Saint Paul Returns to the Movies: Triumph over Shame [Paperback]

 

 

Create your own review

The author's familiarity with Paul's letters and evangelical fervor are undeniable, but his knowledge of film is quite another matter. With the exceptions of "Babette's Feast" and "The Edge of the City" he elects to treat Hollywood hits of the nineties. Since only "Babette's Feast" and "Forrest Gump" pass the author's "Pauline test," it's unclear what his basis for selecting the other 8 films was. Moreover, his attachment to his thesis, one suspects, blinds him to the shallowness of "Forrest Gump," unless he really believes that this new-age, feel-good, self-esteem builder targeted at the troubled baby-boomer generation represents a '"triumph of love." Given the author's preoccupation with the triumph of grace over shame, wouldn't it have made more sense to choose "classic" but not necessarily "popular" films that address this subject--for example, Bergman's "Shame" or Lynch's "The Elephant Man"? Or if he elected to stay within the popular field, why not take a highly-respected "auteur" such as Alfred Hitchock, whose identity is stamped on virtually each of his "texts" by his focusing on the themes of guilt and shame? The author's assumption that popular films are the reflection of deep spiritual currents connecting with Biblical texts is narrow if not naive. Apart from the selection of films, the treatment is limited primarily to the narratives, or scripts, of the films and gives little consideration to the art and technique of the film or the actual experience of the spectator. Although he has consulted some popular reviews, there is virtually no evidence of film theory, aesthetics and history, of the "language" of cinema and the ways in which viewers, vicariously and voyeuristically, make meaning out of that language. Finally, since the author argues that film brings scriptural truths into concrete, human experience, it's surprising that his discussions of the theological meanings of films fails to draw upon "existential" theological thinkers such as Kierkegaard, Tillich, and Buber. As for the author's style, it includes numerous first person references ("I think," "I believe") and indefinite pronouns ("this"), suggesting that the discussions would be a good basis for conversations on the meaning of Paul's letters in the daily lives of present-day Christians. For an audience as specialized as the latter, perhaps the leader of a Bible study group, the book may have greater value than it does for this reader.

Better than his first book, Jewett's sequel is still very uneven. Clearly he is more comfortable with the straight Biblical scholarship than the films, as the strength of the intro indicates.

The film chapters are very uneven, with Jewett often unable to distinguish when a film RELATES to a particular Biblical issue tangentially and when a film PORTRAYS a Biblical issue directly. Stated differently, he seems to make no distinction between films which are consistent with, but not necessarily about, Biblical teaching, and those which seem to be directly about Paul's passages. As a result he seems to stretch to make a movie fit a passage, at times using as evidence the fact that there is some consistency in values. These parallels would, admittedly, be of interest without any claim that the films intendeded a parallel.

At times Jewett seems very liberal in his theology or application. For example he says that Paul would approve of Glen Holland, the teacher in Mr. Holland's Opus, because Holland does not have a sexual affair with a student he finds attractive. While it is certainly good that Holland did not commit adultery, "approve" seems a strong word to attach to a man who knowingly and willingly flirts with a student and cultivates an emotional intimacy that threatens his marriage. I agree with his assessment of PRINCE OF TIDES, that it demonstrates the hurting power of shameful secrets, but he lets Streisand off too easily for her argument that Tom Wingo becomes a better husband and father because his adulterous affair with his sister's therapist somehow "gives him something to give back to the women in his life." He also seems to miss the significance of Tom making psychoanalysis into a "religion" by saying Lowenstein's name "as a prayer" every time he goes home.

Occasionally the parallels are interesting (such as the chapter on BABE). I thought the chapter on GROUNDHOG DAY was his best combination of understanding the film and applying Biblical principles to it. Other chapters seemed to lack application and draw parallels only in subject matter, i.e. both the film and Paul dealt with the issue of "x."

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See both customer reviews...

 

Search Customer Reviews
Only search this product's reviews

Search Listmania!