12 May 2014
BLOCKBUSTER HISTORY: MOVIES FOR CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS
Every week this summer, we'll be taking an historical tour of the Hollywood blockbuster by examining an older film that is in some way a spiritual precursor to one of the weekend's wide releases. This week: by no means is Moms' Night Out the highest-profile film of the weekend, but I couldn't bring myself to dig up a frat comedy. Also, with the first third of 2014 having produced such a strangely durable and high-profile run of movies specifically designed to appeal to Christian audiences - Moms' Night Out being the last of them for a little while, and apparently the least explicitly religious - it seemed like an appropriate time to look back at the film that effectively ignited the genre. Especially since there's no way I'm going to see any of the damn things in theaters.
Honesty forces the blogger to concede that there's not really any margin in making fun of a six-year-old evangelical Christian marriage drama that got largely smacked around by everyone who wasn't already cemented into its target audience at the time of its release and has since been remembered by pretty much nobody. But having watched Fireproof, I'm damned if I can come up with anything nice to say about it, at all.
Actually, according to Fireproof, I'm pretty much just damned. This is one of "Those" Christian-themed movies, the kind where our designated Infallible Source of Wisdom and Advice sagely observes that God forgives, basically, nothing at all: "His standards are so high, He considers hatred to be murder... You've broken His commandments. And one day, you'll answer to Him for that", says this kindly fellow with a beatific calm that's really hard to square with the fact that he's flat-out telling his son to expect to go straight down to Hell. Given that Kirk Cameron, noted for the intensity of his unforgiving religious zealotry far more than his long-ago success as a child actor these days, is the star and the only apparent reason that the film was able to snag a theatrical release in the first place, this vigorously merciless interpretation of Christ's love comes as no real surprise, though the cheeriness with which it's communicated, like all of us sinners are the jerks for expecting anything better than to have God spit on us, did honestly throw me for a loop, a little.
But this is all missing the real point. Fireproof isn't a bad film because it subscribes to a particularly antiseptic strain of evangelical Christianity and I'm a bigoted atheist; it's a bad film because it's a fucking bad film. In ways so comprehensive and destructive that I frequently lost track of the fact that it had anything to do with religion at all. Stilted acting and tormented dialogue do not discriminate by creed. And the acting and dialogue in Fireproof are terrible things indeed, though the music and camerawork, not wishing to be left out, race as fast as they can towards the bottom to join in the fun.
The film concerns a married couple, the Holts: Caleb (Cameron) and Catherine (Erin Bethea), whose relationship has long since descended into a pure, living hell. The script, by brothers Alex and Stephen Kendrick (Alex also directs), would dearly love us to believe that both members of the marriage have contributed their share to bringing things to this point, and this is the first and most fatal of the film's dramatic miscalculations. For anyone not on the ultra-traditional wavelength of the filmmakers, there's no parity here: Caleb is an outlandish asshole and it's hard to imagine there are all that many 21st Century viewers who might be able to see things any other way. He snarls at no provocation, glares at his wife with undisguised contempt, speaks words that drip with stated and unstated insults, takes out his frustration by beating a garbage can with a baseball bat. By the time the film starts, this isn't merely a dying marriage: it's an unsalvageable and irredeemably toxic one. If Catherine is driven to lash out, and to flirt at her hospital job with the pleasant Dr. Gavin Keller (Prerry Revell), it's hard to feel like she's doing anything but trying her best to survive in a situation that she should have gotten out of years ago.
Caleb works as a firefighter, which allows the film to indulge in some powerfully overwrought metaphors, including an opening scene where he angrily berates a newbie who made some mistakes during a rescue that you NEVER LEAVE YOUR PARTNER DURING A FIRE, a groaner of a line even before we actually have it confirmed that Fireproof will be almost exclusively concerned with the terrible crisis of married couples growing tired of each other, urgently demanding that all of us (the movie seems entirely unaware that people might accidentally see it who aren't currently in a wavering marriage) find a way to stay with our spouse no matter how bitter the going gets. For that's what happens, of course: Caleb's dad John (Harris Malcolm) is so disgusted by the idea that his son is contemplating divorce, he insists that the younger man commit to just a 40-day "love dare", in which he follows the day-by-day instructions John wrote down in a notebook. These were the same rules that saved John's marriage to Caleb's mother Cheryl (Phyllis Malcolm), and they include many different specific prescriptions that all boil down to, "don't be the shittiest person in the whole wide world". This proves astonishingly difficult for Caleb to get his head around.
