your eyes are more important than you think

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: art, culture, emerging culture, movies, music, reflections, television
• Date: Jun 26,2009

Many today have an unhealthy love affair with everything John Piper writes. I am humbly learning how not to, as Scot McKnight would say, see things only through the lens of my “maestros.” But the following is just solid, pastoral thinking on the issue of exposure to edgier cultural forms…

And that Piper has said it doesn’t mean that if you are not a conservative, reformed, “glory of God” type of Jesus-follower, this doesn’t apply to you. Listen to me, it does. I believe this is one of the most important issues for many of the “younger evangelicals” who have swung towards a version of cultural syncretism with very little discernment or worse, blurred the lines of holiness for the sake of “understanding culture.”

Don’t misunderstand me. Some are called to things that most Christians couldn’t and frankly, probably shouldn’t, i.e., xxxChurch. This is a unique and specific calling that takes tons of accountability, boundaries, and discernment. I believe if Jesus were around today, he wouldn’t hesitate to be seen with someone from the adult film industry.

The truth is, I LOVE mainstream cultural art forms – probably too much. I have consumed my fair share of it to truly say, as Solomon did, “there is nothing new under the sun.” And in my pursuit of it, I have found, as Piper says in the following post, a “deadening” of my “capacities for joy in Jesus.”

Please read a portion of his recent post, “Why I Don’t Have a Television and Rarely Go to Movies” and ask God to show you how you can love Him more so you can relate to culture:

I think relevance in preaching hangs very little on watching movies, and I think that much exposure to sensuality, banality, and God-absent entertainment does more to deaden our capacities for joy in Jesus than it does to make us spiritually powerful in the lives of the living dead. Sources of spiritual power—which are what we desperately need—are not in the cinema. You will not want your biographer to write: Prick him and he bleeds movies.

If you want to be relevant, say, for prostitutes, don’t watch a movie with a lot of tumbles in a brothel. Immerse yourself in the gospel, which is tailor-made for prostitutes; then watch Jesus deal with them in the Bible; then go find a prostitute and talk to her. Listen to her, not the movie. Being entertained by sin does not increase compassion for sinners.

There are, perhaps, a few extraordinary men who can watch action-packed, suspenseful, sexually explicit films and come away more godly. But there are not many. And I am certainly not one of them.

I have a high tolerance for violence, high tolerance for bad language, and zero tolerance for nudity. There is a reason for these differences. The violence is make-believe. They don’t really mean those bad words. But that lady is really naked, and I am really watching. And somewhere she has a brokenhearted father.

I’ll put it bluntly. The only nude female body a guy should ever lay his eyes on is his wife’s. The few exceptions include doctors, morticians, and fathers changing diapers. “I have made a covenant with my eyes; how then could I gaze at a virgin?” (Job 31:1). What the eyes see really matters. “Everyone who looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Better to gouge your eye than go to hell (verse 29).

Brothers, that is serious. Really serious. Jesus is violent about this. What we do with our eyes can damn us. One reason is that it is virtually impossible to transition from being entertained by nudity to an act of “beholding the glory of the Lord.” But this means the entire Christian life is threatened by the deadening effects of sexual titillation.

All Christ-exalting transformation comes from “beholding the glory of Christ.” “Beholding the glory of the Lord, [we] are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another” (2 Corinthians 3:18). Whatever dulls the eyes of our mind from seeing Christ powerfully and purely is destroying us. There is not one man in a thousand whose spiritual eyes are more readily moved by the beauty of Christ because he has just seen a bare breast with his buddies.

extract’d

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: art, authenticity, books, culture, extract'd, movies, music
• Date: Feb 16,2009

I prefer showing over telling simply because it works – it’s an effective memorable way to communicate a message. Popular movies, books and music do influence, to varying degrees, the way we perceive ourselves, God and each other. And, like olympic figure skaters, they do this without looking like they’re trying – without preaching, using mostly story. And more than one camera, a multi-million dollar budget, and a household-name director. But is that any excuse for making yet another Christian flick that tells us to do the right thing?

