Hollywood fears Narnia

[ReformedWretch]

TERRY MATTINGLY: Evangelical mogul shaking up Hollywood

Scripps Howard News Service
Wednesday, June 1st, 2005 11:45 AM (PDT)
(SH) - The loaded words appear early and often in articles about entrepreneur Philip Anschutz of Denver.

The list includes "elusive," "reclusive," "mysterious" and many others. Most writers then note that Anschutz has not granted interviews since 1974 and the image is complete - he is a ghost worth billions of dollars.

Nevertheless, Anschutz does have ideas and, on rare occasions, he shares them in public.

Consider this statement about movies and the bottom line.

"Speaking purely as a businessman, it is of utmost importance to try and figure out a way to make goods and products that people actually want to buy," he said, in a speech last year. "I don't think Hollywood understands this very well, because they keep making the same old movies. I don't think they understand the market and the mood of a large segment of the movie-going audience today. I think that this is one of the main reasons, by the way, that people don't go to movies like they used to."

This speech received little, if any, attention when it was delivered at a Hillsdale College forum. Once again, Anschutz avoided the mainstream-media radar.

But this is changing, in part because he is backing a big-bucks entertainment project that cannot escape attention. The man Fortune once called "the billionaire next door" is changing his public non-image.

Atlantic Monthly described the old Anschutz this way: "He is worth more than $5 billion - down from $18 billion at the height of the 1990s boom, when Qwest Communications, which he founded, was one of the highest of the high-flying tech stocks. He is a devout Presbyterian and a staunch Republican who has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to right-leaning candidates. He owns oil fields, railroad lines, the country's finest collection of western art, a network of farms and cattle ranches, five Major League Soccer franchises, Regal Entertainment (the country's largest chain of movie theaters), and two daily newspapers - the revived San Francisco Examiner and the newly launched D.C. tabloid of the same name."

Now the Anschutz story has a new lead. His Walden Media studio is working with Walt Disney Pictures to create a franchise that could catch "The Lord of the Rings" or "Star Wars." The goal is to film all seven books of the 20th century's most beloved work of Christian fiction - "The Chronicles of Narnia" by C.S. Lewis. The $150 million production of "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" arrives on Dec. 9.

The scandal of an evangelical mogul has mainstream Hollywood whispering a nasty word that begins with the letter "p."

It isn't "profits." It's "proselytizing."

After all, the studio's mission statement - yes, a movie studio with a "mission statement" - declares: "Walden Media believes that quality entertainment is inherently educational. We believe that ... we can recapture young imaginations, rekindle curiosity and demonstrate the rewards of knowledge and virtue."

Eyebrows are up in power pews as well as corporate boardrooms, especially after two years of passionate debate about faith and film.

As evangelical activist Charles Colson said: "If you happened to stumble across a devout Christian in Hollywood, you'd likely assume he was one of two things: He must be Mel Gibson, or he must be lost." On the other side, Jack Shafer of Slate.com said bluntly: "Nobody dumps millions of dollars into the movie and exhibition business - or newspapers - to uplift the masses. There's got to be an angle."

Anschutz has heard the curses and hosannas. But he told the Hillsdale forum that the edgy Hollywood elites will, ultimately, respect someone who brings his own money to the table and succeeds.

"My reasons for getting into the entertainment business weren't entirely selfless. Hollywood as an industry can at times be insular and doesn't at times understand the market very well," he said. "I saw an opportunity in that fact. Also, because of digital production and digital distribution, I believe the film industry is going to be partially restructured in the coming years - another opportunity.

"My friends think I'm a candidate for a lobotomy and my competitors think I'm naove or stupid or both. But you know what? I don't care. If we can make some movies that have a positive effect on people's lives and on our culture, that's enough for me."

Terry Mattingly (www.tmatt.net) is senior fellow for journalism at the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities.

 

[sastark]

Interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I'm really looking forward to "The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe."

Oh, please, please don't let them screw it up!

 

[RamistThomist]

Originally posted by sastark
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I'm really looking forward to "The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe."

Oh, please, please don't let them screw it up!

This will be interesting. Like Van Til said, "If there were one button in the universe covenant-breaking man could push and escape the presence of God, he would push that button repeatedly.

 

[kevin.carroll]

I dunno..Jesus as a lion...ransom theory of the atonement...sounds thin...

