… an interview with Robert Johnston about his new book Reel Spirituality. The book is an exploration of the intersection between theology and film and is excellent. The style is similar to that of Michael Frost, who has an incisive grasp of this cutting edge area of ministry. (I understand Michael will also soon publish a book on theology and film). What I like about Johnston is his ability to interact with film in a theological way, which yields positive fruit for the gospel. So many Christian critiques of film simply demonise the content and miss the transcendent dimension of so much of it.

Paul Arnott.

1st March 2001.

INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT JOHNSTON ABOUT REEL SPIRITUALITY

Recently, Baker Academic published Robert Johnston’s “Reel Spirituality:

Theology and Film in Dialogue,” the first book in its new Engaging Culture series. Wells Turner, project editor for “Reel Spirituality,” spoke with Johnston about some of the issues he raised in his book:

WT: How can Christians move from merely counting swear words and nude scenes to evaluating movies aesthetically and theologically?

RJ: I acknowledge that we must have some system for indicating whether a

movie’s content is appropriate for children and youth. I’m not sure our present rating system is very effective, but some “quick and easy” system is necessary. However, though its R rating is deserved, “Schindler’s List” is a movie that all teenagers and adults should see for its moving

and profound portrayal of life. Likewise, “Shawshank Redemption” is a moving depiction of friendship and hope that is set in the dehumanizing context of prison life. Its gang-rape scene makes this movie inappropriate for young viewers, but its message is nonetheless profound

and gripping. By developing our critical skills in movie viewing, we can

learn from what our culture is presenting and dialogue with it based on our own Christian convictions.

It does little good, for example, to say that “Titanic” is a salacious movie that will fill all teenage boys with lust (a leading evangelical movie critic made such a claim). It is true that some teenage boys have such raging hormones that lust is present in much of their day. But to deny the spiritual significance of “Titanic” is to miss an opportunity for dialogue. The whole premise of the movie is Rose’s claim that she was saved in every way by the mysterious young man she met on the cruise. To

prove her point, at the end of the story she throws the jewel into the sea, for she does not need the security that money can provide. His sacrificial love has proven redemptive.

WT: Your book flows out of a film study class you teach regularly at Fuller Theological Seminary. What has surprised or encouraged you most about student response?

RJ: First, I’m continually amazed at how perceptively Gen-Xers interpret

movies. With few exceptions, those of us over forty lack the background that younger viewers bring to the experience. They’ve grown up in a visual culture and naturally understand visual expressions of that culture. My students invariably show me things I’ve missed in a movie. Second, I’m encouraged by the number of students who understand the importance of doing theology with a Bible in one hand and a movie in the

other (to paraphrase Karl Barth). They understand the importance of an incarnational theology, learning to hear the Spirit as the Spirit speaks

both inside and beyond the church.

WT: What encouraging recent trends have you seen in the movie industry?

RJ: After a decade or more of lambasting Hollywood for caricaturing the church and its ministry, Michael Medved, a sensitive commentator on Hollywood and religion, recently wrote an article expressing hope and guarded optimism about the last five years or so of film. A growing number of movies take the church seriously. An even larger number of movies take God seriously or respectfully explore issues of faith. Also,

a small but growing number of Christians have become writers and directors and are making movies that grow out of their basic convictions

and beliefs.

At Fuller we host a yearly conference that brings Christian screenwriters and directors into conversation with pastors and youth workers. These groups are significantly influencing our culture, and the conference allows them to learn from each other about storytelling and the changing

role of image in our society. There is great interest in such dialogue. Moreover, those working in the movie industry say that ability is becoming the main criterion for judgment in Hollywood. Faith is not marginalised in most quarters. In fact, Hollywood knows that spirituality is a hot topic right now in our culture, so they are open to stories that embody faith. Good stories need depth, a depth that is consistent with a

religious vision of life. Christian screenwriters have a unique opportunity today to create stories that give expression to and flow forth from their faith and life.

WT: You indicate that the love of a good story is what attracts most movie-goers. Can the church learn from this?

