The Oscar and the Jubilee

by Geoffrey Botkin, Faculty for the Christian Filmmakers Academy and Judge for the 2012 SAICFF

Backstage

It was my first Oscar Night, and the first thing that surprised me was how early in the afternoon it started. Shortly after lunch, in fact. The reason, I was told, was, “Eastern Standard, man. So that little guys can get their little Oscars early, making time for the pretty people to get theirs live. Prime time on the East Coast.” Little Oscars were for stuff like droid noises and storm trooper costume design. The big Oscars, of course, were Best Picture and Best Director.

But there was another reason for the early start. Hollywood is a celebrity culture, a ruling class culture, and the nobility have certain obligations to the public (or so they must believe). There was only one red-carpet entrance to the auditorium, and the arriving limos were careful not to pull up too fast or too early. There appeared to be etiquette, timing, and style to driving a limo to the Oscars. A limo wouldn’t deposit a passenger until the previous limo passenger had minced her way slowly and deliberately up the red carpet.

The California sun was hot and high when the first celebrants arrived. These were not the A-List stars of the evening, but attendees who had to get in the building somehow, and there was only one way in physically, and one way in socially.

Here is the conventional method for entering buildings in Hollywood: like royalty. I was surprised that so many of the women, both very young and very old, arrived alone. I also found it curious that either they, or their fashion designers, had all conformed to the politically-correct or socially-correct style of the hour. Evening gowns were near identical, and not becoming. Also similar was the way the ladies related so intimately with the press cameras. They were sophisticated. All the ladies understood how slowly one walks on the red carpet, playing to the cameras on one side, then playing to cameras on the other. All of them had a polished ability to communicate dozens of subtle messages to the camera. “I’m not posing,” they sparkled, “I’m simply walking into a building.”

But were they? The sound of a hundred shutters and motor drives is the sound of fame. It drew the celebrity-class toward the cameras like a magnet. The sound seemed to excite that amazing aptitude that allows a subject to make friendly contact with every single lens, including mine. I had press credentials for the big occasion, and good cameras, and I was free to go into any area I could penetrate (or so I believed). The red carpet was soon a snarl of competing smiles. I slipped backstage.

The Door of Fame

I wanted to know what the Hollywood elite are like when out of the limelight, and I can tell you in two words: uncomfortably self-conscious. The most fascinating show of the evening was the unscripted, backstage conduct of stars, their agents, the handlers, the paparazzi, the winners, the groupies, the bankers and, of course, the losers.

It was a busy night. There were two backstage areas because there were two stages. One connected to the ceremony out front, and the other connected to a swirling shark-pool of press photographers in the back. After receiving their Oscars, all the winners were led through a small door, which I called “The Door of Fame,” which opened onto what the press called the “white” stage. At the other end of the stage was a door leading them back to their seats in the auditorium. The winner had the white stage all to herself or himself for almost as long as she or he wanted to walk back and forth with Mr. Oscar, displaying that remarkable talent of connecting his or her personality with camera lenses.

It was a big night. Lots of press had showed up for the 50th Anniversary Academy Awards. Yes, that was way back in the day when celebrity security was not as tight as Queen Elizabeth’s, when George Lucas was a relative unknown, Kodak was not bankrupt, and cameras still shot 35mm film. In front of that white stage, the sound of fame was a mighty mechanical roar of shutters, flashes, and film zipping through cameras. Among the more bizarre occurrences of the evening were the sudden and unexpected appearances of has-been celebrities who couldn’t stay away from the sound of fame. They found the Door of Fame quite by accident, and hurried through (in graceful, extra-slow-motion). “Oops,” they sparkled, “Wrong door. Silly me. I’m not posing, of course, I’m just trying to get to my seat.” One aging male actor made the mistake four times, each time with a different aspiring starlet on his arm. But for his effort, he heard the exhilarating sound of fame four times, and he introduced four young disciples to its intoxicating powers. “Let me show you, darling, how to pretend to shield your eyes from the intrusive brilliance of the camera flash. Alas, it’s just one more painful inconvenience of being part of the celebrity elite.”

The shark-pool of photographers shot close-up photos of all this, snickering scornfully. As a group, they were generally cynical, bored, disgusted, impatient, rude, scruffy, pessimistic, derisive and, above all, professionally intrusive. And the stars absolutely loved them. It was photographers, after all, who generated a sound more powerful than the sound of applause. Photographers also generated the images that would freeze fame in history forever. But to what end? Is it really fame if no one remembers it?

The Heart, Soul, and Doctrine of Hollywood

Was this to be an historic night? Some had predicted it to be Star Wars night. Threepio was a presenter. The main host, Bob Hope, had first hosted the awards in 1940, the year Gone With the Wind took eight Oscars. Bob seemed to know everyone and everything about Hollywood personalities, politics, and political correctness. That night was dominated by a new Hollywood culture, but some of the old blood was there on stage with Bob: Fred Astaire, Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, Kirk Douglas, Greer Garson, and Gregory Peck. Nominees included Soviet sympathizers Jane Fonda and Shirley MacLaine, and a defector who knew Soviet ways from the inside, Mikhail Baryshnikov. Spielberg was there, and was snubbed, as usual, but Lucas took home several technical awards for Star Wars . Oscar winner Vanessa Redgrave gave a short, confused sermon about “Zionist hoodlums,” and someone told me later the predominant Jewish contingent in the audience gasped and booed. Later, a presenter reminded Redgrave that winning her Oscar was “not a pivotal moment in history.”

And yet every movie and movie event is important to history because of what it teaches an attentive public. That particular evening was the 50th Anniversary of an event that defined merit and excellence. It could have been a special year, a Jubilee year, set apart to truly honor great national achievements in the motion picture arts and sciences. The eyes of the nation were on the event, and especially on the award for The Big Oscars, those for Best Picture and Best Director. With these awards, the Academy sends a loud trumpet-blast of a signal. Filmmakers and film-goers alike learn what the Academy considers good, important, meritorious, and worthy of honor by the motion picture industry.

The award ceremony is even designed to build dramatic anticipation for the announcement of the Academy’s decision. Who would be most esteemed on the 50th Anniversary of the Oscars? Behind the scenes that night, there were sweaty palms, nervous glances, and fidgeting.

How Oscars Are Won

Oscars are awards of merit given by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. There is a hierarchy at the Academy. A board of governors and associates nominate the movies they like with purpose. They judge these films carefully. Then the thousands of the tightly-controlled membership of the Academy — the Hollywood elite — vote for the nominated films they like best. They vote for what they value. They vote for what they love. They vote for what they believe best represents the worldview of the Hollywood ruling class.

For the 50th celebration, Star Wars came out on top for some awards in Motion Picture Sciences: set decoration, sound, editing, visual effects. But Motion Picture Arts are a special matter to the Academy. Art is an interpretation of culture. Culture is the external religion, the preferred external religion of a people, revealed in their values, seen in popular fashion, music, literature, ethical belief, standards of right and wrong, conversation, education, cases of law and the stories in feature films. For the Academy, the winning film must be good art: a good representation of the preferred beliefs of a culture. The Academy holds strong opinions about the preferred beliefs and reinforces a consistent opinion through the films they nominate. The Academy members vote for the cultural content they have learned to value and to love. They vote for the movies that reinforce everything about their way of faith and life.

So to whom did the Academy award the Big Oscars on their 50th Anniversary? The winner that year, for Best Picture, was — get ready to celebrate — a twisted little film about relationships and the pseudoscience of psychotherapy, by Woody Allen. The co-stars were neurotic serial fornicators who played neurotic serial fornicators in the movie. The story attempted to explain why real relationships are impossible and don’t really matter anyway. The director of that largely forgotten film received double honor that night: He was given the Oscar for Best Director. He is not a good director. The film was not a good film. But it was “Best Picture” according to the preferred theology of The Academy. The Academy of the Motion Picture Arts and Sciences was sending out a very clear trumpet-blast to every filmmaker: This is what we esteem and value above every other professional effort. This is what we believe our worldwide audience needs to be learning.

After the secret was out of the envelope, the Hollywood elite relaxed a little, and their interactions were not unlike those of the winner’s co-stars: selfishly neurotic. Many of the attendees had spent the year competing viciously with one another for places on the lists of players. The forced cordiality ended, and the rest of the evening consisted not in celebration, but in desperate renewed efforts to be like the people in the winning film — to act like them, think like them, quarrel like them, and believe the same meaningless beliefs. This was the faith of Hollywood culture that year, and all who wanted to share in movie-making history, or movie-making fame, worked very hard to learn this faith and live by it.

Hollywood Disciples

When I use the term theology, I mean a systematic set of beliefs based on the will of a god. There is true theology, and a corrupt, deformed version that is the precise opposite. True theology is nothing less than the word of Almighty God. His will and His righteousness are perfectly consistent and unchanging. Hollywood theology, on the other hand, is the word of man, who is elevated to the position of highest authority, and always changing. One main message of Hollywood theology is that man can be and must be his own god, deciding for himself what is right and wrong, building his own theology on his own terms. This is why filmmakers who break away from true theology and exalt Hollywood theology are treated as gods in Hollywood. This is especially true of directors, but it is also true of others in the elite. It is considered an achievement worthy of honor and recognition to turn biblical theology on its head. In Hollywood, Woody Allen is a god. He knows Hollywood Theology, and he honors it with style.

Heaven and Hell Cannot Be Defined by Hollywood

Some filmmakers want Oscars more than they want character, integrity, and truth. Others want fame. They know the rules: conform theologically or forget being included as one of the glitterati. The rules are little different from those of the early Soviet film industry: conform to Soviet theology and the party line and help us mould the ideal unthinking Soviet man, or your film is not good art, and it will never see an audience. Many talented Soviet filmmakers took the easy road and betrayed reality, integrity, and truth in order to be part of the Soviet propaganda unit Goskino. They received rubles, honors, and awards for erasing Christian traditions all across the empire. They were treated as gods, like the filmmakers who will join Hollywood’s firmament of deities at the next Academy Awards ceremony on February 26th. On that Sunday night, Oscar Night, a fawning public will tune in again to get a glimpse into Hollywood Heaven.

I have a message for the American TV audience. You’ll not only get a glimpse; Oscar Night will showcase the entire scope of Hollywood Heaven. You’ll see all there is to see. There is nothing transcendent in the pageant or the people or the films. There’s an ordinary stage, a glitzy pulpit, bright lights, and the self-appointed gods and goddesses of a make-believe world. You’ll see self-aggrandizement, self-congratulation, and self-deception. Hollywood Heaven is a fraudulent alternative to reality. It is held together by morally timid professionals who might love to be free from it but are afraid to break out. They continue to go along with a game many of them know is corrupt.

A few years ago, a young man came to me for help with a script he was submitting to the Hollywood elite. He wanted in. He wanted to be a recognized, well-funded, history-changing filmmaker. But he was a professing Christian, and told me his biggest goal was not to win an Oscar but rather to “send Hollywood a message.” He believed that Hollywood was moving the nation and the world in a negative direction, and he thought his film’s Christian message would show Hollywood a thing or two about writing and producing movies.