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

They should fear the wrath of God more.

 

[Ex Nihilo]

Originally posted by kevin.carroll
I dunno..Jesus as a lion...ransom theory of the atonement...sounds thin...

Not to mention having a female Satan figure!

Though I know Lewis intended Aslan as a Christ figure, I almost prefer to just pretend the stories aren't allegories. Then I can enjoy them without being impeded by the occasionally shaky theology. However, the inclusivist stance in The Last Battle is pretty glaring whether it's allegory or not.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Originally posted by Ex Nihilo

Originally posted by kevin.carroll
I dunno..Jesus as a lion...ransom theory of the atonement...sounds thin...

Not to mention having a female Satan figure!

Though I know Lewis intended Aslan as a Christ figure, I almost prefer to just pretend the stories aren't allegories. Then I can enjoy them without being impeded by the occasionally shaky theology. However, the inclusivist stance in The Last Battle is pretty glaring whether it's allegory or not.

My critique of Anschutz aside, I am looking forward very much to the LWW. However, I have problems with the Narnia Chronicles too most notably in The Last Battle. It is not the magic of Narnia because I think you Evie once put it well that the context of the magic in fantasy literature is what makes it either occultic or else simply employing the creative rules of a fantasy world for good. Rather, I am thinking of the conflation of Aslan and Tash (Tashlan) and the Platonic view of reality as expressed in the Shadow Lands. As stand alone literature rather than strict allegory Lewis (and Tolkien) are par excellence, but the weaknesses in their theology do become evident when the reader tries to match character and plot precisely with the gospel (unlike the matchless Pilgrim's Progress). But as adventure stories that are wholesome and edifying I value them greatly.

[Edited on 6-4-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]

 

[Ex Nihilo]

Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot

Originally posted by Ex Nihilo

Originally posted by kevin.carroll
I dunno..Jesus as a lion...ransom theory of the atonement...sounds thin...

Not to mention having a female Satan figure!

Though I know Lewis intended Aslan as a Christ figure, I almost prefer to just pretend the stories aren't allegories. Then I can enjoy them without being impeded by the occasionally shaky theology. However, the inclusivist stance in The Last Battle is pretty glaring whether it's allegory or not.

My critique of Anschutz aside, I am looking forward very much to the LWW. However, I have problems with the Narnia Chronicles too most notably in The Last Battle. It is not the magic of Narnia because I think you Evie once put it well that the context of the magic in fantasy literature is what makes it either occultic or else simply employing the creative rules of a fantasy world for good. Rather, I am thinking of the conflation of Aslan and Tash (Tashlan) and the Platonic view of reality as expressed in the Shadow Lands. As stand alone literature rather than strict allegory Lewis (and Tolkien) are par excellence, but the weaknesses in their theology do become evident when the reader tries to match character and plot precisely with the gospel (unlike the matchless Pilgrim's Progress). But as adventure stories that are wholesome and edifying I value them greatly.

[Edited on 6-4-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]

While I really disliked the implication that anyone could think he was worshipping a god named Tash and really be worshipping Aslan, I thought the way the bad guys tried to combine the two was interesting--kind of how postmodern culture tries to imply that all religions are essentially the same. I just felt that Lewis sort of contradicted his own point (that Aslan is Aslan, and all others are evil) when he allowed the Tash-worshiper to be "saved." On the other hand, I read that book a while back, so there might be aspects of it that I have forgotten.

Maybe it's an indication of how far our culture has fallen that some people seem to find The Last Battle offensively conservative (which is ridiculous) in its implied attack on Islam (which is rather vague, at any rate). Well, I mostly get this impression from the Book-A-Minute version, but I also read that the Chronicles of Narnia are not particularly well-liked in predominantly Muslim countries.

http://www.rinkworks.com/bookaminute/b/lewis.battle.shtml

[Edited on 6-5-2005 by Ex Nihilo]

 

[Robin]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
They should fear the wrath of God more.

"Is--is he a man?" asked Lucy.

"Aslan a man!" said Mr. Beaver sternly. "Certainly not. I tell you he is the King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-Beyond-the-Sea. Don't you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion--the Lion, the Great Lion."

"Ooh!" said Susan, "I'd thought he was a man. Is he--quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion."

"That you will, dearie, and no mistake,' said Mrs. Beaver, 'if there's anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they're either braver than most or else just silly."

