Horror of all horrors, Hollywood is seeking to make more movies that appeal to Christians, and it might even try to market the films to those audiences. The latest is yet another sequel from Hollywood that has Steve Carell of The Office playing a political guy who quits his career so that he can build an ark (like Noah).
While every movie with a Christian theme these days will be compared to Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ, one wonders if this one was originally conceived with the pew dollar in mind.
What’s interesting about this attempt is that while the movie’s predecessor, Bruce Almighty (2003), was rather irreverent and rated PG-13, this one received a PG rating and is targeted to the 43 percent of the country that is in church, according to what Jonathan Bock, president of Grace Hill Media, told The New York Times.
The Times adds:
By comparison, “Evan Almighty” seems an unlikely candidate for this kind of marketing. Unlike “The Passion of the Christ,” it is a comedy that portrays God in the flesh (played again by Morgan Freeman, wearing a natty white suit). “Bruce Almighty,” which made more than $240 million at the box office in the United States, was better known for irreverent humor and Mr. Carrey’s mugging than for any underlying religious message.
Universal may have reasons enough to look for divine help. The budget of “Evan Almighty,” a movie full of elaborate special effects, has been estimated above $175 million, although the studio will not confirm that figure.
According to Adam Fogelson, the president of marketing for Universal, the studio has had many conversations about appealing to the faithful ever since Mr. Gibson’s blockbuster.
“I don’t believe there is a way — or maybe I’m just not sophisticated or smart enough to know what that way is — to use traditional marketing tactics or tricks to convince the faith audience the film is appropriate for them,” he said. “This film is not about cutting trailers and TV spots and radio spots to skew a piece of material to make it seem like a good movie for this crowd.” He declined to say how much Universal had spent appealing to religious groups.
There seems to be some level of skepticism by the Times on whether this movie will appeal to believers. And it’s good to know that at least the studio executives recognize that evangelicals are not “largely poor, uneducated, and easy to command,” as some media outfits would have us believe.
In fact, nothing presented here makes me think this is anything but another irreverent film with a funny guy (fans of The Office are likely to see the movie for that reason alone) playing next to Morgan Freeman as God. If Evan Almighty lacks religious themes that would keep church leaders from mentioning the film in their Sunday sermons, then reporters should say so. But they would have to ask first.
Despite the distributor’s launching a cheesy website, hiring a public relations firm and taking out a fake-cover ad or “outsert” with Christianity Today, I need to know more about the film’s content before believing that Carell is starring in the next Passion of the Christ or Chronicles of Narnia.
 | Posted at 5:30 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (18) |
May 31, 2007, at 6:04 pm
Hollywood has not demonstrated that it understands Christians or what attracts Christians to movies. If memory serves, Gibson took a considerable risk to do “The Passion”, and the common wisdom was that it would fail miserably. I think that “Narnia” may have been done outside the Hollywood mainstream, too. I enjoyed “Bruce Almighty”, but I have no expectations that “Evan Almighty” is any more “Christian” than its predecessor.
May 31, 2007, at 6:34 pm
Well, the director is a recent convert to Christianity and has been quite open about that and its impact on his career.
That is crucial to this Grace Hill effort, in that it gives them The Man who can stand up and talk to reporters about faith and film — while being comfortable in his own skin.
See this example: http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/newsletter056.htm
May 31, 2007, at 7:49 pm
Having seen the trailer, I question whether this movie will appeal to anybody. It seems to fall within the genre of “stupid ‘comedy’”.
May 31, 2007, at 8:31 pm
I would disagree that “Bruce Almighty” was just irreverent humor. In fact, it seemed to have great religious messages and frankly I found its theology to be at least as appropriate at that in “The Passion of the Christ.”
May 31, 2007, at 10:48 pm
Personally, I measure such movies against “Oh God”. They need to top or at least get close to such classics as the followig if they want my attention:
June 1, 2007, at 1:17 am
The Times wrote:
Wow. These people really don’t understand Christianity, do they. “The Passion” was ALL about portraying God in the flesh.
Also, I agree with Kaylor about Bruce Almighty. I thought it had some wonderful Christian messages.
June 1, 2007, at 4:07 am
All I want to know is how this movie gets around God’s promise not to destroy the world again with a flood.
June 1, 2007, at 11:38 am
Terry, thanks for the tip on the director. It will be interesting to see how he works within the Hollywood system. Gibson went outside the system and, as a result, did not have to compromise to please the bosses.
