Angel Studios: The Shift

[pam]

1 minute ago, LDSGator said:

Well, you and I are friends. So @Carborendum may be on to something. 

You have no idea how close I came to posting, "Well I am friends with Mirkwood and LDSGator so that may be true."

[The Folk Prophet]

56 minutes ago, pam said:

I won't see it because it has Tom Cruise in it. 

Curious. Why is that?

I mean, I know he's a bit weird. But relative to Holyweird, he's actually a lesser weird.

Or do you just not like him as an actor?

[pam]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Curious. Why is that?

I mean, I know he's a bit weird. But relative to Holyweird, he's actually a lesser weird.

Or do you just not like him as an actor?

I've not watched a movie of his since his interview where he tore down Brooke Shields.  

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, pam said:

I've not watched a movie of his since his interview where he tore down Brooke Shields.  

Gotchya.

The following is in no way meant to convince you of anything. Just sharing:

I remember when Evita came out that my sister refused to see it because Madonna was in it. I have a friend who refuses to see anything with certain left-leaning actors. Etc.

I can sort of understand this. It can be difficult to separate the personal jerk-faced-ness of the individual out enough to be able to enjoy their playing a role. But, honestly, with me it depends on how well they can act. If their personality bothers me and then that personality bleeds into their acting...yeah.

But I really don't get my friends, "I won't watch that because so-n-so is a lefty."

Um.... it's Hollywood. It's almost ALL lefties.

Which, okay... don't partake of Hollywood. I could get behind that and respect it. It's when he watches movies with other actors who are just as evil and lefty, but slightly less outspoken maybe, that I start thinking there's some inconsistency problems and bias going on there.

For the most part, I've been able to separate out that personal lives of the actors from the characters they play. If the character is honorable, then that usually works for me.

As for Tom Cruise, I actually respect his stances. Note that I do not mean I agree with them. But to stand for a position (no mind altering drugs) and hold true to it against the hate of the world....

I mean if someone was taking Marijuana to deal with something a lot of us (including myself) would probably say that's a bad idea. If the world (including the medical community) decided alcohol was the proper way to treat some ailment we would definitely consider it a mistake.

Tom did sincerely apologize to Brooke Shields (according to her) for bringing her into it they way he did. I think he recognized that his "how" was mistaken. But he's remained true to his position on drugs none-the-less. And though I do disagree with him on it, I respect his conviction.

That being said (and, as I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I respect your view on the matter), none of that plays into my enjoyment or not of Tom Cruise's movies. He's never (that I know of) preached against post-partem drugs in his roles. And if he did, I would not be interested in that movie.

Anyhow. Just my thoughts. No arguments or contention intended whatsoever.  

[Traveler]

24 minutes ago, pam said:

I've not watched a movie of his since his interview where he tore down Brooke Shields.  

Just a bit of a side note.  I spent some time consulting with some Hollywood types.  A number of weeks on set.  Some in this industry are LDS and perhaps otherwise reasonable.  I know that BYU has a fine arts center and there is a speech and drama major.  I personally think it would be better labeled screech and trauma.  If one is to boycott those in such fields based on their poor (even irrational) treatment of others no one would ever go to any movie and unlikely attend any play, concert or any creative art display.

My father that was an artist that eventually would not publicly display his art and there seemed to be more people and places that he refused to sale anything to or talk to about art.  A personal prejudice of mine is that those that make art their lifelong profession – generally end up quiet messed up.  Those, like my father, that make their living one way and rely on art for art sake and as a personal release – seem to have a better chance to retain their humanity.

 

The Traveler

[mordorbund]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

On it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(j/k of course)

No rush. Go ahead and finish your Taylor Swift jukebox musical first.

[mordorbund]

1 hour ago, pam said:

I won't see it because it has Tom Cruise in it. 

I think Tom Cruise is the reason why it turned out so good.

Face. Smoosh.

[LDSGator]

8 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

No rush. Go ahead and finish your Taylor Swift jukebox musical first.

That’s awesome. Lol. 

