Films with conviction...

[nikolai_42]

Once upon a time, Hollywood had the general aim of uplift and entertainment (and some escapism)...today the general aim has been lowered to one of titillation and pandering (I won't argue this point myself but accept it as background to the question). But every now and then a film has come around that actually convicts with great effect. Not inspiration - don't confuse the two - but really deals with a principle and (usually) one man's stand in the face of great potential personal loss...or more. And it isn't just the loss, but the degree of conviction required to maintain such a stand - and the reasoning behind it.

There are three such films that (in my experience...such as it is) I have seen that fit that bill to one degree or another :

1. A Man For All Seasons (1966) Thomas More was Roman Catholic, but the principled stand he took with Henry VIII at the risk of his life is fleshed out in great detail and with very little sensationalism.
2. The Devil and Daniel Webster (1941) Honestly don't recall much about the film but recall being able to see past the glitz and sensationalism to appreciate the strain of temptation and humility needed to submit to God so the devil will flee...
3. Chariots of Fire (1981) Missionary...running for God...submits to his conscience in the face of potential worldly glory. Convicting AND inspiring at the same time.....

I'm sure there are others out there. Any examples?

 

[PureX]

The goal of the film industry is to make lots of money. Same as the goal of every industry in a capitalist society. If a film happens to "uplift" or "convict", that's incidental to it's primary purpose.

The more focussed on profits and only profits we become in this culture, the worse the products we produce become, and the more our quality of life sinks into a morass of greed and stupidity. Welcome to the 21st century.

 

[patrick jane]

View attachment 21123

 

[steko]

View attachment 21125

 

[nikolai_42]

The goal of the film industry is to make lots of money. Same as the goal of every industry in a capitalist society. If a film happens to "uplift" or "convict", that's incidental to it's primary purpose.

The more focussed on profits and only profits we become in this culture, the worse the products we produce become, and the more our quality of life sinks into a morass of greed and stupidity. Welcome to the 21st century.

I have no qualms that filmmaking in Hollywood is primarily a moneymaking venture. But it wasn't all that long ago that there was a sense of principle that was elevated. Now, principle is essentially boiled down to self-expression (whatever that may happen to be). So the arts have degenerated somewhat predictably (note: I highly recommend Ravi Zacharias' talk on Mind Game in A World of Images as it deals with this and how it affects our faith and worldview). So things have gone from recognizing the importance and benefit of a recognition of the need for that morality - even if it sometimes came across as trite and cheesy in such shows as Leave it to Beaver - to a total denigration of biblical morality and standards. The point I make here is not so much the decline in standards, but that along with it goes an absence of principled conviction outside of "me". In other words, while the three films I mentioned were made with the intent of having people pay to watch them, it was understood that there would be an audience that would make such a venture profitable. Maybe not to the tune of a billion dollars, but enough interest that the film is justified financially.

Note that I also distinguish between conviction and inspiration. The two may be closely related at times, but with conviction there is always a cost (whether personal or otherwise) and the more personal the issue being dealt with (A Man for All Seasons dealt with More's stand against Henry's divorce, Chariots of Fire with - among other things - rejecting potential worldly fame to honor God (not self) etc...), the more it is likely to "hit home". With inspiration, the classic model is an insuperable obstacle being overcome by a single individual (in the face of overwhelming odds). While there is an element of personal cost usually in those situations, it tends to get lost in the glory of being the David that slays Goliath. Those films tend to make a lot more money (and nothing wrong with that). But films that really strike at the heart of a legitimate issue of personal import (but on a universal level) have a different "payoff" that in some ways seems antithetical to the immediacy of the visual (which is, after all, the media in question). So when a filmmaker can pull off both (conviction while being interesting and engaging) it is truly a notable thing.

To be fair...A Man for All Seasons is actually from a play of the same name by Robert Bolt. Plays tend to be less visually spectacular and are more dependent on the spoken word for their success. So maybe there's an unfair advantage there...

 

[ok doser]

Films with conviction...

:think:

Judgement at Nuremberg
To Kill a Mockingbird
A Few Good Men

 

[Totton Linnet]

The sound of mucus

 

[ok doser]

ewwwwww

 

[PureX]

I have no qualms that filmmaking in Hollywood is primarily a moneymaking venture. But it wasn't all that long ago that there was a sense of principle that was elevated.

Yeah, I know. But that principal went out the door when profits became the primary purpose of everything we do. You say you don't care, yet it is exactly what you say you don't care about that is causing the sickness of greed and stupidity to systematically destroy us as a culture and a nation.

So you really ought to start caring about the cause, and not just the sick results.