-Shaun Groves, from his blog entry, “Show and Tell” via shaungroves.com/shlog

the slow numb

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: culture, media, movies, social issues, television
• Date: Feb 4,2009

Jonathan Leeman of 9Marks is reviewing chapter-by-chapter, the new Crossway book, Worldliness, edited by C.J. Mahaney. Today, he reviewed chapter 2 entitled, “God, My Heart, and the Media,” written by Craig Cabaniss. He has some great reflections on the chapter:

…media makes up the continual background of many of our lives, and he [Cabaniss] provokes one to ask whether or not we’re aware of all the assumptions that are slowly filtering into our hearts and minds as we imbibe thoughtlessly imbibe the media.

…many Christians take care to avoid the more explicit moments in movies…Yet we often don’t give a second thought to the fact that entire storylines are premised upon, not just secular, but sinful worldviews…

And when we let storylines undergirded with these kinds of worldviews comprise our “entertainment,” our “down-time,” our “rest,” there’s an effect: “Filling our minds with these media deceptions dulls our sensitivity to God’s holy hatred for sin” (Cabaniss, 53).

Leeman notes that Cabaniss lists several pages of questions to ask of our hearts about one’s media viewing. Here are the ones Leeman reprinted (57-59):

“Why do I want to watch this program or film? What do I find entertaining about it?”
“Am I seeking to escape from something i should be facing by watching this? Am I seeking comfort or relief that can be found only in God?”
“What sinful temptations will this program or film present?”
“Do I secretly want to view something in it that’s sinful?”
“Am I watching because I’m bored or lazy? If so, what does that reveal about my heart?”

go rent be kind rewind!

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: movies
• Date: Dec 17,2008

Holly and I watched the best movie of 2008 (and frankly, the best one we’ve seen in a long time) on Monday night: the Michael Gondry film, Be Kind Rewind starring Jack Black, Mos Def, Danny Glover, and Mia Farrow. Great writing, casting, acting, content, everything. Tons of spiritual echoes throughout. I’m going to do a full review on this here blog after the new year. Stay tuned…

extract’d

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: extract'd, independent music, movies, music
• Date: Aug 27,2008

Will the real indie stand up?

At this point, most people acknowledge that there’s indie rock– music produced without corporate financial backing– and Indie Rock, a corporately funded mainstream genre that’s defined by normative musical aesthetics, not ideology or actual practice. The same idea carries over to indie film. There’s a festival and art-house circuit that’s essentially Hollywood’s shadow, governed not by artistic and financial freedom but by its own internal hierarchies and genre trappings. A number of tiresome trends have infected this circuit in recent years, including a cynical approach to ethnic and identity politics to garner perfunctory acclaim, condescending caricatures of rural types, and the accumulation of quirks and non-sequiturs in lieu of credible characterization.

-Brian Howe, music critic for Pitchfork Media, from his review of the soundtrack of the indie film Woodpecker

Photo by PUM Clothing by Mr. B. Covered by Creative Commons License.

wow…

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: movies, quotes of note, reflections
• Date: Jul 19,2008

Via Brant Hansen. Just read:

At one level, this movie is a bunch of violent, purposeless noise.

But there is a second deeper level. At that level, “The Dark Knight” is a discourse on the nature of evil.

And then… there is a third, still deeper, final level.

At that final level, this movie is a bunch of violent, purposeless noise.

———————

People are buying scalped tickets this weekend for $100 apiece. The critics say it’s brilliant. You’ve likely heard them, speaking in uniform voice, extolling the profundity of this very, very important movie. The hype has been unmatched. It’s the best of its genre — ever. Thoroughly engrossing, thoroughly entertaining, thoroughly — you know — important.

