Then my encounter, if I am successful in conveying the
truth of that moment, becomes your encounter. And perhaps your spirit, too, will be inspired. In
his book, Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, and Fairy Tale, Frederick
Buechner discusses the impact the Gospel can have when we become less concerned “with how
the Gospel is to be preached than with what the Gospel is and what it is to us” (4). He goes on to
say that we, as Christians, must address ourselves “to the fullness of who we are and to the
emptiness too, the emptiness where grace and peace belong” (4). What Buechner is trying to
convey is that we can’t be afraid to let the Gospel see us for who we really are. God’s grace and
peace belong to the emptiness we feel inside our souls. The part of our soul where hurt and
Burchfield 10
anger, bitterness and pain, loneliness and confusion reside; the part we try to hide from all the
world, including ourselves. This is why film is such a powerful medium. Film allows us the
opportunity to expose the hidden part of our souls. We relate to the characters on the screen.
Sometimes we find hope and comfort for our own situations. “Hope...liberates the spirit. Such a
hope...explains the durability of certain American films; indeed, it would be justifiable to claim
that hope undergirds all canons of greatness” (May 1). These moments of vulnerability – when
we are surrounded by the audience but, at the same time, are utterly alone with ourselves –
provide an opportunity for the Spirit to speak to our souls. It may be a word of comfort or it
made be a word that challenges us; either way, it is the voice of God speaking to us through film.
Burchfield 11
Works Cited
Anker, Roy M. Catching Light. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2004. Print.
Baird, Kirk. "Matt Damon chooses freewill over fate in 'Adjustment Bureau'." Blade, The (OH)
03 Mar. 2011: Points of View Reference Center. Web. 21 Nov. 2011.
Booker, M. Keith. Disney, Pixar, And The Hidden Messages Of Children's Films. ABC-CLIO,
2010. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 20 Nov. 2011.
Brackney, William H. A To Z Of The Baptists. Scarecrow Press, 2009. eBook Collection
(EBSCOhost). Web. 17 Nov. 2011.
Buechner, Frederick. Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, and Fairy Tale. New
York: HarperCollins, 1977. Print.
Detweiler, Craig. Into the Dark: Seeing the Sacred in the Top Films of 21st Century. Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008. Print.
New International Version Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984. Print.
Johnston, Robert K. Reel Spirituality. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006. Print.
Junod, Tom. "Father Of The Year." Esquire 155.6 (2011): 152-157. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.
Koch, Christof. "A smart vision of brain hacking." Nature 467.7311 (2010): 32. General
OneFile. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.
The Lord of the Rings, The Return of the King. Dir. Peter Jackson. Perf. Sean Astin. 2003. New
Line Home Entertainment, 2005. DVD.
May, John R., ed. Image and Likeness: Religious Visions in American Film Classics. New York:
Paulist Press, 1992. Print.
McKee, Robert. Story. New York: HarperCollins, 1997. Print.
Nathanson, Paul. Over The Rainbow : The Wizard Of Oz As A Secular Myth Of America. State
University of New York Press, 1991. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 19 Nov.
2011.
Rice, John R. What is Wrong With the Movies? Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1938. Print.
Burchfield 12