Now, principle is essentially boiled down to self-expression (whatever that may happen to be). So the arts have degenerated somewhat predictably

The principal of nearly every human endeavor in a capitalist culture is to maximize profits to the capital investors. That means that any form of artistic expression must become a viable commodity to survive in this culture. And by viable commodity, I mean it must make money for the capital investor. And that's why the artistic expressions you are seeing today are so weak, and so tawdry, and so vacuous. Because weak and tawdry and vacuous make the most money for the capitalist investors. Moral, thought-provoking artistic expressions do not. And the capitalists don't want any moral or thought-provoking expressions out there. They want us to remain ignorant, selfish, consumers of their mindless, useless crap. And they control everything, so they get what they want. And they've been getting it that way so long that stupid and selfish is what we have become as a nation and a culture and sadly, as a people. So much so that Donald Trump can actually run for president in this country and not be laughed and insulted off the stage, and banished from public view by embarrassment.

On the other hand, this is not "Bibleland". It never was, and it never will be, THANK GOD!!! So you are not going to see religious propaganda on your TV or in theaters or anything even close. Because that would be an even worse nightmare than the ignorant greedy nightmare that we're already living in.

 

[nikolai_42]

Yeah, I know. But that principal went out the door when profits became the primary purpose of everything we do. You say you don't care, yet it is exactly what you say you don't care about that is causing the sickness of greed and stupidity to systematically destroy us as a culture and a nation.

So you really ought to start caring about the cause, and not just the sick results.
The principal of nearly every human endeavor in a capitalist culture is to maximize profits to the capital investors. That means that any form of artistic expression must becomes a commodity to survive in this culture. And by commodity, I mean it must make money for the capital investor. And that's why the artistic expressions you are seeing today are so weak, and tawdry. Because weak and tawdry make money for the capitalist investor. Moral, thought-provoking artistic expressions do not. And the capitalists don't want any moral or thought-provoking expressions out there. They want us to remain ignorant, selfish, consumers of their mindless, useless crap. And they control everything, so they get it the way they want it. And they've been getting it that way so long that stupid and selfish is what we have become as a nation and a culture. So much so that Donald Trump can actually run for president in this country and not be laughed and insulted and banished from public view.

On the other hand, this is not "Bibleland". It never was, and it never will be, THANK GOD!!! So you are not going to see religious propaganda 24-7 on your TV or in theaters or anything even close. Because that would be an even worse nightmare than the ignorant greedy nightmare we are already living in.

I would put it to you that the Bible offers one of the most realistic looks at humanity of any work. But when one tries to sever the honesty of the portrayals of such men as David (who committed adultery and killed a man to cover it up) from the morality that makes such things so wrong - and the God who set it forth - you get an amoral landscape. You point out that commercialization of the arts underscores the drive for the almighty dollar, but on what basis can we do that? Part of the reason certain things convict is that there is a very real underlying moral law that exists. So on what basis can one rail against greedy profiteers when the checks against that greed have been cast down?

You say "they" want to control everything...but from a broader perspective, why is that any worse than "you" controlling everything?

I submit to you that the very foundation that you seem to speak against is the thing that kept us from being as "stupid and selfish" as we are today. Profit is not evil. But when it replaces God, it's idolatry. Selfishness is not always wrong. But when self becomes the ultimate good, it is idolatry. Otherwise, there is no God.

 

[PureX]

I would put it to you that the Bible offers one of the most realistic looks at humanity of any work.

We don't need realism. We have plenty of that on the news every day. What we need are practical solutions, and the OT Bible does offer us much of that because we don't live in a bronze age, clan-based culture, anymore.

The solution offered as Christ in the NT is the way ahead, but even after 2,000 years it still doesn't seem to be able to take hold. In no small part because the religion calling itself Christian is far too often anything but.

So although I agree that ultimately the answers are there, we aren't 'getting it'. They're too buried in two centuries of religious nonsense for most people to recognize them, and even if they could recognize them as the solution, I'm not sure they'd adopt the lifestyle of love and service, anyway. They're too frantic and frightened for that, most of them.

You point out that commercialization of the arts underscores the drive for the almighty dollar, but on what basis can we do that? Part of the reason certain things convict is that there is a very real underlying moral law that exists. So on what basis can one rail against greedy profiteers when the checks against that greed have been cast down?

The problem is that morality doesn't carry the real-life weight in people's lives that money does. When it comes down to the choice, the money wins. Nearly every time. For a great many people. Money is the emblem, now, for everything: survival, longevity, happiness, respect, and most of all, freedom. Without money we suffer, wither, and die. So naturally, morality falls to the wayside when money enters as a possibility.

You say "they" want to control everything...but from a broader perspective, why is that any worse than "you" controlling everything?

Who said anything about me controlling anything? Who said anything about me even waning to control anything? Why are you even considering this as an intellectual option?

I submit to you that the very foundation that you seem to speak against is the thing that kept us from being as "stupid and selfish" as we are today. Profit is not evil. But when it replaces God, it's idolatry. Selfishness is not always wrong. But when self becomes the ultimate good, it is idolatry. Otherwise, there is no God.

Well, in the world we are living in, profits have long since replaced "God". Selfishness and fear have long since become most people's default mode. And all the 'Bibleland' propaganda we could dream up isn't going to make much of a dent in this downward spiral.

What's missing is not more religion. It's the reality of God's love acting in us and through us to each other, to heal us and save us from ourselves.