1 of 3

We've been wrestling with the question of just how explicit, in the things of faith, a Christian film should be. Should it be in your face with Jesus and the gospel, or should it be more subtle?

We asked two sharp-thinking filmmakers to help us wrestle with the question. Rik Swartzwelder is an L.A. filmmaker whose short, The Least of These, won numerous awards on the film festival circuit. Atlanta's Angela Harvey is a filmmaker, writer, graphic designer, and founder of Crimson, which produces independent films, gospel tracts and greeting cards.

In an oversimplified nutshell, Swartzwelder believes Christian filmmakers should feel free to be direct with spiritual content—including the gospel—in the context of cinematic storytelling, while Harvey believes such things should be communicated in a more subtle way, if at all. With those assumptions as the starting point, we asked Rik and Angela to debate their positions in an e-mail exchange—which we're now sharing with you in a special four-part series, starting today and running through Thursday.

In yesterday's Part 2, the debate ranged from what the gospel should "look like" in a movie to exploring the Holy Spirit's role in conveying the message. In today's Part 3, the debate continues, including an exploration into whether "Christian" films are actually recruiting tools …

Angela Harvey writes:

As a freelancer, I do a lot of work for churches, and I would consider that work "Christian." But when I write or design something for a secular organization, I do that work with excellence and unto the Lord—but I don't necessarily consider the end product "Christian" in nature. I don't think it's possible to make Christian desserts, even if you put a chocolate cross on top.

You've repeatedly said that Christians are putting pressure on other Christians to suppress the Christian content of their work. What I am espousing here is not suppression, but a deliberate weaving of Christian themes—such as quoted but not referenced Scripture, and well-rounded Christian characters—into the fabric of great stories. It doesn't require less artisanship or individuality than mainstream films, but a great deal more. The difference between my position and the one you've been attacked with lies in execution and in the motive of the heart.

I can think of only one reason why Christians would want religious content completely cut out of a film, and that's fear. They fear personal rejection and embarrassment, or they fear the film will be poorly executed, resulting in a further demeaning of themselves, the gospel and the Church. I can certainly understand those fears; the church has suffered from enough bad filmmaking over the past couple of decades. Hiding our faith isn't the answer, but at the same time, I don't think it's necessarily appropriate to scream that we are Christians from the tops of our lungs. There's a balance. And if that includes highlighting our strong points in order to get people to give Christianity a second look, I have no problem with that.

When I was at a state university, my biology professor was so anti-Christianity that he consistently told students that Christians were idiots, that most people who attended church were uneducated and easily duped. He attacked no other form of religion or spirituality. Otherwise, this man was affable and one of the most respected teachers on campus. But he was wrong.

The truth is, most Christians I know are likeable and intelligent. Granted, we all have our bad days, but those don't generally include cutting off a man's fingers with a cigar cutter and then searing them closed with a cigarette lighter, as Denzel Washington's character did in Man on Fire. And I really can't remember the last time one of my friends decorated his gigantic, diesel-eating truck with pictures of Jesus, ran over an entire family and then fled the scene as Benecio del Toro's Jack Jordan does in 21 Grams.

Let's offer a little bit of perspective here. I really appreciated John Corbett's portrayal of the Lutheran Pastor Dan in Raising Helen. While the film itself may not have been Garry Marshall's best, I still appreciated the positive portrayal of a Christian character under ordinary circumstances. That does not mean that all our Christian characters should be falsely free of character flaws and do nothing wrong. But in presenting flawed people, I think we should be careful not to imply that the thing in which they've placed their faith is also flawed.

next page... |  1 of 3 | last page

Related Elsewhere:

Should Films Be Faith-Explicit?	Printer view
That's the question we posed to two Christian filmmakers on both sides of the issue. We initiated an e-mail debate between them, and while there were no easy answers, the lively exchange is instructive. Part 1 of 4.

---

Should Films Be Faith-Explicit?	Printer view
That's the question we posed to two Christian filmmakers on both sides of the issue. We initiated an e-mail debate between them, and while there were no easy answers, the lively exchange is instructive. Part 2 of 4.

---

Should Films Be Faith-Explicit?	Printer view
That's the question we posed to two Christian filmmakers who were coming from two sides of the issue. We initiated an e-mail debate between them, and while there were no easy answers, the lively exchange is instructive. Part 4 of 4.