[LDSGator]

@mordorbund-he’ll work on that one after he finishes the sequel to Rocky Horror Picture Show. 😉 

[The Folk Prophet]

27 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

@mordorbund-he’ll work on that one after he finishes the sequel to Rocky Horror Picture Show. 😉 

No no. I'm working on a musicalized version of Brokeback Mountain.

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

No no. I'm working on a musicalized version of Brokeback Mountain.

I spit out my orange juice!!!  🤣

[mordorbund]

5 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

No no. I'm working on a musicalized version of Brokeback Mountain.

It would be the first musical based on a movie to win an award. And it would win all the awards.

I think the reason Dear Evan Hansen beat out Come From Away was because everyone assumed the central suicide was a gay kid.

[Carborendum]

On 12/9/2023 at 9:56 AM, pam said:

Yep I have absolutely no taste.     

You could fix that by integrating kim chee into your diet. 

[Carborendum]

On 12/9/2023 at 10:44 AM, mordorbund said:

No rush. Go ahead and finish your Taylor Swift jukebox musical first.

Just don't cast Pierce Brosnan as the leading man.

[pam]

19 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Just don't cast Pierce Brosnan as the leading man.

We've already learned he definitely can't sing after seeing him in Mama Mia.  

[prisonchaplain]

Big picture thought: Do we lament lost Hollywood, circle the wagons, and spend our time watching B-grade religious movies. OR do we engage the culture by producing and consuming the high-quality stuff? Of course, the actual answer is some of both. The first impulse is most common among Fundamentalists while Evangelicals favor the latter approach. Yet, even in those camps you'll find a mix. There is a lot of dross in Hollywood. Sadly, a good amount of Christian production is of poor quality. Love those gems that are both well done and faith affirming.

[Vort]

8 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Big picture thought: Do we lament lost Hollywood, circle the wagons, and spend our time watching B-grade religious movies. OR do we engage the culture by producing and consuming the high-quality stuff?

Or do we recognize that Hollywood has never been a purveyor of Christian values, not even in our grandparents' day, and look outside of video-based productions for entertainment? Perhaps we should cease thinking of "entertainment" as empty calories, as something done to fill time rather than as something integral to our well-being, a type of education. Just a thought, an idea that I believe has value but that I haven't really put a lot of analysis into.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Vort

[zil2]

27 minutes ago, Vort said:

Or do we recognize that Hollywood has never been a purveyor of Christian values, not even in our grandparents' day, and look outside of video-based productions for entertainment? Perhaps we should cease thinking of "entertainment" as empty calories, as something done to fill time rather than as something integral to our well-being, a type of education. Just a thought, an idea that I believe has value but that I haven't really put a lot of analysis into.

In Approaching Zion, Nibley talks about "goods of first and second intent" - apparently an idea from Aristotle.  IMO, goods of first intent should be our entertainment and goods of second intent our work.  But that would require a lot more effort than turning on the TV.  (It would also yield a lot more satisfaction and happiness and beauty in the world.)

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, prisonchaplain said:

Big picture thought: Do we lament lost Hollywood, circle the wagons, and spend our time watching B-grade religious movies. OR do we engage the culture by producing and consuming the high-quality stuff? Of course, the actual answer is some of both. The first impulse is most common among Fundamentalists while Evangelicals favor the latter approach. Yet, even in those camps you'll find a mix. There is a lot of dross in Hollywood. Sadly, a good amount of Christian production is of poor quality. Love those gems that are both well done and faith affirming.

Why would a Christian filmmaker bother making movies for a crowd that 1) will just complain anyway and 2) won’t go to the movie in the first place? 
 

I’m serious. If you knew those were the outcomes you wouldn’t do it either.  

[prisonchaplain]

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

Why would a Christian filmmaker bother making movies for a crowd that 1) will just complain anyway and 2) won’t go to the movie in the first place? 
 

I’m serious. If you knew those were the outcomes you wouldn’t do it either.  

IMHO Angel Studios is attempting to make faith affirming movies that are interesting enough that non-believers will watch. There are a couple of movies that come to mind (one Catholic, one Jewish) that were R-rated, yet definitely affirmed faith and had well-recognized production value. Movies about real life events can sometimes work well. Sound of Freedom (I haven't seen it) had potential, though it became politicized, then key players ran into controversy. These movies are few and far between, but they happen.