"Then he isn't safe?" said Lucy.

"Safe?" said Mr. Beaver. "Don't you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? 'Course he isn't safe. But he's good. He's the King I tell you."

"I'm longing to see him," said Peter, "even if I do feel frightened when it comes to the point."

(C. S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe)

 

[Scott]

"While I really disliked the implication that anyone could think he was worshipping a god named Tash and really be worshipping Aslan . . ."

This bothers me too. I suppose there is precedent for it in Paul's statement about how certain pagans who worshiped the "unknown god" were really worshipping a vague image of the real God. Although, I suppose Tash would be more akin to Baal than the unknown god.

Lewis' views of false religions was fairly liberal, believing that they all had elements of Christianity in them. I expect he agreed or would have agreed with the Catholic Vatican II views that anyone who is sincerely seeking can be saved, even without hearing the gospel. This is unfortunate.

The stuff on Tashalan was pretty good.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Time Magazine on The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe:

How to Tell if The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is a Christian Film
Whether four sentences from the C.S. Lewis book make it onto the big screen will make a big difference

By DAVID VAN BIEMA

Posted Monday, Oct. 03, 2005
The White Witch: "That human creature is mine. His life is forfeit to me. His blood is my property."

Aslan (later) : "The Witch knew the Deep Magic. But if she could have looked a little further back... she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor's stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backwards." "”from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, by C.S. Lewis

Earlier this month, Disney ran the first test screening of its December release, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe in a California theater. The existence of a screenable print constitutes a kind of opening bell for two questions regarding its content. The answer to the first, "Is it any good as a movie?" will be worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Disney and its co-producer, Walden Media and will only be known later this year when the box office comes in. The second, more intriguing question, "Has it reproduced the Christian character of C.S. Lewis's book?" could also be worth tens of millions if it inspires Passion of the Christ-style repeat viewings by conservative Christians. And the answer could lie in whether the four sentences above, which constitute a kind of evangelical sniff test make it into the film. (A Disney spokesperson said that since he had not attended the screening and that there is not yet a final cut, he could not verify whether it contains the lines, but promised that "the movie is going to be as faithful to the book as possible.")

Lewis always insisted that his seven Narnia books were not a point-by-point Christian allegory. Much of The Lion, the Witch owes more to English folktales or Norse and classical myth than to the New Testament. The passage of the four Pevensie children through the magic closet into a world laboring under a spell of eternal winter is not Christian, nor are the cruel white witch, talking animals, centaurs, and even a duo of Roman gods who inhabit it. True, the description of the redeeming figure of the lion Aslan as "the Son the Great Emperor-Beyond-the- Sea" is a big hint. But even Aslan's sacrifice on a huge stone table (not a cross; and performed with a stone knife, Aztec-style), and his subsequent miraculous recovery could have been borrowed from any number of world religions.

It is the book's explanation for this key sequence that makes it exclusively Christian. After Edmund Pevensie betrays Aslan and his brother and sisters, the Witch claims his blood in accordance to the laws of "Deep Magic." Aslan concedes this and offers himself up in proxy, announcing glumly, "I have settled the claim on your brother's blood." Miraculously revived, he explains, "the Witch knew the Deep Magic. But if she could have looked a little further back... she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor's stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backwards."

This is Christianity in a kid-lit veil. Like any good sermon, its key points can be traced to Biblical citations"”here mostly from the Letters of the apostle Paul. Edmund's treachery corresponds to the sins of humanity, which Paul explains is inherently doomed to violate God's Law ("The Deep Magic"). Because of this violation, writes Paul in Romans, humans are literally owned by Satan ("slaves of the one whom you obey"); and "the wages of sin is death." The idea that Aslan, because he is sinless, can voluntarily pay for Edmund's blood with his own, is the powerful Christian doctrine of blood atonement, developed from texts like the First Letter of Peter: "You know that you were ransomed... with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot." Like Christ's, Aslan's resurrection is inevitable ("If Christ has not been raised, then ... our faith is in vain," Paul writes in First Corinthians.) And it conquers not just his death (or as Aslan would say, causes it to move backwards) but that of all believers, who will also see resurrection. Paul rejoices: "Death is swallowed up in victory... O death, where is thy sting?" In The Lion, Aslan and Lucy Pevensie celebrate with a "mad" game of tag.