I started to read his script, and here’s what I discovered.

He had chosen a great and truly biblical theme for his film: “Forcing oneself into worldly conformity will not bring happiness.” Then he padded it out with a number of other ideas he thought were necessary to make his film a Hollywood film. He added Hollywood theology:

• Businessmen are evil.
• Small country towns are depraved because they are so traditional.
• Work is to be avoided.
• Sex makes the world go ‘round.
• Men are stupid.
• Dads are dopey.
• Fornication is inevitable after the “Hollywood kiss.”
• License (libertinism) is virtuous. Man can be his own god unless he’s a clergyman.
• Rebellion is inherently cool.
• Selfish hedonism is a path to fulfillment and happiness.
• Sin is an outdated concept.
• Homosexuality is genetic.
• “Gays” should be celebrated fixtures of society.
• The State has a duty to provide a risk-free existence to its people.
• Characters who curse are necessary as a mark of honest reality in a script.

All these theological elements were added before the end of Act II, where I stopped reading. To be yet more graphic, the script included specific jokes that seemed to go out of their way to prove the writer’s familiarity with Hollywood’s idea of aesthetic humor, including potty jokes, the newest sex slang, comparisons of Reagan to Hitler, racial minorities dealing out violent arrogance to white Anglo-Saxon males, and the mocking of a famous Christian businessman.

Here is an interesting point about theology. The writer was a graduate of Bible school. The theme of this film is Biblical. Yet every doctrinal element in the film is faithful to a rival theology of a rival god. The Christian writer was glorifying man and honoring Hollywood theology. He did not realize this theology is antithetical to Christian culture. It is the key to building and sustaining an anti-Christian culture.

So what message was this writer sending Hollywood? I want to be as cool as you are and be a part of your world. Please call me a filmmaker and don’t count it against me if I pretend to be a Christian. See what great, cool Hollywood movies I can make in the name of Hollywood? Please give me a seat at your table.

This is a treasonous message of surrender. If I had to summarize Hollywood theology in a phrase, I would say it is a very attractive lie. It glorifies man as the highest moral agent, with all authority to be his own god, determining for himself any ethical rules he wants. He can call ugliness beauty, evil good, or falsehood truth. It teaches that irresponsible filmmaking is no big deal — certainly not a theological thing — it’s just entertainment.

So many filmmakers have grown up with this theology they don’t realize it is theology. They think it is simply the way the world is. Well, it is the way the world is now, thanks to the influence of movies, but this is not the culture that anyone should reinforce through cinematic example. This theology is deformed, twisted, and corrupt, but there is a cinematic alternative.

A Prelude to Greatness

About the Hollywood elite, Director Frank Capra once observed, “We learn about life from each other’s pictures.” It has been a long time since the movies have shown us a picture of true heroism. Movies have taught us it is normal to be moral cowards. Movies have discipled us into a common faith. A great library of darkness has despoiled a once-great people, starting with the Hollywood elite. Americans now find the murky world of cinema to be more real than God.

Here are some important questions Americans should be asking during Oscar weekend in 2012: What might happen if a group of heroic filmmakers resolved to break away from bankrupt Hollywood theology to build a library of films that could inspire a nation to honesty, virtue, courage, humility, and the honor of God instead the honor of men?

What if a new library of films began to repair America’s broken understanding of true theology? What if honest filmmakers began learning about real life from each others’ creative endeavors? What if their films replaced pop doctrine with the genuine article?

Answer: The spell of Hollywood Theology would be broken, and cinema could go back to artistic honesty and creativity. Cinema could be brought back under the legitimate authority of the true Sovereign of the universe, Jesus Christ. And there would be something to celebrate in cinema.

The Night Before the Oscars: A Jubilee Celebration

On the night of February 25th — the night before Oscar Night — a revolutionary group of filmmakers will be gathering 1,300 miles from Hollywood to celebrate a reality that is the opposite of Hollywood’s carnival of deception. These filmmakers will be celebrating the courage of their professional peers in creating a library of independent films that frame the direct antithesis to dishonest filmmaking.

Visionary Doug Phillips has organized a professional Film Festival that has thrown open the door to a new era of cinematic history. The San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival is pointing the way to cinematic reformation by being bluntly honest about the arts and sciences of filmmaking. From the beginning of its history, the SAICFF was boldly truthful about the messages that should be communicated in cinema, as well as in cinematic awards of merit.

The SAICFF rests its policies on the one fixed standard of merit which is based squarely on the unchanging systematic theology of the Bible. Many filmmakers see this standard and say, “Why did no one ever show us this before?” Filmmakers know, deep down, that every film teaches theology, and now they know how important it is to get one’s theology right. Now they know which system of theology can give their films a foundation of honesty, integrity, and real freedom of creativity. It is the SAICFF that has set filmmakers free from the straightjacket of Hollywood Theology and introduces them to real creative freedom. It is fitting that Doug Phillips calls the highest award for merit “The Jubilee Award.” Every acknowledgment of a winner is a trumpet-blast, proclaiming liberty to an industry long held hostage by moral confusion.

The SAICFF receives hundreds of film submissions to each year’s festival. Most of the works demonstrate the long-misplaced reality that there is a transcendent theology of right and wrong, courage and cowardice, pride and humility. Filmmakers are learning, little-by-little, that there is a stark distinction between the pop doctrines of Hollywood theology and the freedom-giving standard represented clearly in the Bible. It is for this reason that winners of Jubilee Awards are as different as their films. They are not trying to be gods, and they are not expecting to be treated as gods. They are honored to be recognized as responsible communicators and cultural ambassadors of the great Creator Himself.

Geoff Botkin is a writer, producer, director and faculty member for the Christian Filmmakers Academy who has trained thousands of independent filmmakers. He serves as a Jubilee judge for the SAICFF and is the founder and president of the Western Conservatory of the Arts and Sciences.

Mr. Jones recently offered further thoughts regarding the role of film in discipling culture in an interview with Christianity Today:

“[Y]ou become what you see and hear. Film and television have been partially responsible for the disconnect between our nation and our God. Dynamic but righteous entertainment can help reverse this trend.

Obviously, family entertainment brings families together. If there are positive results from the characters in the film not succumbing to perversion, anger and self-centeredness, the film lifts the quality of life for that family. If a new generation is brought up in an atmosphere filled with the triumph of goodness and mercy and life, then a new generation is better prepared to solve the problems of the real world.

How does your faith come into play when considering a script?

Jones: First of all, I won’t blaspheme God. This immediately eliminates most scripts, but I see no reason, since I need all the help I can get, to encourage God to vacate the premises.

The spirit of a film is decisive. With the least bit of discernment, you can figure what motivates a person, their business, the movie they produce or direct, or the character they play in it. The spirit of a character can be discerned and matched up against the Spirit of God. Is it a spirit of hope and love, or the result of their lives being a series of angry blasts and fears? I try and discern the spirit of a script—what does it do in the final analysis, what is its effect upon an audience, how will they react? Will they leave the theater anxious and angry, or will they see a way, as a result of what’s in the film, to attack the problems they face? In other words, does the movie produce good or evil? That’s the bottom line for me...”

To read the rest of the article click here.

The San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival is pleased to announce that the 2010 SAICFF and the presentation of the $101,000 grand prize award for Best of Festival will take place the week of October 28-30, 2010 at the Municipal Auditorium and the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in downtown San Antonio.

In God’s providence, a fundamental renovation of our primary event facility during the time scheduled for the SAICFF has opened the door for a date change, and with the date change comes a fresh opportunity for filmmakers who will now be able to submit films for competition between December 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010 for consideration.

The SAICFF is looking into the possibility of adding other cash prize awards for the 2010 festival in our effort to promote and honor the broad depth of talent represented by our filmmakers. Also, we are pleased to announce that we will be holding an advanced, specialty filmmakers boot-camp in February of 2010, details to follow shortly.

April 13th-18th Only

On April 13, the 2009 Best of Festival and Audience Choice award-winning film The Widow’s Might will open in 94 U.S. cities across the Midwest and South as part of Carmike Cinemas and Dalton Pictures’ Independent Film Series. The initial is only scheduled for one week, so be sure to visit The Widow’s Might website and check out the list of cities the film will be playing in. Tickets can be booked through Fandango here.

The Widow’s Might took home both the $101,000 Best of Festival
Award and the Audience Choice Award at the 2009 SAICFF

Watch the Trailer

The Significance of The Widow’s Might to Independent Christian Filmmaking

Geoff Botkin explained: “The Widow’s Might is a groundbreaking film, even though it is a first feature film from a young director. It is one of the most original high-concept features in recent film history. The story is innovative in ways that can inspire the next generation of filmmakers, many of whom are looking for ways to break out of tired cinematic clichés, especially the weak theological clichés of the Christian ‘altar call’ movie. This film attempted and achieved a wholesome family message, illustrating the difficult-to-capture functional family environment. Its message addressed a very complex theological issue which is a defining issue of our generation: a form of taxation that asserts the state‘s presumed authority over God‘s. The clash over sovereignty between man and God is a topic Christian filmmakers will be exploring for decades to come. The film employed a clever story line to make rich use of complex subplots, including an illustration of the abusive use of media. Finally, the film used aesthetic elements to set new standards for taste and humor, charting a delightful course for tomorrow‘s filmmakers who will make a clean break from patterns of discourse that have taken American culture in the wrong direction for several decades.”

“We never saw this coming!” said John Moore. “The greatest lesson we have learned at this event over the years is to press on; keep moving forward; always pursue excellence. The production was very tough, but it brought our families together, and we‘re even closer now than ever.... I dedicate this award to my father, the most inspiring man I have ever known.”

This year, the Duggar family returned to the SAICFF — and brought the show with them! The latest episode, titled Lights, Camera, Duggars features the family at the 2009 SAICFF as they watch films, enjoy fellowship, and meet their favorite movie star, Kirk Cameron. The show airs tonight at 9:00PM ET on The Learning Channel.

O’Donnell told the AP that she thought it “was absolutely heartwrenching and perfect,” she said. “It was very moving to me.”

O’Donnell who has four children with her “partner” Kelli Carpenter said that she anticipates the homosexual movement to become national in light of the California marriage ban on same-sex unions. Again, she told the AP: “We keep walking forward,” she said. “Civil rights don’t happen overnight. I think it’s going to happen, and it’s going to happen soon. It will be national.”

Commenting on how quickly homosexuals have gained ground she stated: “When you think really how long the gay-rights movement has been around, it’s not that long,” she added. “It’s tremendous progress. When my career began, no one would even insinuate anyone was gay. People wouldn’t even bring it up. It was never mentioned. It was almost a taboo subject.