The film is sincere; we have to give it that, since there's nothing else really to give it. The camera never falls down, everything is in focus, and by virtue of all the locations being real-world spaces arranged by various church group types (my understanding is that Fireproof was very close to an all-volunteer movie), the set design can't help but have an authentic, lived-in feel. That's the other thing to give it. All the rest is silence: or rather, silence's immensely annoying polar opposite, since the biggest liabilities in the film happen whenever anyone opens their mouth, or when Mark Willard's chintzy, electronic keyboard-sounding score revs up, or when one of the several montages set to ghastly Christian pop-rock flail across the screen. I shouldn't say mean things about the actors, who were generally not well-established professionals at the time; but they are quite uniformly stilted, some of them proving entirely unable to meet the challenge of expressing emotions through facial expressions or reciting dialogue in a way that mimics the rhythms of normal human speech. It's a tremendous liability that some of the most important performances, and I will not name names, but she plays the protagonist's wife, are also among the worst in this respect. I can only think to call it irony that the acting in this hypnotically faith-driven movie so nearly resembles the acting in a pornographic film: unchanging eyes and a weird tendency for every emotional register to end up coming off as impatient sarcasm.
Visually, at least, the thing is just boring: overlit medium shot followed by overlit medium shot, and sometimes, Alex Kendrick and cinematographer Bob Scott get really sassy by tossing in a close-up, most of which only serve to draw attention to how oily Kirk Cameron's skin looks, and makes one appreciate anew the good work of cinema's unsung armies of make-up assistants who should have been on hand to do something about that. The firefighting scenes are even kind of kinetic and exciting, though perhaps that's because they are the moments where the film forgets about Catherine entirely, and gives Caleb a chance to be a quick-thinking professional instead of an emotionally abusive psychopath.
I feel like I ask this question every time I encounter one of the things, but: why can't social conservatives make remotely decent movies? Or even largely functional ones? Go back far enough, and you land at directors like Frank Capra, unabashed right-wingers who communicated that philosophy with intelligent, visually creative, dramatically compelling movies. Something snapped along the way, and now we end up with borderline-incoherent trash with a scowling, screaming Kirk Cameron barreling through a horribly bland plot with shiny, anonymous visuals that make the whole thing feel like a church group and some kids taking a high school film class got together one weekend to crank out something that resembles a movie for want of any better comparison. It's boring and, frankly, pathetic, too dimwitted and shaggy for it to even be fun to mock.
Honesty forces the blogger to concede that there's not really any margin in making fun of a six-year-old evangelical Christian marriage drama that got largely smacked around by everyone who wasn't already cemented into its target audience at the time of its release and has since been remembered by pretty much nobody. But having watched Fireproof, I'm damned if I can come up with anything nice to say about it, at all.
Actually, according to Fireproof, I'm pretty much just damned. This is one of "Those" Christian-themed movies, the kind where our designated Infallible Source of Wisdom and Advice sagely observes that God forgives, basically, nothing at all: "His standards are so high, He considers hatred to be murder... You've broken His commandments. And one day, you'll answer to Him for that", says this kindly fellow with a beatific calm that's really hard to square with the fact that he's flat-out telling his son to expect to go straight down to Hell. Given that Kirk Cameron, noted for the intensity of his unforgiving religious zealotry far more than his long-ago success as a child actor these days, is the star and the only apparent reason that the film was able to snag a theatrical release in the first place, this vigorously merciless interpretation of Christ's love comes as no real surprise, though the cheeriness with which it's communicated, like all of us sinners are the jerks for expecting anything better than to have God spit on us, did honestly throw me for a loop, a little.
