The Anatomy of a Successful "Christian" Movie

Ahh, Christian movies....

Like Christian Rock, Christian Pop, Christian Rap (!) and Christian Reggae (!!), Christian movies are often (rightly) perceived to be the trying-hard uncool cousins of their secular counterparts. Here in good old Manila, Christian pop alternatives are so out of the loop that we don't have a local Christian pop alternative industry. After all, our inbred literati that compose the top of our film and music industry food chains often lack the religious imagination, not to mention the balls, to go through this route, and their equally inbred "indie" contenders are still at that adolescent phase wherein they still get their jollies off of looking down on religious rubes. Looking at the American version of Christian pop alternatives, I don't blame them. So many in the US do it so badly, very few can look at that horrific landscape of heavy-handed kitsch and say "I can make this work".

But someone did. His name was Mel Gibson.

The Passion of the Christ changed the Christian movie landscape. That movie, unlike any other Christian movie before it, made a fortune at the box office and saw success even beyond the targeted groups. In an increasingly post-Christian West (the earlier gospel flicks that gained some success played to a radically different audience and culture), the "Passion" phenomenon was nothing short of a miracle.

Since then, several mainstream American studios have tried, and failed, to replicate what Mel Gibson did. The most visible failure was the much-hyped "Nativity Story", about the birth of Christ. Because of this manifest failure in recreating the "Passion" phenomenon, many of the new religious movie divisions are floundering.

Then, from out of nowhere, a Southern Baptist congregation in Georgia puts up Sherwood Pictures, and produces two successful Christian flicks in succession, "Flywheel" and "Facing the Giants". "Facing the Giants" in particular was a moving success. With a budget of $100K, just enough to pay for small professional crew (all the actors and the director were church volunteers), the movie pulled in a remarkable $10 million in its theatrical run, with an additonal $20 million more in DVD sales. That may be chump change to a mainstream studio, but that number represented a return of 10,000%. Most studio execs would strangle their own mothers for that rate of return.

Sherwood Pictures is far from done. This year, they released another Christian flick in "Fireproof", a movie about a fireman trying to save his rocky marriage through faith. The movie looks every bit its small $500K budget (once more, just to pay for the crew, as all the actors and the director were volunteers, including Kirk Cameron), but it still made $30 million in the box office for a return of 6,000%. So, your average Hollywood suit once again lifts his head off of the line of cocaine he's been snorting long enough to ask..."Wha...? How...?" Execs who would rather treat the Christian market like a cranky girlfriend who refuses token flower offerings suddenly discover that this particular girlfriend can be very generous when properly treated. But how?

In this case, there are two halves that make or break a Christian movie. The first consists of production value and professional quality. That vast wasteland of Christian cinema that sprawled before onlookers prior to Mel Gibson's daring leap of faith suffered from a distinct lack of this half. Most were clunkers produced by good-hearted people who simply did not have the money and talent to make films. The few good ones suffered from being in a barrel full of bad apples.

But after Mel Gibson, Christian flicks with more professional polish and significantly higher production values came out. But none could replicate the Passion's rousing success. The "Nativity Story" looked polished and professional, but it bombed royally and nobody knew why. At least, until outfits like Sherwood came along.

This brings us to the second half of the successful Christian movie. Unlike the first, this second half consists of something intangible. In a word, it is sincerity. But one can dig up a whole host of words to clarify it. "Heart", "Faith", "Theological Seriousness", and so on, would probably describe aspects of this second half.

This is where the slick new Hollywood Christian flicks fail miserably. Modern Hollywood can never do sincere, especially where matters of faith are concerned. The best Hollywood can do is use its vast array of IMC (Integrated Marketing Communications *ahem*) trickery to get people to watch their well-polished but half-hearted products. The problem is, no amount of focus-grouped market research can remove the stench of phony. And the Christian market, like that hard-to-woo girlfriend who refuses the token flowers, can smell a phony a mile away. They smelled it in "Nativity Story" just as they smelled it in "The Last Temptation of Christ".

How did they smell half-heartedness? Contrast the dramatization of 'Fireproof" and "Nativity Story". "Nativity Story" is safe and hits all the right focus group points and avoids all the potentially politically-incorrect red flags. (Multi-ethnic cast? Check. Arab Muslim playing the angel Gabriel? Check. Likeable female lead? Check. No "triumphalism"? Check. And here comes the cash flow...wait...) "Fireproof" had just enough polish to make it acceptable to mainstream cinemas, but not by much. Its dramatization is brutally close to its Christian origins, and is at times schmaltzy and over-the-top. But this refreshing honesty and fearless adherence to its Christian message, political correctness be damned, resonated with the Christian market despite its abysmal showing among the critics. (Rotten Tomato has it at 39% among pro critics, 88% among casual viewers.) Contrast the leads of "Fireproof" and "Nativity Story".  Kirk Cameron is an evangelical Christian who did "Fireproof" in exchange for a small contribution to a camp for sick kids he and his wife runs. All the company paid for other than the contribution were his airfare and lodging. Kiesha Castle-Hughes was pregnant out of wedlock during the publicity tour of "Nativity Story", and constantly opined against "judgmentalism". Little details like that matter to a Christian audience, because it is the difference between something done with sincerity and something done just to get access to their hard-earned money. The auteur has to believe, or the audience will not believe him. Or her, as is the case for "Nativity Story". One can say that the Passion had abortion activist and former softcore goddess Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene, but the heart and soul of the Passion were Mel Gibson and Jim Caviezel, both of whom are ardent believers. Mel Gibson even took a lot of flack for his faith in the media, including dubious charges of anti-Semitism laid against the Passion by professional sensitivity-mongers. This probably only further solidiefied the Christian market's resolve to watch his work.

The ultimate Christian movie, as shown by the Passion, combines both professional polish and heartfelt sincerity. While Hollywood has all the polish in the world, it will never replicate the Passion unless it learns how to make films with true sincerity and respect for the Christian market. Good luck with that, Hollywood.

Personally, I can see the potential of the Christian movie in the Philippines. We may lack professional polish, but this is nothing that cannot be learned. The more immeasurable, intangible aspect of sincerity is here, and here in abundance. (Check out "Tanging Yaman", for example.) All it takes is for someone to do what Mel Gibson did, and say "I can make this work".