Unpop Culture

On the surface, there’s no discernible relationship between Pixar Animation Studios and Christopher Nolan. After all, the former produces exclusively animated fare, whereas the latter produces dark and gritty live-action films. And while Pixar movies often tug at the heartstrings, Nolan’s films often act as cinematic brainteasers. Upon further reflection, however, there are more similarities between Pixar and Christopher Nolan than one might expect. Consider film critic Scott Renshaw’s somewhat humorous summation of Pixar’s output : As wonderfully crafted and emotionally affecting as those films have been, they all seemed to start from a very similar place: What if toys had feelings? What if insects had feelings? What if monsters had feelings? What if cars had feelings? What if  feelings  had feelings? Similarly, Christopher Nolan’s intricately crafted and cerebrally affecting films tend to start from a similar place : How does memory loss affect perception of reality? ...

If you take Christopher Nolan’s work as a whole, it’s possible to discern the emergence of a common concept—what we might call a narrative MacGuffin unifying all his movies: How does memory loss affect perception of reality? How do dreams affect perception of reality? How do magic tricks affect perception of reality? How does insomnia affect perception of reality? How does time inversion affect perception of reality? Nolan has established himself as a director adept at exploring the relationship between time, memory, and reality—as well as how these concepts can be perceived, rearranged, and distorted. But even if his feature-length oeuvre is fairly cohesive, it can still be divided into three separate epochs, each with its own distinct characteristics. Others have argued that Nolan’s career has mirrored the three stages of a magic act: the pledge, the turn, and the prestige . This concept is clever, insightful, and thought provoking. Nevertheless, it is, in my opinion, insufficien...

If I had to summarize the typical faith-based film in one word, it would be “shamefully, embarrassingly subpar.” Okay, so that’s technically three words. Here’s the deal. As a Christian who loves visual stories, I am, more often than not, ashamed and embarrassed by the lack of creativity displayed by those who claim adherence to (and often inspiration from) the original Creator. A few years ago, I wrote a piece entitled God’s Not Dead and the Bastardization of Christian Filmmaking . I meant every word of it, and I still believe what I wrote. Suffice it to say, it is a rare thing for me to fully enjoy a faith-based drama. It is rarer still for me to fully enjoy and fully admire a faith-based drama. Enter The Chosen , a faith-based TV show on the life of Christ, with multiple seasons planned. Technically, I have already reviewed this show , and it’s not typical to write two reviews of the same piece. However, I have more to say about this work of art (in both the lite...

If you’re a fan of the 2014 film God’s Not Dead , and if you’re excited about its upcoming sequel, you and I probably have several things in common. We likely agree that historic Christianity is becoming less and acceptable in the public sphere. We likely agree that many of our nation’s college campuses are becoming more and more hostile to individuals who adhere to any form of absolutes. We also likely agree that there is an increasing need for believers of all types—students, teachers, pastors, filmmakers, etc.—to engage with our world in an effective and countercultural way. It’s actually because of these shared beliefs that I’m majorly concerned with the popularity of God’s Not Dead (and other movies like it). And it’s because of these shared beliefs that I want to explain my concerns to you. I’ll put aside most of the artistic issues I have with the film. (For that, I’ll direct you to my cyber friends Steven D. Greydanus and Peter T. Chattaway ). My main focus here wi...

“ Every year, thousands of children swarm Hollywood in search of fame, but what they often find under the surface is a deep and disturbing underbelly of manipulation and abuse.” So reads part of the description of An Open Secret , a new documentary set to premiere at DOC NY this year. The film is helmed by Amy Berg, the Oscar-nominated director of another documentary that deals with the theme of sexual abuse. An Open Secret is “a sobering look at the lives of children who were exploited and assaulted by some of Hollywood’s most powerful players.” The film’s title suggests that these secret crimes weren’t so much secret as they were ignored or glossed over. If the content of the movie is true, it’s a scathing indictment of the culture in which much of moviemaking takes place. It reminds me of my blog post Hollywood’s Secret Rape Culture , in which I talk about the many ways actors—especially women—are abused and mistreated in the process of filming scenes that require nu...

I am honored to have the folks at Speculative Faith post an article of mine: Actually, Fantastic Films Don’t Require Sex and Nudity . In this piece, I examine two potential problems with the argument that nudity and/or sex scenes are necessary to any film. Special thanks to E. Stephen Burnett for his encouragement and editing prowess, and for coming up with a great tagline for the article: “ Might we end up justifying idolatry or sexual sins by believing ‘the story made me do it’?”

Hollywood needs to deal with sexual themes in its movies. Not all of them, of course, but some of them. If you’ve been reading this blog for any length of time, you might find that statement—and this article’s title—surprising. After all, I’ve been campaigning against both the use of porn in mainstream entertainment and the abuse of actors that said porn often necessitates. Actors are people too , and their emotional and spiritual well-being should be the concern of every Christian moviegoer . That being said, it’s possible to take any argument too far. Some readers might interpret me to be saying what I am not saying at all—that any and all references to sex or sexuality should be eliminated from public storytelling. Yes, some prudes are Christians, but not all Christians are prudes. As a Christian movie patron, I hope to act with prudence, not prudishness. Why support the prudent portrayals of sexuality in films? Because both the uses and abuses of sex are a part ...

The conversation I overheard took place between three Christian men. Maybe that’s why I found it so disturbing. Their words revealed a flippant attitude toward sexual manipulation—in this case, of underage girls. What’s worse, it was excused on the grounds of entertainment. The shocking callousness has stayed with me to this day. The topic? A popular television series they had all been watching. Here’s what I heard them say. (The names I’ve used are not real.) LEO: I’ve watched the first 5 seasons. I attempted to start season 6 the other day, but I just couldn’t take it. I made it only twenty minutes into the first episode before the hyper-sexualization of everything, including 15-year-old girls, did me in. So Nate, give me your best judgment: is there enough of a payoff in terms of storyline development to make another go at it worthwhile? NATE: Orson would be the best judge of that. I stopped during season three. ORSON: The finale of the latest season is, for me, qu...