RJ: The first Reel Spirituality conference at Fuller explored “Storytelling as Common Ground: The Church and Hollywood.” But Hollywood

is often the expert here, not the church. In spite of the fact that Jesus gave us stories, the church continues to speak in propositions. Such disparate writers as Garrison Keillor and Ken Gire comment that movies often do a better job of giving us brief moments of transcendence than the church does. At the movies, we can lose ourselves in somebody else’s

story. And when we do, we are often deeply moved.

Movies usually provoke much more discussion and dialogue than sermons do, even among Christians. When church members go out to dinner after hearing a sermon, do they discuss what they’ve heard, or do they move on to other topics, such as the football game? On the other hand, when churchgoers go out to dinner after seeing a movie, the conversation almost always includes a significant amount of discussion about the film they’ve just seen. We need to remember that the gospel is incarnate, and we must make

sure that our communication of the gospel doesn’t become disincarnate!

WT: Although G and PG films typically gross more at the box office than R-rated films, Hollywood continues to focus on R-rated films. To what extent, then, do movies accurately reflect beliefs and trends in the wider culture?

RJ: Just as with novels, movies that are aimed at a youthful audience tend not to get the same respect as those aimed at an adult audience. Also, movies with adult themes are strongly favoured by Academy members when the Oscar voting takes place. (For example, almost no animated film

has been honoured.) So a movie’s gross is not the only criterion one should use in evaluating whether a movie accurately reflects a society’s

values.

There is a place for novels and movies that have adult themes and foci. A movie like “The Third Miracle,” on the one hand, has an R rating, but it

is a profound portrayal of faith and doubt. It tells the story of a Catholic priest who loses his faith while exposing the dark side of a folk “saint” who common people on the south side of Chicago have revered. In undercutting their devotion, the priest undercuts his own faith. The rest of the movie recounts his pilgrimage back to faith. On the other hand, though, there are a number of PG movies aimed at teenagers that are immoral at core. Their non-adult themes don’t protect them from immoral and disgusting perspectives. I’m thinking of such movies as “Scary Movie.”

There are also a number of film-makers who include gratuitous material because they think it will sell. And it does. Both G-rated and R-rated movies have a more limited audience than PG movies do. Almost all of the

blockbuster movies are rated PG. But PG usually includes a small bit of “edgy” material. This is probably because “PG with a bit of edginess” reflects the values of the majority of Americans and so represents the largest potential audience. Directors and studios have their pet projects, but they are in business to make money. So Hollywood’s output over the long haul must represent what viewers choose to see, or the studios would simply go out of business.

WT: If you could add a chapter or two more to your book, what would you add or expand on?

RJ: I’m convinced that the chief theological importance of movies is the

first-order experiences they provide. To put it in the vernacular, movies can make us cry. In theological language, movies have more to do with encountering the Spirit than with understanding the Word. Too often the church has used film simply to illustrate ideas that it has arrived at independently. At worst, movies have been reduced to sermon illustrations. But this limits the work of the Spirit in our lives. We Protestants need a better theology of the imagination than we now have. There is much more theological reflection to be done on this point. Roman Catholics, with their sacramental theology rooted in image, are further along in their theology of the imagination than Protestants are. But we all can benefit from further insight on this.

Second, I would like to have included another extended example of how theological criticism of film works out in practice. In addition to considering the movies of Peter Weir, I would like to have discussed the

movies of Kevin Spacey. That is, in addition to applying “Auteur” criticism to the work of a director, I would like to have applied “Auteur” criticism to how an actor chooses his material and acts in it. The movies of Tom Hanks would have offered another interesting example.

WT: How do you hope your book will change the way we look at film?

RJ: I hope that my book will help a wide cross-section of movie viewers learn how better to relate their faith to film. We Christians too often divide our lives into those areas we think are spiritual and those we think are secular. For many Christians, movie-going is a “secular” activity divorced from the centre of their spiritual life. They may use their Christian faith to “screen out” movies with objectionable content,

but they rarely use their faith to engage in dialogue with the images of

reality appearing on the screen. They may be transformed and challenged by the movies they see and yet fail to integrate these encounters into their wider Christian experience. From teaching classes on theology and film, I have found that with a little bit of encouragement and the development of some basic critical skills, Christian movie-goers can improve dramatically in their ability to engage a movie theologically. That’s essentially what I try to do in my book.