“When I was (first) on TV, it was before ‘Will & Grace,’ it was before Ellen came out. And not one person ever asked me. Times have changed just in my lifetime. To walk down the street in Manhattan and see 20-year-old guys holding hands or young, cute lesbians. ... I think ‘Wow.’ There has been tremendous progress made. Just in my lifetime. And I’m almost 47.”

Click here to read the entire interview

But most of all, if Harvey had not been taken from us 30 years ago, I think he’d want me to say to all of the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight who have been told that they are less than by their churches, by the government or by their families, that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value and that no matter what anyone tells you, God does love you and that very soon — I promise you — you will have equal rights federally, across this great nation of ours. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, God, for giving us Harvey Milk. — Homosexual activist Dustin Lance Black accepting the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay for Milk.

The distinction between Hollywood’s toxic culture of death and the burgeoning Christian film movement of life was highlighted in bold this weekend.

Millions of viewers tuned into the 81st Academy Awards where they watched Sean Penn receive the Best Actor Oscar for his portrayal of homosexual activist Harvey Milk, and Kate Winslet receive the Best Female Actor Oscar for her performance in The Reader, a pornographic story about a female Nazi war criminal seducing a fifteen-year-old boy. They also watched award-winners use their platform to push homosexual political activism and to encourage teenagers to pursue a homosexual lifestyle.

But just over twenty-four hours earlier, National Public Radio broadcast a seven-minute feature story on a very different type of film movement and award ceremony to a listening audience of more than six million:

As Hollywood crowns its favorite movies and actors at the Oscars on Sunday, another group is trying to create a rival movie industry. Fed up with sex and violence in mainstream entertainment, conservative Christians are turning out their own films. And they’ve made surprising inroads.

NPR Religion correspondent Barbara Bradley Hagerty reported on the 2009 San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival in her feature report, “Christian Filmmakers Creating an Industry of Faith.” She began her story with this telling question: “What was the biggest grossing independent film in 2008? No, not Slumdog Millionaire. Not Milk. It was a movie you’ve probably never heard of...”

Click here to listen to the report which includes interviews with Kirk Cameron, Steven Kendrick, and some of the more than 2,400 attendees of the 2009 festival.

Independent Christian Filmmaking Comes of Age

The 2009 San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival was an event of firsts. Each of these firsts pointed to the growing maturity of the independent Christian film movement and its mission to build a Christ-honoring replacement industry outside of Hollywood. For the first time in history, a Christian film festival offered the largest single cash prize in America to a single filmmaker. The message was clear: Christians will invest in their future. For the first time in history, the finalists and award winning films at this year’s festival included feature films that were also making headlines for significant cultural impact. In fact, FIREPROOF, the winner of the SAICFF Jubilee for Best Feature Film, was the top grossing independent film in the United States for 2008, at $33 million in box office receipts. Also, with more than 2400 people in attendance at the SAICFF and 550 at the Christian Filmmaker’s Academy, interest in Christian filmmaking appeared to reach a historic high.

The Festival was also noteworthy for the unified vision and message of the participants. From Dean Jones to Kirk Cameron to Stephen Kendrick to the Grand Prize winners, a message was communicated that the time has come for Christians to get out of Hollywood and develop theologically sound films with high production values, films which breathe a distinctively Christian worldview. For the first time, filmmakers were able to offer their films for sale through a downloadable media platform during the festival event. For Christian filmmaking to survive it must be economically viable, and the success of a number of films, as well as new distribution mechanisms, point to greater financial success in the future. Finally, the maturity of the filmmakers and their films, as evidenced by a greater hunger for theological precision, improved story-lines, and advanced production values, spoke to the fact that the independent Christian film movement is beginning to come of age.

The Widow’s Might Wins Audience Choice, Best of Festival, and $101,000

The “Best of Festival” Jubilee Award — with its $101,000 cash prize — went to The Widow’s Might, a feature length comedy adventure that tells the fictional story of how aspiring filmmakers came to the aid of an elderly widow who faced losing her home due to rising property taxes. The 101-minute film was written and directed by 19-year-old John Moore of Kaufman, Texas, with David Heustis and Jeff Moreland serving as producers.

SAICFF judge Geoff Botkin explains the significance of the film for the independent Christian film movement: “Every film ever made represents more than the story seen on a two-dimensional screen. Films represent a very three-dimensional experience of dozens of artisans who work together in a specific purpose. Their combined effort reflects strong theological motives and cultural beliefs about life. The Widow’s Might represents a rich cultural understanding of the objectives of the SAICFF. The film was made by a young man who worked and planned under the guidance and counsel of his father, and with a deliberate sensitivity to lessons learned at the CFA. The filmmaker involved not only his entire family in the process, but other entire families who worked together with spiritual goals in mind. The filmmaker set ambitious goals for himself and his team. The filmmaker rigorously scrutinized his script for theological soundness. The filmmaker demonstrated the kind of practical humility necessary for a creator who acknowledges that his derivative creativity comes not from himself but a sovereign Creator. The general theme of the film impressed judges who believe that families can work together as salt and light in the community, applying God’s Word to all of life.”

The Significance of The Widow’s Might to Independent Christian Filmmaking

Geoff Botkin explained: “The Widow’s Might is a groundbreaking film, even though it is a first feature film from a young director. It is one of the most original high-concept features in recent film history. The story is innovative in ways that can inspire the next generation of filmmakers, many of whom are looking for ways to break out of tired cinematic clichés, especially the weak theological clichés of the Christian ‘altar call’ movie. This film attempted and achieved a wholesome family message, illustrating the difficult-to-capture functional family environment. Its message addressed a very complex theological issue which is a defining issue of our generation: a form of taxation that asserts the state’s presumed authority over God’s. The clash over sovereignty between man and God is a topic Christian filmmakers will be exploring for decades to come. The film employed a clever story line to make rich use of complex subplots, including an illustration of the abusive use of media. Finally, the film used aesthetic elements to set new standards for taste and humor, charting a delightful course for tomorrow’s filmmakers who will make a clean break from patterns of discourse that have taken American culture in the wrong direction for several decades.”

“We never saw this coming!” said John Moore. “The greatest lesson we have learned at this event over the years is to press on; keep moving forward; always pursue excellence. The production was very tough, but it brought our families together, and we’re even closer now than ever. . . . I dedicate this award to my father, the most inspiring man I have ever known.”

They Came From Nepal, Egypt, and China, From Africa and Central America, and From Many of the Fifty States

This special moment in the history of independent Christian filmmaking was enjoyed by Christians from many of the fifty states and from diverse nations around the world. One enthusiastic citizen of Shanghai, China, wrote the following . . .

“Greeting from Shanghai, China. Just returned to Shanghai yesterday afternoon after 22 hrs traveling. Thank you so much for all the thing you done for the Kingdom business. I returned to SH with full blessing and fire. [The Botkin family] definitely impacted and blessed a lot of people’s life and we are one of them. It’s so amazing to participate the meeting and to know I have so many alliance. Hoping soon we could have “SHICFF” — Shanghai Independent Christian Film Festival hold in Shanghai. Why not?”

The Von Trapp Children Kept the Fifth Commandment

For three nights the audience at the 2009 SAICFF were transported on what has been described as “one of the happiest melodic journeys of our lives.” Receiving standing ovation after standing ovation, The Von Trapp Children wove a seamless fabric of complex, but pitch perfect harmonies in a collection of musical favorites from around the world, including notable songs from The Sound of Music, the film that brought the story of their family to millions.

The performances were thrilling, but the Christian testimony of four great-grandchildren intent on praising Christ and honoring the memory of their great-grandparents was even more so. The message of these children both on and off the stage is simple: Deep gratitude to the Lord for the heroic legacies of their ancestors; an evangelical and Bible-based Christianity; the blessing of family and the encouragement of home education; and the power of the winsome presentation of beautiful music to lift hearts and communicate important stories that bring generations together.

Christian Filmmaking Becomes More Profitable With Downloads

For the first time in history, a film festival was able to work with a sponsor to offer all finalists and semi-finalists filmmakers the ability to sell their films as downloadable media off of the Internet and during the event. SAICFF founder Doug Phillips had this to say:

“Historically, film festivals have been disinclined to encourage sales of DVDs of competing films during their festivals. Up until now, no festival has offered films for sale as downloadable media during their event. The reluctance to do so has been based in part on the concern that attendance will decline if people can just watch the films without attending the festival. We took a different view. And with the birth of BlueBehemoth.com, we were able to implement our vision. Our approach was to invest in the filmmakers by giving them an immediate way to see a financial return on their investment. And it worked. As we predicted, the movie sales did not diminish the ticket sales. In fact, this year we saw ticket sales increase dramatically, even with a healthy number of movie downloads during the week of the event.”

Phillips continued: “Platforms like BlueBehemoth.com are great for the movement. These filmmakers work very hard on their craft and often they see little return. And for our movement to succeed it must be competitive and economically viable. But that means getting healthy, Christ-honoring media to families, which is exactly what vehicles like BlueBehemoth.com accomplish.” Phillips added: “The realistic hope of profitability is one of many signs that the tide is beginning to turn for Christian filmmakers.”

“I wouldn’t trade this for an Oscar . . . “

“I wouldn’t trade this for an Oscar,” remarked Dean Jones upon receiving the special Lifetime Achievement Jubilee Award at the 2009 SAICFF. Jones has played in 46 films and 5 Broadway shows over his career of more than half a century, including 10 films with Disney, 6 of which are on Variety’s all-time hit list. His best-known role is that of racecar driver Jim Douglas in The Love Bug. In more recent years, he has appeared in such films as Beethoven and Clear and Present Danger . The special presentation in honor of Mr. Jones followed on the heels of the world premiere of Abraham and Isaac , a short film by Crown Financial Ministries, which brings to life the biblical epic of Abraham’s call to give up his own son. Jones plays the lead role of Abraham in the new film. Doug Phillips explained the reason for the award: “Dean has touched the hearts of millions with his talents and gifts through film, but at the age of 78 he is best remembered today as a follower of Christ, a defender of the family — a man who is finishing his race strong by using his gifts to draw men all over the world closer to the Lord.”

As he accepted the Lifetime Achievement Jubilee Award, Mr. Jones offered hopeful words regarding the rising independent Christian film movement: “There is a curtain on stage, and it is down in front of all of us tonight. And I believe it is going to rise soon, and there will be Christian people that have expertise in Christian filmmaking who become an antidote to the horrors of our culture today . . . A change is coming. It’s a matter of time until one or two or ten of them in North Carolina or Utah or Texas catch hold of Walt [Disney]’s pattern and bring some quality work to the fore. . . . [They] are going to be doing films that will once again give an occasion for the children and dads and moms to gather together in a theater or around a television and see something that brings them together, that teaches them to love one another — films of quality, films of morality.”