But this is all missing the real point. Fireproof isn't a bad film because it subscribes to a particularly antiseptic strain of evangelical Christianity and I'm a bigoted atheist; it's a bad film because it's a fucking bad film. In ways so comprehensive and destructive that I frequently lost track of the fact that it had anything to do with religion at all. Stilted acting and tormented dialogue do not discriminate by creed. And the acting and dialogue in Fireproof are terrible things indeed, though the music and camerawork, not wishing to be left out, race as fast as they can towards the bottom to join in the fun.
The film concerns a married couple, the Holts: Caleb (Cameron) and Catherine (Erin Bethea), whose relationship has long since descended into a pure, living hell. The script, by brothers Alex and Stephen Kendrick (Alex also directs), would dearly love us to believe that both members of the marriage have contributed their share to bringing things to this point, and this is the first and most fatal of the film's dramatic miscalculations. For anyone not on the ultra-traditional wavelength of the filmmakers, there's no parity here: Caleb is an outlandish asshole and it's hard to imagine there are all that many 21st Century viewers who might be able to see things any other way. He snarls at no provocation, glares at his wife with undisguised contempt, speaks words that drip with stated and unstated insults, takes out his frustration by beating a garbage can with a baseball bat. By the time the film starts, this isn't merely a dying marriage: it's an unsalvageable and irredeemably toxic one. If Catherine is driven to lash out, and to flirt at her hospital job with the pleasant Dr. Gavin Keller (Prerry Revell), it's hard to feel like she's doing anything but trying her best to survive in a situation that she should have gotten out of years ago.
Caleb works as a firefighter, which allows the film to indulge in some powerfully overwrought metaphors, including an opening scene where he angrily berates a newbie who made some mistakes during a rescue that you NEVER LEAVE YOUR PARTNER DURING A FIRE, a groaner of a line even before we actually have it confirmed that Fireproof will be almost exclusively concerned with the terrible crisis of married couples growing tired of each other, urgently demanding that all of us (the movie seems entirely unaware that people might accidentally see it who aren't currently in a wavering marriage) find a way to stay with our spouse no matter how bitter the going gets. For that's what happens, of course: Caleb's dad John (Harris Malcolm) is so disgusted by the idea that his son is contemplating divorce, he insists that the younger man commit to just a 40-day "love dare", in which he follows the day-by-day instructions John wrote down in a notebook. These were the same rules that saved John's marriage to Caleb's mother Cheryl (Phyllis Malcolm), and they include many different specific prescriptions that all boil down to, "don't be the shittiest person in the whole wide world". This proves astonishingly difficult for Caleb to get his head around.
The film is sincere; we have to give it that, since there's nothing else really to give it. The camera never falls down, everything is in focus, and by virtue of all the locations being real-world spaces arranged by various church group types (my understanding is that Fireproof was very close to an all-volunteer movie), the set design can't help but have an authentic, lived-in feel. That's the other thing to give it. All the rest is silence: or rather, silence's immensely annoying polar opposite, since the biggest liabilities in the film happen whenever anyone opens their mouth, or when Mark Willard's chintzy, electronic keyboard-sounding score revs up, or when one of the several montages set to ghastly Christian pop-rock flail across the screen. I shouldn't say mean things about the actors, who were generally not well-established professionals at the time; but they are quite uniformly stilted, some of them proving entirely unable to meet the challenge of expressing emotions through facial expressions or reciting dialogue in a way that mimics the rhythms of normal human speech. It's a tremendous liability that some of the most important performances, and I will not name names, but she plays the protagonist's wife, are also among the worst in this respect. I can only think to call it irony that the acting in this hypnotically faith-driven movie so nearly resembles the acting in a pornographic film: unchanging eyes and a weird tendency for every emotional register to end up coming off as impatient sarcasm.