Some faith-affirming movies flop miserable. All the Left Behind movies failed at the box office. I've seen them all. The Kirk Cameron ones (1990s) were okay for Evangelicals but had weak production value. The two re-dos tried and failed to reach the broader public. The blind was a sweet movie about the Duck Dynasty family but felt like something that would quickly go to streaming. 

All this to say, it can work, but this is tough work and there is a lot of competition. Nevertheless, it may be worthwhile. 

[LDSGator]

6 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

IMHO Angel Studios is attempting to make faith affirming movies that are interesting enough that non-believers will watch.

I wish them the best, but the most influential faith based movies like the Passion are difficult to make. 

[Carborendum]

11 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

IMHO Angel Studios is attempting to make faith affirming movies that are interesting enough that non-believers will watch. There are a couple of movies that come to mind (one Catholic, one Jewish) that were R-rated, yet definitely affirmed faith and had well-recognized production value. Movies about real life events can sometimes work well. Sound of Freedom (I haven't seen it) had potential, though it became politicized, then key players ran into controversy. These movies are few and far between, but they happen.

Some faith-affirming movies flop miserable. All the Left Behind movies failed at the box office. I've seen them all. The Kirk Cameron ones (1990s) were okay for Evangelicals but had weak production value. The two re-dos tried and failed to reach the broader public. The blind was a sweet movie about the Duck Dynasty family but felt like something that would quickly go to streaming. 

All this to say, it can work, but this is tough work and there is a lot of competition. Nevertheless, it may be worthwhile. 

I've become interested in Kevin Sorbo's movies recently.  They're all indies.  So, low production types. 

I kinda think some of them would be ok if the production value was higher.  But there have been a few that were pretty good even with low budgets (e.g. The Santa Suit).  I can think of a few others (with or without Sorbo) that had a decent message.  The thing that weakened them was that they were a bit predictable and a little contrived.

Cameron's Fireproof did pretty well in theaters.  And it was decent.  But there were just a few things that made it lower quality.  And TBH, Cameron isn't the best actor for a lot of these films.

I don't see why we can't have decent actors that are right for the part with a decent story that can be inspiring and have a fresh take.  None of that takes a huge budget.

[JohnsonJones]

Not all faith based movies are poorly made, though the studios that were big enough to make major productions have decreased.

One of the biggest movie studios that used to have Christianity and Christian based values in it's movies has turned 180 degrees after it's founder died.

Disney didn't have EVERY movie with some sort of faith based message, but there were several which had very pointed messages about faith and deity within them.  Sometimes they were more obvious in the live actions films they made.  Unfortunately, it seems  Disney is the exact opposite of what it used to be.  One movie my wife really loves is The Happiest Millionaire which has references to Bible study and Christianity blatantly within it.  

You won't find that type of movie being made by Disney today.  You have to turn to other film studios for material like that. 

[Carborendum]

On 12/11/2023 at 10:15 AM, prisonchaplain said:

Big picture thought: Do we lament lost Hollywood, circle the wagons, and spend our time watching B-grade religious movies. OR do we engage the culture by producing and consuming the high-quality stuff? Of course, the actual answer is some of both. The first impulse is most common among Fundamentalists while Evangelicals favor the latter approach. Yet, even in those camps you'll find a mix. There is a lot of dross in Hollywood. Sadly, a good amount of Christian production is of poor quality. Love those gems that are both well done and faith affirming.

I'm not sure I can really commiserate on the topic.  When I was a child, I was a product of a culture that let TV raise the children.  I really wasn't a good kid.  I had to do a lot of growing up after I left home.

While I have to admit that it was all very entertaining, I really can't enumerate the benefit beyond escapism.  There are a few times when we have absolute gems (The Princess Bride, Secondhand Lions) that somehow speak to the classic archetypes.  But by and large, are they really something to miss?

And I mean that as a sincere question.  Is there something to miss?  If so, what is it?