So it’s interesting to watch people emerge into the light of day in the hot Florida sun, looking for their cars in the crowded lots. They look kinda…bored. Like they did when they walked in. Almost like they didn’t just see 2.5 hours of non-stop explosions, ear-crushing destruction, screams, bleeding, shotgun blasts, and brutal torture scenes.

Let the record show that in the waning days of western civilization, when we were artistically spent, the going rate for 2.5 hours of defibrillation was $9. Anything — anything! — to get our hearts pumping again, if for a short time, before exiting to find where we put the Accord.

This movie is well-made, of course. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, “People who enjoy that sort of thing will certainly enjoy that sort of thing.”

“The Dark Knight” is that sort of thing. Death, mayhem, horrifying chaos — wrapped in ooh-that’s-deep philosophizing that will prompt many an essay from high school sophomores. Too bad it, ultimately, means nothing.

Granted, my experience was colored somewhat. Carolyn and I were sitting next to a three-year-old, who was treated to a happy-time-with-dad buffet of burnt flesh, maniacal laughing, and corpses. It’s only PG-13, you know, which just means parents need show guidance, as they guide those they are to protect into their seats in dark, stranger-filled blood shows. Where would we be without parental guidance?

———————

Focus on the Family gives this movie 2-and-a-half stars for “family friendliness”. For what family, the Mansons?

Will kids say they liked it, though? Will the junior high boys like it? Here’s an experiement: Ask a group of junior high boys for movies they say that were NOT awesome. I’ve done it. There follows a long silence. This is because they are fools.

———————

“The Dark Knight” is cultural rigormortis. It’s what happens when we are done, and we are done. Jacques Barzun had it right, when he wrote a history of western culture up through the 1990s, and said, certainly, that our age is defined by boredom. We are excited by nothing, really, but maybe for a moment here, or a moment there, we can try to be turned on. Sex can do it (or fake sex, much more likely) but brutal violence can work, too, if for a short time.

Our culture is lying on the table, and “The Dark Knight” is just another jolt before the flatline resumes.

At least give us this: Our mass-market (which included me, yesterday) is willing to pay for it, but also demands some sense that it was all, ultimately, high-minded, that it was making some statement, that it was horrific, yes, but redemptive, blah blah blah. Expect many hip Christian types to write as much, because 1) That’s the essence of being hip, and 2) Who doesn’t like Batman?

But it’s not redemptive…unless…

Unless we can emerge in the sunlight, after ALL THAT HYPE for this masterwork, this penultimate expression, this marvel-ous creation, saying, “Really? That’s as good as it gets?”

Then we walk out into the sun, and decide it’s infinitely more interesting than what we just paid to see.

the 7

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: church, community, emerging church, missiology, missional church, movies, multi-site, music, prayer, relevintage, theology
• Date: May 30,2008

1. I-Monk once again cuts to the chase regarding the difference between gaining converts and just gaining people in church. Sometimes, bigger isn’t missional…

2. Ever seen a horrible Jesus movie? The Wittenberg Door has seen ten. And #10 may surprise you… [The pics alone are worth a click...]

3. Want an inside look at Saddleback? Bob Hyatt recently visited and unpacked some pithy insights on video venues, Rick Warren’s preaching and use of Scripture, worship segmentation, and church size.

4. This was a very provocative interview by Andrew Jones that got me thinking about how ‘gutsy’ our missional living really is. He interviewed David Pierce, director of Steiger International and No Longer Music, who, as Andrew says, is taking its message of hope to “some of the darkest places imaginable, including closed Islamic countries, terrorist clubs, squatter villages, anarchy festivals, brothels, junkie joints, punk & goth music festivals, Satanist clubs and New Age gatherings.” Wow…

5. Greg Gilbert waxes eloquent on adiaphora, er, the pursuit of many for coolness over faithfulness in a church. Not that they are mutually exclusive, but he pushes us to think about what is most important…