June 1, 2007, at 11:50 am
I had a great point, but VoxDilecti beat me to it in the comment above (7). The entire premise is (how do I say this? Oh, yeah…) non-Biblical. Then again, the director IS a recent convert, and probably didn’t grow up hearing these stories in Sunday School.
I enjoyed Bruce Almighty, but it was a bit raunchy at times and was hardly Christian, though it was enjoyable on a certain level and (most importantly) funny.
I’m waiting to see if the mainstream media catches onto this guy’s “subversive” Christian message and trashes the film as just another “Passion” being pitched to churches.
June 1, 2007, at 11:53 am
For VoxDilecti and Stephen A.:
Perhaps the guy to ask is Pastor Richard Greene, of Frostburg, Maryland:
http://www.godsark.org/
No matter how many times I pass this on I-68, it’s always quite a jolt.
June 1, 2007, at 12:54 pm
[…] Whatever the case, it has been successful in driving discussion about the site and the movie, if nothing else. See: GetReligion, Bob’s Blog n’ Blather, MovieMarketingMadness, ChangeYourWorld, Paleoevangelical, Camy’s Loft, Lake Neuron, and The Blog that Ties for examples. […]
June 1, 2007, at 1:34 pm
“http://www.godsark.org/”
Checked it out of curiosity (I used to work right next to Frostburg). In FAQ section:
“Q: Is there another flood coming?
A: In Genesis, Chapter 9, God made a promise with Noah that He would never destroy the earth by water again. God even told Noah that He would put a rainbow in the sky as a reminder of this promise. We are not building this ark because of another flood, but as a sign to the world of God’s love and Jesus’ soon return!”
I guess in his defense, it’s the movie that portrays an (unbiblical) repeat world-destroying flood, whereas his landlocked boat is just a “sign” of some sort.
As many in the MSM have become quite adept at hyping up and zeroing in on real or perceived doctrinal disputes in the church and “Christian culture”, I wouldn’t be too surprised to eventually see a headline like “Flood of Complaints: Ark Movie Targeted to Christians Violates Scripture”
June 1, 2007, at 4:12 pm
Frankly, I’m flabbergasted that apparently “Bruce Almighty” did so well, they think a sequel is justified. Or is this really a remake? I mean, the first film must be almost five years old by now, so that means all the six year olds who were too young to see it the first time round will be just about old enough to catch this one.
Any way, I won’t be rushing off to the local fleapit to view this, not as long as I’ve got such thrilling and rewarding alternatives to spend my time such as scrubbing the mold out from between the bathroom tiles.
June 1, 2007, at 6:08 pm
I think Maryellen Ashcroft’s book “The Magdalene Gospel”, which is being made into a movie, will be the next passion… Telling the story of Jesus from the females that followed him’s perspective could get some good publicity particularly if it were timed with renewed controversy over women clergy…
dlw
June 1, 2007, at 10:52 pm
Considering that character “Evan” is an idiot in Bruce Almighty, he is shown driving a H2 Hummer in the trailer, and that they choose to use the flood story, I am willing bet $50 that “global warming” is thrown in to the plot.
June 2, 2007, at 8:23 am
My friend took me out to see ‘Pirates of the Carribean III’, I did not see the first two movies, but it was a very ugly picture, complete with great amounts of actors that were filthy and unwashed with the worst possible set of teeth ever viewed in any picture. I found myself praising the old Erol Flynn movies after viewing the Pirates of the Carribean III. I think Hollywood is on drugs, it’s the only possible reason for them to be so completely out of touch with reality. So, it would be understandable that they could not make a movie about anything reverant to save their lives.
June 5, 2007, at 11:48 pm
I think the fact that many Christians consider Bruce Almighty “unChristian” and “nonbiblical” because it didn’t overtly reference scripture or had a PG-13 rating is perhaps the reason Hollywood doesn’t know what to do with us. That movie was one of the most Christian movies I’ve ever seen. Its theme was God reaching out in love to us and inviting us to freely respond to that love, as opposed to God being some sort of chess master controlling our lives. If that’s not a Christian message that non-Christians need to hear (and Christians, for that matter), I don’t know what is. And the very last scene, when the face of the homeless man morphs into the face of God? A direct reference to Matthew 25:31-40. That was incredibly powerful.
I can’t wait for Evan Almighty, not only because I’m a Office fan, but also because I’m excited to see how God’s character will be revealed in the sequel.
June 6, 2007, at 5:16 pm
I got to see a premier if Evan Almighty last night. (I have not seen Bruce Almighty.) This movie was a GREAT family film! I thought the message of the movie was really good. I was very surprised - I could take kids to this movie and feel completely comfortable.