Dean Jones Emerges as an Elder Statesman for Christian Filmmaking

In a lecture for students of the Christian Filmmakers Academy (CFA) held during the festival, Mr. Jones urged the students to make Christ-honoring films outside Hollywood: “If you want a job, do what I did: work for other people for 50 years, but the odds of you getting swallowed up by the blasphemous, godless, decadent, deadly spirit of today’s show business are thousands to one . . . But there’s a better way. And the pattern will still work: the pattern of keeping control out of the hands of the godless spirit of the age; of setting standards of excellence; of developing your own means of distribution.”

CFA founder Doug Phillips observed: “Dean Jones is emerging as the elder statesman of independent Christian filmmakers. With a robust Hollywood career behind him, he recognizes the dangerous influence of Hollywood and is urging the next generation of filmmakers to take a different path — a visionary, Christ-centered path outside of Hollywood, one that allows Christian filmmakers to call the shots and make films that honor Christ because they embody a biblical worldview. His work in St. John in Exile — and most recently in Abraham and Isaac — are two examples of how he is modeling this new vision.”

FIREPROOF Goes Home with Jubilee for Best Feature

The top honor in the “Best Feature Film” category was awarded to FIREPROOF, a film starring Kirk Cameron that explores a firefighter’s struggle to save his failing marriage. FIREPROOF — which was written, produced, and directed by Alex and Stephen Kendrick of Sherwood Pictures — was the highest-grossing independent film of 2008 with over $33 million in box-office receipts, beating out such films as Woody Allen’s Vicky Cristina Barcelona (starring Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz), and Milk (starring Sean Penn). The film also received recognition as runner-up for “Best of Festival.” Stephen Kendrick, who was on hand in the Alamo City to receive the award, noted, “Sherwood Pictures is thrilled that FIREPROOF has won ‘Best Feature’ at a film festival that not only seeks to honor the pursuit of high production values, but also morally responsible filmmaking.”

Also speaking at the 2009 SAICFF was noted actor Kirk Cameron, who played the lead role in FIREPROOF. Although no award was given at this year’s Festival for best actor, Kirk won the hearts of attendees with his riveting performance of a husband fighting for his marriage — a truly memorable performance laced with nuance and depth. Addressing a crowd of around 2400 attendees, Kirk communicated a Christ-centered, inspiring, and principled message of hope to the families and filmmakers present.

Stephen Kendrick Blazes a Trail for Principled Filmmakers

Both at the Christian Filmmakers Academy and before a sold-out crowd at the 2009 SAICFF, FIREPROOF producer Stephen Kendrick electrified audiences with his dynamic message of Christ-centered, no-compromise filmmaking. Drawing from story after story of God’s faithful provision for the vision of a local church, of the power of prayer, and of the need to avoid every appearance of evil when producing a Christian film, Mr. Kendrick modeled an uncommon humility and spiritual fervor to both the professional and young filmmakers present at this year’s event.

Commenting on his experience at the Christian Filmmakers Academy and Festival, Kendrick noted that he “saw firsthand how Vision Forum is stepping up to fill a vital need right now. Their vision is much greater and far reaching than most people realize. The digitalization of media is bringing a massive flood of new young filmmakers on the scene. My deep concern has been that they can afford the equipment, but may not be morally responsible or theologically grounded enough to use this powerful influence for good. This festival and academy are exactly what is needed right now to steer them toward producing films that are professional, commercially viable, and also fruitful for eternity. A close friend of mine, who graduated Valedictorian from a well-known film school, attended the academy and festival with me. After the week, he commented how much he learned at the academy and how much more honorable and classy the festival was than others he had attended in the past. But more than that, he left with a clearer vision to use his skills for the glory of God rather than for leading others into decadence and vanity. I believe that decades from now, we will see filmmakers who are changing the world who will undoubtedly state that this festival and academy were what God used to help ground them and prepare them for long term success.”

Audiences Deeply Moved by Abraham and Isaac

Through a very special arrangement with Crown Financial Ministries and Vision Forum Ministries, the SAICFF became host to the world premiere of three important new films produced under the direction of Crown Financial Ministries CEO, Chuck Bentley. Doug Phillips commented that “the forging of Dean Jone’s great acting with Crown Financial Ministries’ bold vision to bring to the screen key stories from the Bible has resulted in an exceptional film. Abraham and Isaac is a real treasure. And the response of the audience was simply overwhelming. People loved the films. Some wept. Others were convicted of sin. Still others were moved to a greater appreciation of the love and provision of Christ. Those in attendance knew that they were watching something very special — a series of films that perhaps will someday be viewed as classics that will have touched the hearts of millions. Chuck is a visionary who has blessed the Christian community and the world beyond.”

Following the film, the audience was treated to a very special “behind-the scenes” look at the making of the films with filmmakers Jon and Andy Erwin, actor Dean Jones, and Crown Financial Ministries CEO, Chuck Bentley. Abraham and Isaac is part of God Provides: A FIlm Learning Experience from Crown Financial Ministries. Crown Financial Ministries, formerly led by financial author and radio host Larry Burkett, who passed away in 2003, got involved in filmmaking in 2007 after witnessing how many third world countries learn through storytelling. “Our goal for the films in the God Provides series is to engage hearts worldwide through the tool of visual media storytelling, sharing God’s financial principles with the world’s population who cannot read, as well as visual learners in the most modern parts of the world,” remarked Chuck Bentley. “Abraham and Isaac is an integral part of our new teaching series, and we are honored to be coming to the Alamo City to introduce this film as part of the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival.”

Pro-Family Films Dominate the Jubilee Awards

The winners at this year’s festival were noteworthy for more than just a growing trend toward cinematic excellence in Christian filmmaking — this year’s winners covered a wide range of themes touching on a diversity of issues important to the Christian family. Notable among these were FIREPROOF, with its message of covenant marriage, and The Widow’s Might, with its underlying theme of family faithfulness, multi-generational vision, and care for widows.

The award for “Best Biblical Family Film” was presented by the twenty-member Duggar family and went to the documentary Binding Faith for its powerful depiction of an Indian family and their commitment one-to-another in the midst of intense religious persecution. The Terri Schiavo Story, a two-part television series that follows the Schindler family’s long and highly emotional struggle to save their daughter’s life, garnered the SAICFF “Best Documentary” Award. The film, hosted by Joni Eareckson Tada, was directed and produced by Ken Carpenter of Franklin Films. The top honor in the “Best Dramatic Short” category was awarded to The Prodigal Trilogy, a cinematic adaptation of acclaimed solo performer Jason Hildebrand’s monologues based on the Luke 15 parable of Jesus in the Bible. The Secrets of Jonathan Sperry, a story about the need for young men to be encouraged by grandfathers in the Faith, took the top honor for “Best Original Score.” For a complete list of winners and to learn more about the films, go here.

More Reasons Why This Was a Historic Year

Geoff Botkin observes: “Today’s aspiring filmmakers have been taught about life, and theology, and film by Hollywood. For many years they have assumed that one day they would make films in Hollywood — until this year at the Christian Filmmakers Academy. At this year’s Academy, more than 500 students looked around the room at other serious filmmakers who were intently listening to lectures about theology, and they grasped the significance of a truly independent Christian filmmaking industry. They realized that a theological framework underlies every movie. They realized that filmmakers can get their theology wrong, and mislead millions of moviegoers. And these students purposed before their peers and colleagues that they want to get it right.

“This new perspective gave birth to yet more historic ‘firsts.’ These ambitious filmmakers also agreed to help one another in a cause that is much larger and more important than their individual plans and personal artistic experiments. These filmmakers want to help one another make the priority projects that will redefine cinematic history and prove that a comprehensively ‘Outside Hollywood’ industry can be commercially viable and culturally significant.”

Innovative and Thought-Provoking Biblical Worldview Messages

More than five hundred students attended the Christian Filmmakers Academy. Many more listened to lectures presented at the 2009 SAICFF. Commenting on Geoff Botkin’s lecture “How to Evaluate a Hollywood Film,” KSLR talk-show host Adam McManus wrote: “When Geoff Botkin warned the 2009 SAICFF audience that the G-rated Walt Disney film entitled Princess Diaries 2 was filled with toxic messages antithetical to a biblical worldview, you could have heard a pin drop. But, in scene after scene, Mr. Botkin revealed how this seemingly innocuous movie wasn’t innocuous at all! Throughout the movie, we hear the princess declare over and over again the politically correct mantra ‘This is the 21st century!’ — a notion no doubt instilled in her in the classrooms of the Ivy League. The message? Throw off the constraints of family, tradition, and religion and find your own ‘truth.’”

Doug Phillips presented students with a worldview-challenging symposium on Christianity and Science Fiction. He answered the question, “Is science fiction a legitimate genre for Christian filmmakers?” with a resounding “Yes, but only if we reject the philosophical foundations of modern science fiction and replace it with a presuppositionally Christian foundation for ethics and cosmology.” Dr. Voddie Baucham brought a memorable message on masculinity and film entitled What Hollywood Teaches About Manhood.

Action-Packed Stunt Workshop Teaches World Class Moves

Jimmy Broyden’s bio tells us that he came “from 17-year-old drug addict and high school drop out to stuntman, entrepreneur, motivational speaker, and father of seven.” But students at the 2009 CFA got to know Jimmy as a wonderful, humble, and talented man who blessed the 2009 Christian Filmmakers Academy students with two hours of power-packed training on stunt coordination.

For many students the combination of the theological training and practical workshops resulted in the best Christian Filmmakers Academy to date. “We hope to train more than three thousand new filmmakers over the next five years,” commented Doug Phillips. “Each year we hope to surpass the last with more innovative, practical, and foundational training than the year before. The inclusion of important classes on cinematography and stunts are just one step in that direction.”

The Movement is Just Beginning - Join Us Next Year

The staff of the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival and the Christian Filmmakers Academy want to offer a special note of thanks to the hundreds of people who came together to make this year’s event a historic success. Thanks also to all the attendees who traveled to participate in this year’s festival and filmmakers academy. The film festival was completely sold out, so make sure to book your tickets early for next year’s events.

SAN ANTONIO, TX, March 5, 2008—On Monday, March 10, the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival (SAICFF) will unveil plans to give the single largest cash prize in the world to be awarded by any film festival—secular or Christian.

The cash prize payout for their annual “Best of Festival” Jubilee Award is being upped to more than $101,000, giving it the top rank for cash prizes among film festivals worldwide. In addition, it is expected that other cash, product and service related prizes will bring the total value of awards for the next SAICFF in excess of $200,000. Doug Phillips, founder of the SAICFF, will make the announcement at an official press conference to be held at 1:30pm at the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) Convention in Nashville, Tennessee.

The unprecedented announcement comes during a sustained crescendo for independent Christian films. In recent years, the industry has enjoyed mainstream praise and box office success for low-budget indy films such as Facing the Giants. Privately-financed blockbusters like The Passion of the Christ have challenged the conventional wisdom on issues of marketing, distribution and ticket sales.

“Purse strings of liberal filmmakers have financed anti-Christian values and moral decadence through film for decades,” remarked Phillips. “They have had their day, and now is the time for a Christian reformation in filmmaking.”