Visually, at least, the thing is just boring: overlit medium shot followed by overlit medium shot, and sometimes, Alex Kendrick and cinematographer Bob Scott get really sassy by tossing in a close-up, most of which only serve to draw attention to how oily Kirk Cameron's skin looks, and makes one appreciate anew the good work of cinema's unsung armies of make-up assistants who should have been on hand to do something about that. The firefighting scenes are even kind of kinetic and exciting, though perhaps that's because they are the moments where the film forgets about Catherine entirely, and gives Caleb a chance to be a quick-thinking professional instead of an emotionally abusive psychopath.
I feel like I ask this question every time I encounter one of the things, but: why can't social conservatives make remotely decent movies? Or even largely functional ones? Go back far enough, and you land at directors like Frank Capra, unabashed right-wingers who communicated that philosophy with intelligent, visually creative, dramatically compelling movies. Something snapped along the way, and now we end up with borderline-incoherent trash with a scowling, screaming Kirk Cameron barreling through a horribly bland plot with shiny, anonymous visuals that make the whole thing feel like a church group and some kids taking a high school film class got together one weekend to crank out something that resembles a movie for want of any better comparison. It's boring and, frankly, pathetic, too dimwitted and shaggy for it to even be fun to mock.
18 comments:
Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.
Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.
"ignited the genre"
ReplyDeleteGoddamn you sir.
Isn't Caleb addicted to internet porn or something? Or am I thinking of a different evangelichristian movie?
ReplyDeletethey include many different specific prescriptions that all boil down to, "don't be the shittiest person in the whole wide world". This proves astonishingly difficult for Caleb to get his head around.
ReplyDeleteSo just like his character in Left Behind, then.
My sisters rented this when one of them was dating a fire fighter, and they all couldn't agree on a film. The women wanted romance. He wanted action, and they ended up with this turd.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I would like to make a motion that you add some Christianity to your summer of blood, if only so you can review this thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3Pj4_AaUY
M.C. - I would give anything to say that I meant to make that pun, because it would make me my own favorite non-fiction writer in the English language. Alas, it was just a glorious accident.
ReplyDeleteRick- You've got the right one. There's a scene where he destroys his computer because it's the source of marriage-destroying temptation, or some such.
Not Fenimore- A movie that I'll catch up with one of these days, in anticipation of the big(ger) budget remake.
Alison- If the point of that movie is demonise pornography, it must not be working, because I want to have sex with that trailer.
I am heartbroken to report that the movie doesn't seem to otherwise exist.
I'll add this to my growing backlog of Christian pandertainment that I mean to get drunk to.
ReplyDelete"Harmless" looks incredible as well. I'd also like to take this opportunity to flag up one of my pet favourite hilarious evangelical genre riffs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-7TM3Udip4
I wish I knew the answer to your question. I'm a Christian (although my political stance varies between "slightly left of moderate" and "we're screwed either way") and I have invariably hated Christian movies I've seen.
ReplyDeleteThese films are uniformly terrible, and they uniformly take the most loveless, hateful interpretation of Christ's teachings, and then they have to try to make that look like something that can work in anyone's real life. (Except for maybe Noah, which I've heard is just completely batshit and might be fun on that level. On dvd. I can't be bothered with it in the theater.)
The best one I think I've seen was a schlocky movie from the 70's called "A Thief in the Night." It was also a rapture movie, but it presented itself as horror rather than assuming the viewer's smug condemnation of the characters. The intro is on YouTube.
Don't get me wrong - it's not a GOOD film. It still has that conversion money shot thing that makes Christian fiction so.. special. But at least there was a grain of some kind of filmmaking idea, viz., "these are scary things to happen and it would be horrifying to experience them."
It looks like the Kickstarter to finish Harmless failed spectacularly. And it's even more a tragedy that Tim can't see this movie because "We couldn’t just show images of magazines and video. We took a page from the Steven Spielberg’s school and didn’t show the monster, just alluded to it like in Jaws."