Gibson's The Passion of the Christ magnified one fraction of the Atonement/Resurrection story"”Christ's suffering"”into a two hour movie. By contrast, Lewis packed the two huge ideas into a few lines at the brief hinge moment of his plot. But the same electric current than charged The Passion runs through them. What the Lion's filmmakers do with the charming storytelling that surrounds them is"”theologically"”optional. But if these key ideas are muddled, the film may be a classic, but never a Christian classic. And its revenues, large as they may be, will reflect that.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Recently Released Letter By C.S. Lewis

New Letter Shows C.S. Lewis 'Absolutely Opposed' Film Version of 'Narnia'

November 29, 2005
By Kimberly Maul
The Book Standard

In a recently-released letter written by C.S. Lewis, the author and scholar writes that he was "œabsolutely opposed" to a live-action film or television version of his books in The Chronicles of Narnia series.

"œAnthropomorphic animals, when taken out of narrative into actual visibility, always turn into buffoonery or nightmare," he said in a letter dated Dec. 19, 1959 to BBC producer Lance Sieveking, shortly after the BBC produced a radio version of Lewis´s The Magician´s Nephew. In 1988"”well after Lewis´ death in 1963--the BBC produced a live-action television miniseries of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and Disney is currently working on a series of films based on the classic books.

The letter, which was published on the literary website nthposition.com, also shows that Lewis was not opposed to a cartoon version of his work, "œif only Disney did not combine so much vulgarity with his genius!" Disney´s The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is set to be released Dec. 9.

According to the BBC, the C.S. Lewis estate approved both the BBC series and the Disney movie. Lewis´s stepson, Douglas Gresham, oversees the C.S. Lewis estate and is also a co-producer of the upcoming film.

"œMy job, I suppose, was as resident Narnia guru, to make sure everything Narnian was Narnian in the film, to make sure there weren't anachronisms and incongruities," Gresham recently told the Associated Press. "œBut to be honest with you, the team that we have had on this film has been so good that there's been very little that I've had to complain about."

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Originally posted by Draught Horse
This will be interesting. Like Van Til said, "If there were one button in the universe covenant-breaking man could push and escape the presence of God, he would push that button repeatedly.

Does anyone know the source where Van Till said this?

 

[Saiph]

While I really disliked the implication that anyone could think he was worshipping a god named Tash and really be worshipping Aslan, I thought the way the bad guys tried to combine the two was interesting--kind of how postmodern culture tries to imply that all religions are essentially the same. I just felt that Lewis sort of contradicted his own point (that Aslan is Aslan, and all others are evil) when he allowed the Tash-worshiper to be "saved." On the other hand, I read that book a while back, so there might be aspects of it that I have forgotten.

This is the first time I have heard this idea. I do not recall the Tash worshipper being saved. However, I agree with Lewis in theory if that is what he is implying. If one is worshipping Satan, or anyone or anything other than God, then they are worshipping God indirectly, which the commandment reveals is sin.
However, no Calvinist would say that God does not use false worship for good, and for His own redemptive plan in history or the lives of saints individually. My entire Christian life has been a process of God delivering me from one idolatry to the next. God desires true worshippers. And since the fall, they are pretty hard to find (sic), He has been making them Himself out of the basest of humans.

 

[BJClark]

I've never read the series of books, but I have seen an older
version of the story on video, rented it from Blockbuster.

Our church has rented one of the local movie screens the night
before the movie opens, and our Pastor will be getting up after
the movie to give a presentation of the Gospel. Wonderful idea,
however, I wonder how many will be bringing their lost friends
and family with them to see the film or if he will be preaching mostly
to those who already know Christ.

I have many neighbors who claim to be Christians, yet do not go to
church, and those who do not know Christ have no desire to see the
movie. Though I would love to see the movie early, mostly just to
listen to my pastor share the gospel message and hear how he explains
it from the movie POV, I may wait so that those who have lost friends and neighbors who DO desire to see it can take them. And I can stay home and pray for them.

 

[SmokingFlax]

ChristopherPaul:

I'm pretty certain that the Van Til quote is from his Defense of the Faith but I don't know which page (???). Also, I suspect that this idea/phrase can probably be found in some of his other works as well.

It rang true for me the first time I read that phrase -I never forgot it afterwards.