Phillips noted, “We at the SAICFF are endeavoring to spearhead this reformation by giving the largest cash prize award in the world to our ‚ÄòBest of Festival’ Winner—to reward that filmmaker who best communicates a Christian worldview with artistic excellence through their work. Thanks to the generous donation of a private foundation, the SAICFF now has prize money available to help encourage Christian filmmakers who are engaging this critical arena of the arts.

“Our mission is not to infiltrate Hollywood, nor merely to temper its distasteful agenda,” Phillips said, “but to replace it altogether. We are about the business of building a replacement industry—one that is distinctively Christian in message and methodology. This world class grand prize sends a message that Christians are serious about investing in those independent Christian filmmakers who are willing to work outside of Hollywood, and to produce competitive films of technical excellence, with a presuppositionally biblical message.

The SAICFF is also announcing the inclusion of feature films, promotional media and commercial advertisements into its line-up of Jubilee Award winning categories. For the January, 2009 ceremony, awards will be given in the following categories: Best of Film Festival; Best Documentary Short; Best Dramatic Short Film; Best Creation Film; Best Biblical Family Film; Best Promotional Media; Best Commercial Advertisement; Best Young Filmmakers Short; Best Trailer; Audience Choice Award; Best Treatment; Best Original Score (Special Award)

Since firming up plans to offer a $101,000 Grand Prize at the film festival, the SAICFF has secured festival sponsorships from the NRB Network as well as Samaritan Ministries, and more significant sponsorships are in the works.

“We are thankful for our sponsors” Phillips stated. “And we welcome others who desire to help us spread the word about this new opportunity, as well as those who want to aid us financially in expanding this effort.”

“It does little good to complain about Hollywood’s corrupt agenda,” continued Phillips. “Our goal is to light a candle—to show that there is hope outside Hollywood by rewarding culture changers who are recapturing film for Christ’s glory.”

The San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival will hold its fifth annual festival in the Alamo City on January 8-10, 2009. The deadline for film submissions is November 1 for feature films and October 1 for all other film categories.

To learn more about the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival, visit “http://www.independentchristianfilms.org.” Watch a new promotional video with additional commentary about the 2009 SAICFF.

To interview Doug Phillips regarding his vision for the SAICFF or to receive press materials and photos from the announcement, media should contact Gregg Wooding, I AM PR Services, 972-567-7660 or gwooding@texasprototypes.com

Several months ago, I had the opportunity to speak face-to-face with George Barna of The Barna Group. We briefly discussed a number of subjects including family-integrated worship, church, home, and film. Of special interest to me were George’s comments that horror is the most influential film genre for modern young people (Christian or otherwise).

Also interesting is the rising fascination with horror as the genre of choice among professing Christian filmmakers. In the eternal quest for “relevance” (the fashionable codeword for status quo ethics), a new breed of cultural syncretists hopes to reach out to the world by competing with the world on the world’s terms. When it comes to “Christian horror films,” this sometimes means using truly vile and defiling images to communicate a holy theme. In my view, this is a mistake. Of greater concern than even these offensive externals (which seem inextricably linked to the genre) is the basic premise that darkness and fear should be entertainment.

One of the subjects we addressed at this year’s Christian Filmmakers Academy is the duty of the Christian filmmaker to evaluate film genre from a presuppositional and biblical ethic. The truth is this: not all genres are created equal. Genres reflect philosophical and theological priorities. Some genres are so immersed in anti-Christian presuppositions that to divest them of their perverse worldview is to destroy the genre itself. Consequently, some genres are unredeemable. Pornography would be one example. Horror is another.

The horror film genre actually finds its origins in the twisted morality stories and rebellious gothic novels of the nineteenth century. One part proto-sci fi, another part evolutionary hypothesis, another part occult mysticism, and yet a fourth part early psychological intrigue, the gothic novels reflected lawless man’s fascination with the exploration of the dark side of the imagination. Their mission: titillate through fear.

As early as the horror-fantasy films of magician-turned-cinema innovator Georges Méliès in the 1890s, filmmakers exposed audiences to photographic tricks that allowed them to conjure up witches, devils, and imps. These spooky images were designed to produce humor and fear. The German Expressionist cinema introduced the twentieth century to some of the more sinister and enduring horror images designed to communicate doom and hopelessness. Vampires, devil worship, madness, Satanic eroticism, and lost souls were frequent themes of early horror classics from directors like Robert Weine, F.W. Murnau, Victor Sjostrom, and Paul Wegener. Many of these films, like the Fritz Lang sci-fi horror film Metropolis (1926), incorporated heavy social commentary that reflected strong anti-Christian and pro-Marxist sentiments.

The 1930s, ‘40s, ‘50s, and ‘60s each brought their own twist on the horror genre, but the basic thesis that “darkness and fear is entertainment” was never in question. From the numerous gothic novel spin-offs of the ‘30s, to the perverse fascination with the “undead” in the ‘40s, to the 3-D craze and B-film epoch of the ’50s, to the psychological horrors and serial killer films of the 1960s, to the extreme occultims of the 1970s, and the various slasher series of the 1980s and ‘90s, the horror genre has cultivated a national fascination with that which is evil and perverse. Horror has glorified the nightmare and taught Americans an ungodly fear of evil. To the extent that Christianity is incorporated into horror films, it is either openly ridiculed, or it is presented as a form of mystical superpower in the hands of special men who wield their own Christian talismans, incantations, and spells.

Horror is an example of a genre which was conceived in rebellion. It is based on a fascination with ungodly fear. It should not be imitated, propagated, or encouraged. It cannot be redeemed because it is presuppositionally at war with God.

Christians filmmakers can, of course, juxtapose good and evil, ungodly fear with godly fear, and the horrible consequences on man for departing from God’s law — but none of this qualifies as “horror” as the film genre was conceived and as it has been executed in its various permutations for more than one hundred years. Consequently, we should recognize that “Christian horror film” is an oxymoronic expression. Perhaps what is needed is a fresh new genre that allows us to explore complex themes, but in a sanctified and holy way. Or perhaps not.

But this much is sure: it should raise red flags when Christian writers or directors announce that they are making horror films for Jesus. As Christians, we must speak to our culture, but we must do so on God’s terms. We need less gore and more Gospel with gravitas. Building on the foundations of that which is idolatrous and despicable is no way to win a culture for Christ. It is the fear of the Lord, not the fear of the dark, which is the beginning of wisdom.

A friend of mine believes that the July blockbuster Ratatouille is an allegory of Pixar’s own rise to fame within the Hollywood animation industry which has degraded since the death of Walt Disney. At first I was skeptical, but there are number of similarities between the Pixar staff’s ambitions and successes and the journey taken by the main character of their latest film. I’m not sure how many of these parallels have been placed there on purpose, but I believe that a much more interesting comparison can be made than a small studio achieving fame and fortune. First, a description of the plot:

The film opens on a televised cooking show which describes the life of Auguste Gusteau, the greatest chef in France, a food-loving visionary who enthusiastically revolutionized French cuisine with his book, Anyone Can Cook. Gusteau is also the idol and inspiration of Remy, a rat who is not content just to be a simple scavenger. Watching television and reading cookbooks has opened his eyes to a new world that is not particularly rat-friendly, much to the concern of his father, the patriarch of this rat family.

Sure enough, a human being wakes up to find our hero cooking in her kitchen, and her ensuing fury endangers the whole rat clan. In the face of imminent destruction, Remy’s father orders a full-scale evacuation, but Remy disobeys his father’s instructions and runs back to the kitchen to steal a copy of Anyone Can Cook. He loses his family, and winds up alone and starving on the streets of Paris where he stumbles across Gusteau’s once five-star restaurant, now greatly diminished in reputation since the great chef’s death.

Gusteau’s restaurant is now operated by a Michael Eisner-esque successor — an opportunist named Skinner — who uses Gusteau’s legacy to hustle microwave burritos and corn dogs. The kitchen also employs the clumsy and inept Linguini, a mere garbage boy until he and Remy join forces and begin to create culinary masterpieces together. In this film, rats can understand English but not speak it themselves, so a communication system must be devised to allow cooperation.

By hiding under Linguini’s hat, Remy controls his human puppet by tugging different hairs and can finally prepare the gourmet meals his heart desires. As a newly-discovered wunderkind chef, Linguini gains the respect and admiration of the other cooks. Unfortunately, their sudden combined success fills both them with selfish pride and they begin to fight over all the glory that is due the star of a successful kitchen. Without Linguini’s hat for cover Remy can’t cook in the open, and without the guidance of Remy, Linguini can’t cook at all, so their squabbling threatens the success of the entire restaurant, just as the Paris food critics have begun to take an interest in it again.

Meanwhile, the jealous Skinner has begun to suspect that Linguini is not all what he seems and is desperate to eliminate this threat to his superiority in the kitchen. Further complications arise as the appallingly unambitious Linguini falls in love with one of the other cooks, and Remy is discovered by his family who have been looking for him. Remy’s father wants him to rejoin the clan and is horrified that his son is working with humans. Conflicts continue to mount until the climax of the film, which I found to be exciting, but a little unsatisfying.

Throughout the film, the audiences is taught about the intricacies of gourmet cooking, the workings of the Michelin star system that governs French restaurants (sort of), and the hierarchy of professional kitchens — all without stopping the story or boring the audience. Complex supporting characters are introduced and described effortlessly, and the sort of exposition that usually bogs a film down with dry explanation is handled with great skill and woven carefully into the structure of the plot. However, the cheap trick of using an inner monologue weakens the overall film, and it is this over-reliance on voice-over that is the main weakness of the ending.

In every technical way this film excels. The animation is truly superior, containing some of the best human animation Pixar has produced to date, and the rats are expressive, flexible, and fun to watch. The fur, hair and cloth effects are excellent, and although they are far more complex simulations than we saw in Finding Nemo and The Incredibles, they are not much more impressive. The great technical breakthrough of this film is in the rendering of the food; the delicate translucency of onions and celery, the fluid layers of oil and vinegar dressing, and the mixing of thick sauces and creamy batters. It is truly amazing... but perhaps only to other computer animators, like myself.

The lighting is also a new high point for a Pixar film, and the camera work is stunning. Brad Bird’s direction, composition, and pacing has only improved since The Incredibles. The sound design is excellent, Michael Giacchino’s second Pixar score is fanciful and lively, and the voice acting is wonderful. A highlight is Peter O’Toole’s role as the most interesting and ominous food critic ever shown on film who is possibly meant as a little dig at movie critics as well.

However, with the exception of last year’s Cars, I thought this was Pixar’s weakest film. The plot’s external elements and minor characters are handled with brilliance and great originality, but its heart is a rancid cliche.

Films that revolve around a son or daughter’s desire to escape from overbearing parental authority and are merely seeking independence are a dime a dozen. Films that feature the single-minded pursuit of a selfish dream for that dream’s own sake as a moral theme are extremely overdone. Films that create either tension or comedy by incessant bickering between parents and children are currently the norm.