6. If you haven’t been following JVo’s series on prayer, it’s good. I mean really good. Check it out: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9

7. In light of the series I’m doing on the missional church, I found this video very insightful. It comes from Dave Browning of Christ the King Church @ Leadership Network’s Multi-Site Exposed conference @ Mars Hill in Seattle. In it, he talks about growing organic, relational congregations with authentic community that can grow and adapt to their specific sub-culture and yet remain connected to the greater body.

prognosticating…

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: movies
• Date: Mar 27,2008

One of the biggest films of all time, breaking box office records galore. May 22. I can’t wait.

mysteriously funny

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: humor, movies
• Date: Mar 13,2008

I caught this on Encore Action today while chilling at my in-laws for Spring Break. Classically weird…

I mean, Tom Waits…

movie review: fracture

• Author: Brad
• Filed under: culture, movies, review, theology
• Date: Jun 2,2007

I really don’t get out to see movies in the theater anymore. With a full-time job, a family I adore, and t.v. shows like Lost and Grey’s Anatomy to keep me busy, plopping $30+ down for a movie and Junior Mints is getting harder to justify. I think the last movie we saw was The DaVinci Code. I now, losers…

But when me and my wife are kidless – a.k.a. at their grandparents – we try to find something that might work on the big screen. We scoured the movie listings last night and decided on the Anthony Hopkins/Ryan Gosling criminal drama thriller, Fracture.

The basic premise is an attorney [Gosling], intent on climbing the career ladder toward success, finds an unlikely opponent [Hopkins] in a manipulative criminal he’s trying to prosecute. The movie is Gosling’s journey, no so much to understand whodunnit, but howdunnit.

So my reaction to Fracture? One of the best movies I’ve seen in recent memory. Here’s why:

Cinematography
The cinematography was gorgeous yet understated. Hopkin’s home, the courtroom, the L.A. skyline, etc. Even the IC Unit looked stunning in how they shot the scenes. There were only a few scenes where I felt like they milked the tension between Gosling and Hopkin’s characters with dramatic close-ups, but on the whole, the cinematography was amazing. It never felt big-budget, yet was a bit slicker than an indie feel.

Plot development & pace
I care alot about how a plot develops. I don’t like leaps in what I supposed to assume or spots where huge things aren’t explained but I’m supposed to accept. The plotline was clear, interesting yet suspenseful. And the pace. Superb. I never felt liked I was being yanked further ahead than I should. It was a smart 21st century thriller.

Casting
Brilliant. Yes, Hopkins as a bad guy congers up Hannibal Lector conniptions, but his performance was believable and downright disturbing. One of the best villains in a movie I’ve ever seen. So evil I had to laugh at times. I’m not sure what that says about me.

Gosling was a 21st-century version of Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men. Young, cocky, brilliant, etc. His take on this character was spot on. The banter between Hopkins and Gosling through the movie was dialogue magic.

The 80% rule
I have what I call an 80% rule about movies. I try to veer towards flicks that in 80% of its content, it doesn’t include gratuitous sex, violence, and cursing. I try to check out a movie before I go and see it to see if it meets this standard. Fracture was a model movie in that they kept the SVC above the fray. No nudity or really suggestive clothing. The violence and cursing were relevant to the plotline and were used smartly. The sexual tension between Gosling and Rosamund Pike seemed a bit overboard, but it was watchable. It can be done Hollywood…

Spiritual metaphor
Finally, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the echoes of the spiritual in Fracture. The spiritual metaphor I came away with was that your sin will find you out. We all feel like if we can maneuver and manipulate the system, we can get away with just about anything. Sin isn’t something to be confessed, it is something we justify.

God calls us to live lives of holiness, purity, and integrity. We will fall short of the standard that is in place, but when we do, that is the time to come clean, not the time to hide behind justifications for doing the wrong thing.

Christ has justified us by his Cross. Let that be the justification we long for…