ReplyDeleteIt figures. Porn is a favorite scapegoat right now. Every pastor I've had in the last five years has mentioned it. There's always an assumption that it is looked at only by men, who are married, because their wives don't want to have sex. I'm a little concerned, as a Christian female, that Christian males may have poor clitoris locating skills.
ReplyDelete@Tim, Shalen: There's a great review of Left Behind (the Movie) here:
ReplyDeleteOne Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten Eleven Twelve
It even brings up A Thief in the Nighttowards the end! The money quote is, I think:
"Like Tim LaHaye, Thompson had studied his Hal Lindsay, but he'd also studied his George Romero. Night of the Living Dead showed Thompson how to portray a global apocalypse with a microscopic budget. Thompson wasn't a tenth of the artist Romero is, but his scare-them-into-heaven Christsploitation** flicks, with their casts of amateurs, seem far more compelling and entertaining than the bigger-budget LBTM."
@Shalen: at the risk of dragging this thread hilariously far afield, I think it's more that Christian pastors (of a particular breed) don't have good not-being-gender-essentialist skills. Men want sex all the time obsessively; women want sex not very much if at all; so married men will be more or less always more or less bluntly pressuring their wives into sex; if and when sex fails to happen it will be because of the woman's reluctance; porn provides another (inferior, dirtywrongbad) outlet for the man's perpetual horniness; so men looking at porn is the fault of women. The clitoris doesn't come into it.
ReplyDelete(Probably literally doesn't come into it, if you're the kind of gender-essentiallist jerk who believes that line of reasoning. That obviously suggests another reason why Big Manly Christian Man's wife might be less interested in sex than him, but that would imply that Big Manly Christian Man is not totally awesome, you guys, so clearly that's not it. Eyeroll.)
@NotFenimore
ReplyDeleteAha, a fellow Slacktivist reader! Can't wait until the Nic Cage reboot comes out, the reaction over there will be thermonuclear.
@Thrash: IKR? It's going to be great.
ReplyDeleteOh, Not Fenimore, you're going straight to Hell. Heeeeeell.
ReplyDelete:D
I suspect you're right. And I'd call "Christsploitation" a perfect term for what "A Thief In The Night" is, and what Left Behind et al. fail to be (or they'd be more fun).
I just want to say that right now, I'm in love with everybody involved in this comment thread.
ReplyDelete"Aha, a fellow Slacktivist reader! Can't wait until the Nic Cage reboot comes out, the reaction over there will be thermonuclear."
ReplyDelete*Raises hand* Me too!
I'm kinda disappointed that the makers of the LB remake are thinking so small. Like, they're only making the first third of the first (of 12!) book.
I mean, do Buck and Rafe even cast the "Sinner's Prayer" spell and Get Saved™? Nicolae Carpathia doesn't even show up yet, let alone TurboJesus; 20 feet tall with disintegration rays of righteousness shooting out of his eyes, cutting down the doomed sinner armies like Doctor Manhattan winning the Vietnam war.
@Shaelen: Quite probably.
ReplyDelete@Rick: My favourite comment on that was from MightyGodKing, another blogger I hope you all read:
"NO! NOT CGI PADDY HAT SOLDIER! He had four CGI kids and a fifth one being rendered!"
It's all anecdotal,
ReplyDeleteThese newer Christploitation movies seem to be born of a strain of exclusive Christianity, the end product of preaching a gospel of "Christianity under siege," constantly ringing alarm bells on how the "Christian way of life" is being threatened by This Godless Modern World. And while 'we're under attack' is a great way to drum up support, it tends to turn your followers into hard-liners who alienate everyone who isn't already with them.
And people don't seem to go for tragedies anymore, so the "Christians under siege" have to "win" in the movie; at no point can any other viewpoint look like a reasonable one.
So rather than honest paeans to good-old-fashioned small-town virtues that might even make viewers outside a target demographic feel warm fuzzies for having watched it, you end up with hysterical alarmist screeds that only aim to preach to the choir.
What I don't get is how Tyler Perry seems to be able to tread similar territory and make a mint, while I don't even know if any of these other films recoup.