Remy the rat doesn’t experience much character growth in this film; after a few adventures, we find that his environment and family have just arbitrarily changed to suit him. He doesn’t have to work or even apply himself to achieve his inexplicable cooking skills.

Ratatouille’s preparation, seasoning, garnish, and presentation are almost flawless. Unfortunately, it has been made from sub-par ingredients, which is, sadly, becoming a trend in Pixar’s recent releases. This film was started by Jan Pinkava, apparently based on Richard Lawson’s Ben and Me and Eve Titus’s Anatole, but then changed hands mid-production to the leadership of Brad Bird, which may account for most of its inconsistencies and would explain how such a substandard story structure could be brought to the screen so artfully.

These convoluted and fragmented production structures are standard procedure in most Hollywood studios, but Pixar has built its reputation on careful story planning and films that reflect great unity of purpose and solid construction. Getting back to the analogies between Pixar, Disney, and Remy the rat, a few things should be noted. Firstly, Pixar’s top men are not merely the latest acquisition of the massive Walt Disney Corporation — they are the heirs apparent to Walt Disney himself, and careful students of his best work.

In the same way that Walt Disney invented the best techniques and much of technology of 2D animation, and through years of production from his shorts to his features defined and polished the art of animation and built it into a lucrative industry, Ed Catmull and John Lasseter have built 3D animation’s industry from the ground up with Pixar. In their early days as a division of George Lucas’s effects studio ILM, they built the hardware and software that produced the first computer animation ever put on film. Later, as an independent company, their short films helped sell software but also captured the imaginations of other animators and laid the foundations for Toy Story.

However, like Gusteau’s name in the film, the Walt Disney brand is now used to sell cheap toys, endless direct-to-video sequels, crude television programs, and abysmal music. At the moment, Pixar is poised to either rejuvenate the principles and standards that Disney once represented or be absorbed and driven down the same path of uninspired and uninspiring films. Like Remy, they have achieved great success, seemingly overnight, and now tend be more arrogant about upcoming projects then they were in their early days and seem to be spending less time on story development.

With the death of Joe Ranft, Pixar’s story department lost a vital member, and with more films in simultaneous production than before, the remaining team is split between several projects. I believe that they must refocus themselves on making story the main goal and collaborating, like Linguini and Remy, to perfect every scene. With full financial support from Disney Corp., the best software development team in the business, and a deservedly glowing reputation, they are no longer bound by the limitations of budgets, technology, or even audience approval, and could be excused for resting on their laurels for a film or two.

But to continue to create great films in the future they need to stick together and keep working through story structure. Despite Ratatouille’s weak foundational plot and whiny, unmotivated characters, it contains many high points, including what is probably the best-written and best-executed scene in any Pixar film to date. These flashes of brilliance show that the Pixar team can easily continue to make great films, as long as they can keep from being split up, diluted, or lulled into a false sense of security or accomplishment where they might lose sight of their original goals and their potential for truly great storytelling.

If they understand that perfect sauces can’t save an undercooked dish and focus on the basics, their next films will be excellent, but if they spread themselves too thin and fall into the trap of valuing style over substance, their future projects will slip slowly into mediocrity. As much as I hope they can climb from strength to strength, I am sure that both their successes and failures will be instructive. All filmmakers can and should learn from Pixar’s many different examples, and what they do next should teach a very valuable lesson.

By Douglas Phillips

As well as being extraordinarily popular, the [Harry Potter] books have encouraged millions of children to start reading for the first time.... For those who have a problem with the idea of fantasy and alternative universes alongside ours, we need to recognize that almost all children play imaginative games in their minds starting at a very young age and have no difficulty whatsoever in distinguishing between fantasy and reality.... Additionally, the Harry Potter books send a strong message about moral order. There are beautiful and enjoyable human relationships among the characters, and there is a depth of commitment and service among them.... Finally, I see the books as valuable because they consistently include the three fundamental themes that can be found as a subtext in almost all good literature: the beauty of creation, the appalling reality of evil, and the universal human longing for redemption.... J.K. Rowling does not profess to be a Christian, as far as I am aware, but she has insight into the themes that are at the very heart of what Christians understand to be true about the nature of the universe in which we live.... All truth is God’s truth, and non-Christians recognize that truth to one degree or another.... It is said that because magic is a part of the ... books, they may have the effect of interesting children in the reality of the Occult.... The magic is simply a part of the imaginative worlds.... Some people have gone on record as stating that they believe that J.K. Rowling is purposely and explicitly teaching Occult and even Satanic practice. As a Christian, I have to say I am profoundly ashamed of those who have responded with this kind of malicious gossip. We must recognize that whenever she talks about evil magic she presents it as evil.” (Jerram Barr, Professor of Christianity and Contemporary Culture and Resident Scholar at The Francis Schaeffer Institute)^[1]

Breaking News

This morning, the publishing industry surprised the world by releasing a new, unexpected companion volume to last week’s sixth installment of J.K. Rowling’s hugely successful Harry Potter series. As word of the new release spread like wildfire, crowds of frenzied children and teenagers began thronging at the doors of hundreds of local bookstores in the United States and U.K., hoping to be among the first to receive their own copy of a book bearing the title: Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade.

Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade continues to perpetuate all the sorceries, incantations, and spells which have delighted children around the world. But this installment of Harry Potter introduces a new theme — homosexuality. In Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade, we discover that the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is expanding its curriculum base to provide mandatory training in homosexuality for all of its recruits. Harry discovered in Book One that he was born with witchcraft in his blood. Now, recent discoveries show that the same students born with the gift of magic also possess a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality. With this in mind, the goal of Hogwarts is to teach its students the proper and moral way to be homosexual witches. Students must learn about safety, monogamy, and even social etiquette.

But the race is on. A second witch training academy run by evil witches has also discovered their own homosexual predispositions. Unlike Hogwarts, they intend to use their homosexuality for evil. They teach their students evils like sexual promiscuity. They openly encourage pedophilia. It is the mission of Harry and his intrepid gang of sodomite warlocks and lesbian witches (dubbed “The Lavender Brigade”) to once again stop the menace of bad witches.

No Cause for Concern

Perhaps some Christians have concerns about children’s literature in which homosexuality is both a defining characteristic of the protagonists and a thematic element which runs from beginning to the end of the novel.

Relax. Don’t be so uptight. Don’t worry, Christian parents. Harry Potter is not the real world! It is an imaginary world. Children know the difference between the two. They are not going to start dressing up like their heroes or pretending to do the same things their heroes do in the stories. After all, it is just a pretend story. Thoughtful Christian critics will recognize that the author has created an alternative reality with a completely different set of rules. Sodomy may be wrong in the real world, but it is not wrong in Harry Potter’s reality, and it would be sophomoric to think that, just because the book is one long story about the glories of good homosexuality in the world of Harry Potter, that it desensitizes children to the problems with homosexuality in the real world. We should be ashamed of any Christians who would claim the author is promoting perversion. She makes strong distinctions between good homosexuality and bad homosexuality. Bad homosexuality is always presented as really bad.

And here is the clincher: Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade is a brilliant, well-written adventure that includes all the great themes of classic literature — the creation of an alternative reality where different rules apply, a carefully-executed plot, and clear elements of good versus evil. The story presents the beauty of creation and the appalling reality of evil. (Keep in mind that all truth is God’s truth.) There is even a strong redemption theme in the story as the leader of the pro-pedophilia group realizes the wrongness of his ways and joins the good sodomites of Hogwarts. In the end, good sodomites triumph over bad sodomites and order is restored to the alternative universe.

Confession

Okay, so there is no Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade. I made it up.

What I have not made up is the fact that Pottermania has engulfed the youth of a generation, setting an unprecedented frenzy of sales of the recent installment, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince.^[2] Within the first twenty-four hours of its release, nearly seven million copies were sold in the United States alone. Assuming a 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. sales schedule, that means they averaged nearly 600,000 copies an hour.

Also not made up is the fact that there are growing numbers of intelligent, reasonable, Christian teachers and scholars — some are friends whom I dearly love and respect — who are on record as giving their blessing to Harry Potter and supporting the inclusion of Harry Potter books as a healthy, positive part of the literary diet of Christian children. I disagree with them for many reasons, but it is the limited purpose of this article to focus in on and address what I see as their root argument.

The Argument for Potter

To begin with, there really is no debate between us over the basic facts of the Potter series. We all agree that Harry Potter is a story about young children engaged in the study and practice of witchcraft. The heroes of the stories are always good witches. Typically, the bad guys are bad witches. Second, in fairness, it must be acknowledged that these men recognize the wickedness of the occult and would squarely oppose the practice of witchcraft in the real world. None of them would want their children attempting to cast spells or dabbling in the dark arts.

What, then, is the fundamental argument employed by honorable Christian thinkers like Mr. Barr of Covenant Seminary (cited above) to endorse Harry Potter and to justify the creation of children’s books which are simply drenched in the glorification of sorcery?

It is this: Fantasy worlds are not the real world. Authors need not follow the same moral rules in fantasy realities. Things which are downright wicked in the real world may be introduced in a fantasy world and presented as good, if this literary device helps to serve the broader purpose of telling a great story.

My question is: If we may bend God’s moral laws in fantasy realities, then why is “Harry the Hero-Witch” okay for our children, but “Harry the Hero-Homosexual” not?

Both witchcraft and perversion are deemed “works of the flesh” and “abominations” in Scripture.^[3] Both are immoral acts for which the practitioner stands condemned. Why would one be cute, fun, appealing, and — most importantly — legitimate in a fantasy reality, and the other unacceptable?

Not for Debate Today

Before presenting my argument, please permit me to clear away some debris.

First, it is not my purpose today to offer a broad-sweeping critique of the propriety and/or impropriety, strengths and/or weaknesses of fantasy as a genre. This is a worthy, big, important subject, but not my subject for the day. Nor am I arguing that because something is popular it is therefore inescapably evil. (I happen to like ice cream, and it does not bother me that ninety percent of Americans like it, too.) Mass entertainment appeal can raise concerns, but this argument will not carry the day one way or another.

Nor am I going to argue that Harry Potter is bad because it presents bad attitudes toward authority. To the extent that the bad attitudes of protagonists are either left unresolved in the story or presented to the reader as acceptable behavior — that is a big problem. But if this debate were really about bad attitudes, our criticism for Harry Potter would be similar in kind to that which might be expressed for 95% of the popular children’s literature and television programming of our day — media which is contributing by bad example to the discipleship in selfishness of a nation of bratty, disrespectful boys and girls.

Nor is it my purpose today to justify or condemn the Harry Potter series by comparing it to, or distinguishing it from, The Lord of the Rings or The Chronicles of Narnia. Similarities and distinctions between these series abound, but at the end of the day, neither the brilliant C.S. Lewis nor the ingenious J.R.R. Tolkien are the standard by which literature is to be judged. That standard is the revealed word of God alone which is a sufficient guide for all of faith and practice, including the development of biblical principles for evaluating literature. If either Lewis or Tolkien are guilty of employing literary devices inconsistent with a biblical worldview, then to the extent which they have missed the mark, we must be willing to say so. If not, great! But at all costs, we must not allow sentiment and experientialism to drive our theology. The issue is not whether Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, or any other author can tell a great story, foster creative thinking, or entertain the reader — but whether they have done so lawfully.

I am less concerned with slippery-slope arguments, psychological arguments, or even empirical data about the number of children who have joined covens after reading Harry Potter. Some of the arguments are valid, some less so, some may be straw men, but none of these arguments are necessary if it can be demonstrated that, in its premise and execution, Harry Potter is inherently unbiblical, being in plain violation of the revealed law of God.

To Be Debated Today

The question is this: Is it biblically lawful to create alternative literary realities in which necromancy and witchcraft are presented as glorious, healthy, positive, and good?^[4]

I say no because I believe to do so is inconsistent with revealed law. If pro-witchcraft fantasy realities are unlawful, then the fundamental question of whether Harry Potter is healthy literature is resolved.

Stated another way, the question is: Does the creation of “alternative fantasy realities” allow authors to employ literary premises which declare “good” that which God has declared morally reprehensible in the real world?

And another: If certain acts are abominations over which God pronounces the death sentence in the real world, should Christians glory in the same abominable practices when presented as desirable and declared to be “good” in the fantasy worlds of literature?

The Case Against Potter

The case that I would like to respectfully make in response to my brothers who defend Harry Potter is built on four propositions:

1. The seriousness of God’s prohibition on witchcraft and His declaration that it is immoral to practice dark arts make it unlawful even to pretend that witchcraft is a good thing;
2. Man may not lawfully escape the righteous rule of God by entering fantasy realities in which the law of God does not apply;
3. To create fantasy universes built on propositions which are immoral is to undermine the character of God Himself or establish false gods; and
4. God holds man accountable for vain imaginations. This means that fantasy is only lawful insofar as it does not undermine the moral law of God.

Point #1: The Seriousness of God’s Prohibition on Witchcraft

When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD.... (Deuteronomy 18:9-12)

The Bible, both Old and New Testament, has much to say about witchcraft, all of which is supremely negative. In anticipation of nitpickers and legalists who want to wiggle out of the prohibition against witchcraft, the Bible details by specific precept and numerous examples the wickedness of those who seek such supernatural powers and the judgment that will fall upon them.

The prohibitions against witchcraft elaborate to include witchcraft in any form or expression. Sorcerers, mediums, soothsayers, spell-casters, astrologers, and those who practice any dark art fall under the prohibition.

Witchcraft is declared to be an abomination (Exodus 22:18; Deuteronomy 8:9-12; 1 Samuel 15:23; Isaiah 8:19-20). Those who practice it are in rebellion against God (1 Samuel 15:23) and were subject to the death penalty (Exodus 22:18). They will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21), are detestable to the Lord (2 Kings 21:6; Micah 5:12; Isaiah 47:12; Ezekiel 13:18,20; Acts 8:11-24; Leviticus 20:27; Exodus 7:11; Revelation 9:21; 22:15), and will be cast into the burning lake of fire (Revelation 21:8).

Furthermore, God describes sorcery as an immoral “work of the flesh” and lumps it in with idolatry, murder, and adultery, declaring that those who do such will not inherit the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21; Revelation 9:21).

The biblical response of God’s people to witchcraft is to (1) drive it from the land (Deuteronomy 18:9-12); (2) flee from every vestige of it, even if this means publicly burning expensive books (Acts 19:19); and (3) rebuke attempts to mix the spirit of sorcery with the spirit of Christ (Acts 8:1-40).

Point #2: Man May Never Escape the Righteous Rule of God

Supernatural powers, by definition, are the means to suspend or work outside of the natural law order created by God.^[5] Our God reserves supernatural powers to Himself because He alone is the creator and the object of worship. He will share His glory with none other. Witchcraft is an abomination, not because of some arbitrary, localized principle applicable only to ancient Israel, but because it is rebellion against God Himself, who never, ever changes. Witchcraft is man’s attempt to be like God. It can involve the explicit false worship of devils, but it need not. Conjuring, sorcery, and divination are all attempts to have powers reserved to God. They are attempts to live outside of the reality in which God has placed man.

I am frankly amazed at the efforts of some to strain at a gnat and swallow a camel when it comes to the issue of witchcraft. It truly seems like we are often more interested in justifying the theology of Walt Disney, than we are in sticking to the plain teaching of Scripture. The fact is that the Bible makes no distinctions between cute, harmless sorcery (or necromancy or divination) and a bad kind. Any attempt to participate or dabble in supernatural dark arts is a crime in God’s universe. You can dress up cute little fairies in bonnets, but the minute they attempt to cast spells or invoke supernatural powers reserved to God, they become moral criminals.

Note that we are not discussing fiction about potential scientific discoveries. The exploration of the natural universe is explicitly given to man by God as a means of understanding Him better and for executing his duty under God to take dominion over the earth. And let’s not kid ourselves — Harry Potter is not about scientific children who create amazing flying-broom machines. It is about sorcerers engaged in witchcraft. Under the Hebrew economy, Harry Potter, the great hero of a generation of children, would be put to death^[6] by direct order of the King of Kings and author of all reality — Jesus Christ Himself.

Nor are we criticizing Harry Potter for the inclusion of talking animals in its storyline. The Bible begins^[7] and ends^[8] with revelations about talking animals, a fact which establishes beyond any doubt that the inclusion of talking animals in storytelling is not per se an abomination which assaults the very character of God. Similarly, dragons,^[9] demons,^[10] giants,^[11] and unicorns^[12] may be the stuff of fantasy lore, but they are also real creatures discussed, as such, in the Bible. None of these elements assault the righteous rule of God, but a fantasy universe filled with “good sorcerers” does.

Point #3: Man May Not Refashion a God of His Own Imagination — Even in a Fantasy Reality

The eternal quest of rebellious man is to escape the law and dominion of God. Man wants to create realities of his own where he is free to operate without the constraint of the rule of law as prescribed by God. The moral law of God and its application in the universe reflect the eternal, transcendent, immutable character of God Himself.^[13] Consequently, those who seek to create alternative realities in which the moral law of God is suspended are, in fact, creating alternative realities governed by something or someone other than the God of the Bible. This god need not be explicitly revealed by name. He can be implied or simply assumed. Even the perceived absence of a god in an alternative reality presupposes some unifying, eternal, transcendent principle or “force.” The point is this: Every alternative reality has a god. Those alternative realities which alter the moral law of the God of the Bible thereby substitute a false god as lord over the universe they have created.

Like the Babel-builders of the past, twenty-first century man is discontent with the rules and realities given to him by God. He wants a different reality. It is the quest of some fantasy literature to satisfy this ungodly longing by recreating God in man’s own image. This happens when we construct literary worlds which rest on propositions which challenge the very character of God Himself.

Note that the use of allegories, parables, types, and symbolism can be employed in literature lawfully and to the glory of God. Jesus Christ modeled this Himself in Holy Scripture.^[14] Christ-honoring authors may draw from a host of techniques and circumstances when employing such literary devices. But the moment an author redefines the moral law order of the universe, he has left the realm of legitimate analogical reasoning and creative allegory, and has declared war on God. This is the case for fantasy realities in which murder, perversion, or witchcraft are presented as good things.

The character of God is challenged when we posit alternative realities which redefine the moral law order of God to allow men to delight in that which would be deemed wickedness in the real world. Creating worlds of good witchcraft versus bad witchcraft is a prime example of the problem. No such world can exist — anywhere — not even in our own imagination, without redefining the nature and attributes of God Himself. The essence of witchcraft and the desire to employ the tools of witchcraft are an assault on the Lordship and sovereignty of God. By virtue of the fact that Harry and his friends are “good guys” in pursuit of the very powers reserved to God Himself in the real world, the god of Harry Potter’s universe is, ispo facto, a different god than the God of our universe.

And no one need ask, “What Would Jesus Do?” in the real world to Harry and his friends, because the Bible answers the question with deafening specificity:

But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. (Revelation 21:8)

Point #4: The Bible Forbids Not Merely Acts, But Vain Imaginations

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? (Psalm 2:1)

Not all imagination is wrong, but vain imagination is wrong. A “vain imagination” is one in which man seeks to create a reality at war with God and His law.

We live in a world in which millions of men and women leave what they perceive to be a humdrum life of marriage to escape into a fantasy-world of alternative reality. They do this in their minds.^[15] They are aided and abetted in this practice by literature, images, and film which become the mediator between the individual and the fantasy world. In their alternative fantasy realities, these men and women are not married to their boring, overweight, selfish wives and husbands. Instead, they are able to enjoy intimate relations, free of guilt, with seemingly perfect individuals who appear nearly superhuman in their emotional and physical perfections. Since this is only a fantasy — the argument goes — there is nothing wrong with it. Some argue that modern man can actually cope better in the real world if he regularly visits his fantasy world.^[16]

Christian advocates of Harry Potter make the same mistake: In effect, they are arguing that little children may freely take witchcraft into their hearts by identifying with their sorcerer-hero and rejoicing in his magical powers — just so long as they would not engage in dark arts in the real world. After all, little children know the difference between reality and fiction.

This response misses the point. The Bible offers no refuge to the individual who says, “It is okay for me to imagine and rejoice in the vanity of immoral speculations, because I am not doing it in the real world.” If you imagine such things in your heart, you stand condemned. The Lord Jesus Christ answered those legalists who wanted to limit the scope of the culpability before the law to the physical world. He explained that they would be condemned for having wicked imaginations in their fantasy world as well:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

The same principle that applies to pornographic literature applies to witchcraft-glorifying literature. Men do not have the right to enter fantasy worlds in which they delight in their hearts in acts of adultery. Nor do they have the right to enter fantasy worlds in which they delight in immoral acts of witchcraft.

The Use of Witchcraft in Literature and Entertainment

For the record, I do not oppose the appropriate inclusion of witchcraft in literature. The Bible tells the story of actual witches. It describes the practices of these witches and reveals the laws against witchcraft. We learn of the divinations of Jezebel,^[17] the consultation by Saul with the witch of Endor,^[18] and the influence and rebuke of Simon the Sorcerer.^[19] Witchcraft is in Old and New Testaments. But witchcraft is always presented as an incontrovertible evil.

Just as there is nothing funny, glorious, or desirable about adultery, perversion, or murder — there is nothing funny, glorious, or desirable about witchcraft (see Galatians 4:24).^[20] It is one thing for a story to include adultery, perversion, murder, and witchcraft in their true despicable form as an element necessary to make a righteous point, but it is another to portray abominations as virtues. Any television show, film, or literature which does the latter is encouraging others to identify in their imaginations with evil.

To put it bluntly: Bewitched — bad! Walt Disney’s Merlin from Sword in the Stone — bad! Glinda the Good Witch of Oz — bad! The White Witch of Narnia — not necessarily bad at all, because she is presented as the incarnation of evil. Gandalf? You will have to do the math yourself.^[21]

Concessions

At this point, I am losing some of you. You have cherished fond childhood memories of these icons of twentieth-century culture. There is massive sentimental value associated with these stories. If the principles articulated in this paper are true, then there could be some substantial boat-rocking in your life — perhaps even some changes in your reading or viewing diet. I hear you. My own boat has been substantially rocked over the years as I have considered the implications of the character of God and His law-word upon the icons of modern culture.

Let me offer a little help and a few concessions:

Concession number one: There are some genuine challenges and tough calls involved when evaluating what constitutes Christ-honoring literature. I fully recognize the complexity of faithfully applying these principles, for example, to the use of various literary devices that appear to incorporate mysterious transportation vehicles or tools which possess unusual powers. Meditation, prayer, and reasoned analysis are the need of the hour. Faithful men may disagree on some applications. But the challenge of application never absolves us of our personal duty before the Lord to rigorously examine everything in light of Scripture.

Second, there is not a man on the planet who is perfectly consistent in the application of the biblical principles he understands, let alone the ones with which he is grappling. Here again, the fact that there are inconsistencies in our behavior, or holes in our thinking, does not relieve us of the biblical duty to become more consistent in the application of our Christianity as we take every thought, frame, and note — everything — captive to the obedience of Christ.

Third, many Christians are uncomfortable tossing out an otherwise “good story” because it has one offensive element. I certainly understand this challenge. For some, the answer is to perform a balancing test which weighs the good against the bad to see which comes out on top. But when it comes to Harry Potter, no balancing act is needed. This consideration need not apply. Why? Because the premise of the stories is witchcraft, the plot of the story is witchcraft, and the protagonists are all witches. From beginning to end, Harry Potter is a story immersed in a subversive lie about a genuine abomination called witchcraft. Period! Harry Potter calls evil good, and thus falls under the explicit censure of our Lord.

Conclusion

Harry Potter favorably models for children that which the Bible clearly and unequivocally declares to be an abomination.^[22] It creates heroes of a class of individuals that the Bible declares to be villains. In the world that God created, the heroes of Harry Potter would (absent their repentance) be enemies of the Church and eternally damned souls.

Moral evil does not become acceptable simply because it is presented in an alternative reality. There is no such thing as good witchcraft, good bestiality, good sodomy, good child sacrifice, or good Dagon worship in this reality (the only reality created by God); and man is not at liberty to free himself from the law of God by concocting fantasy worlds of his imagination in which the transcendent, eternal, binding moral law of God no longer applies.

Finally, the Bible, not sentimentalism or personal experience, is the only standard by which the Christian may evaluate his culture.^[23] By this standard, Harry Potter fails the test of biblical acceptability. Just as Christians should oppose the glorified homosexuality of a hypothetical Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade, so they should also recognize the systemic poison of any and all Potter books that are built on the false proposition that witchcraft can be a good thing.

But these two things shall come to you in a moment, in one day: The loss of children, and widowhood. They shall come upon you in their fullness because of the multitude of your sorceries, for the great abundance of your enchantments. (Isaiah 47:9)

[1] A very thoughtful article by seminary professor and Christian apologist Jerram Barr, offering a defense of the Harry Potter series, was presented on christiancounterculture.com. The article reflects the sentiments of a growing number of Christian thinkers that books and film immersed in ostensibly pagan motifs and literary devices are basic to a healthy cultural diet for children and are pleasing to Christ — so long as they include moralisms, a redemption theme, and a good story line.

[2] Scholastic Corp., the U.S. publisher of the Harry Potter books, said the sixth installment of the series sold a record 6.9 million copies in the first twenty-four hours after thousands of fans packed stores for the book’s midnight release.

[3] “When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD...” (Deuteronomy 18:9-12). “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19-21).

[4] Some would argue that the world of Harry Potter is not an alternative fantasy reality, but a reality that exists alongside normal humanity, and that we are simply unaware of its existence. It really makes no difference to the thesis of this paper whether Harry Potter’s world is a real alternative reality or only a quasi-alternative reality. My argument is that man may never posit realities in which moral evil is acceptable.

[5] “MIRACLES: The miracle proper is a work of God (Ex 7:3 ff; Deut 4:34-35, etc.; John 3:2; 9:32-33; 10:38; Acts 10:38, etc.); but as supernatural acts miracles are recognized as possible to evil agencies (Matt 24:24; 2 Thess 2:9; Rev 13:14; 16:14, etc.)” (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).

[6] “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” (Exodus 22:18).

[7] “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” (Genesis 3:1).

[8] “And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come” Revelation 4:8).

[9] “Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?” (Isaiah 51:9).

[10] “And they came over unto the other side of the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes. And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains: Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man tame him. And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones” (Mark 5:1-5).

[11] “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown” (Genesis 6:4).

[12] “God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows” (Numbers 24:8). “But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil” (Psalm 92:10).

[13] “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:35). “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (II Tim. 3:16-17).

[14] “All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them” (Matthew 13:34).

[15] “Men who will not be governed by God’s word will not be governed by reality, because reality is not of their making. God having created all things, reality reflects the mind of God, not man. Hence, it is the essence of sin to resort to imagination to escape God’s law world” (R.J. Rushdoony, Systematic Theology, vol. 1, pg. 474).

[16] Ibid. Rushdoony further elaborates: “Why should an unreal female be exciting, and a far better and real woman not be so? The key is the essence of imagination: the fantasy woman is totally the creation and creature of man, whereas the real woman is God’s creation and creature. It is essential to imagination to create a man-made world and a man-ordained decree of predestination. It is the essence of sin to demand such a world.”

[17] “And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?” (2 Kings 9:22).

[18] “Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor” (1 Samuel 28:7).

[19] “And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Barjesus” (Acts 13:6).

[20] “Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar” (Galatians 4:24).

[21] Permit me a brief bunny trail: For the same reason (biblical revelation) that I categorically reject the notion that there can be good witchcraft and bad witchcraft, I believe it certainly could (where carefully and properly executed) be appropriate and God-glorifying to vest an allegorical figure representing Christ or His angels (to whom authority is delegated) with the same authoritative powers reserved to the Deity. But this is a far-cry from spell-casting “good witches.” Further, we should heed God’s warnings and be careful not to allow the lines of distinction between the two to be blurred.

[22] Deuteronomy 18:9-12.

[23] “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God” (Romans 12:2). “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (II Corinthians 10:5).

Antithesis

Culture is not neutral. It either reflects the priorities of Christianity or the priorities of godless man. Antithesis is the distinction between the two. There is no neutrality. While Hollywood continues to besiege the families and youth of America with the images and philosophies of godless man, the Lord is raising up a replacement industry of filmmakers committed to presuppositionally biblical filmmaking for the glory of God. At the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival, you will meet these filmmaking mavericks and learn why our mission is neither to retreat from society, nor is it to synthesize with paganism — our mission is to do God’s work, God’s way, from the ground level up. In so doing, in the name of Christ, we are to force the antithesis between cultural righteousness and cultural evil.

Controversy

This film festival is controversial — not because it seeks to be avant-garde or push the envelope of visual acceptability. It is controversial because it dares to proclaim that the Lordship of Christ applies to our methodologies as well as our ends. It is controversial, not because of the offensive things you will see, but because of what you will not see. You will not see, for example, God’s name taken in vain, unbiblical presentations of romance and sexuality, or the glorification of effeminate men and masculine women. It is controversial because it rejects the notion that the legitimate goal of presenting culturally relevant media means that filmmakers have to adopt and glorify the worst elements and attitudes of modern culture in order to reach the culture.

Honor

A crucial element of this film festival is honor. We seek first to honor our Lord and Savior. In His name, we seek to honor others, to recognize and reward filmmakers whose projects lift high the standard of Jesus Christ. Throughout the festival, attendees will watch films that honor God’s vision for the biblical family.

Refreshment

Those in attendance will have the opportunity to watch many dozens of hours of refreshing films; to enjoy live stage performances and musical presentations designed to encourage believers with courage and hope. It is our experience, however, that the greatest refreshment comes through the interaction of the people attending with many other like-minded families and individuals of vision.

Opportunity

Attendees will have the opportunity to interact with and meet other like-minded filmmakers, producers, and industry specialists who share a vision for building and financing the independent Christian film market.

Hope

We live at a time of great doubts about the future of our once-great Christian civilization. There is desperate need for our sons and daughters to receive a message of hope. That message is found in God’s Word and is made alive and real by the power of the Holy Spirit as we apply the message of His Word to the real world around us. At the SAICFF, participants will not only receive a message of hope, but they will witness the fruits of the hopeful — men and women laboring to advance the crown rights of Christ in a medium of defining significance for twenty-first century Christians.

Wireless keypads in the hands of every student will give them yet additional advantages students in other film courses do not enjoy. “We try to only cover the material the students need,” says instructor Geoffrey Botkin. “This phenomenal tool helps us fine-tune our lectures as we go. The Academy has a very fast-paced schedule, and it’s packed with customized material. This outstanding tool also allows the students to learn more about the skills and background of their peers, and to become more aware of the unique demographics of the independent Christian film movement.”

Since the founding of the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival and the Christian Filmmakers Academy, the importance of writing has been stressed by our faculty as foundational to the craft of filmmaking. All film production begins with the script, and the script must communicate more than the wisdom, theology, and insight of the writer. The script format communicates instructions to all senior personnel on a film production.

We are pleased to announce that the motion picture industry’s leading script-authoring software company has joined the Academy in a sponsorship arrangement to assist students in the craft of writing and reading the complex screenplay format. This is a skill every filmmaker must master, no matter what his specialty or gift. The hundreds of professionals who must come together to make a film all work from the same script. All rely on the wealth of information contained in strict formatting rules. Every professional script must have this formatting.

In 1991, Final Draft, Inc. developed a software program that allows the writer to concentrate on the creative process and not on the industry’s stringent and highly complex formatting rules. Today it is used by the more productive writers, producers, and directors.

Promising writers and producers will have an opportunity to win a personal license for Final Draft software as the SAICFF launches The Treatment Contest. This year’s attendees will hear about the scope of the contest and the benefits for entrants. Treatments do not require the complex guidelines of full-length screenplays, but winning treatments will be most easily converted into winning scripts with the kind of software help Final Draft can provide.

“Final Draft is an amazing piece of software,” says producer Mace Neufeld (Gods and Generals, The Hunt for Red October, Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger), “and the only program around that allows me to instantly get rewrites of a script no matter where I am shooting, from the most remote film location in the Moroccan desert, to the frozen landscape of Montreal’ who doesn’t use Final Draft — it’s essential.”