After Christianity Today published a lengthy Q&A with Evan Almighty director Tom Shadyac, there was no excuse for those writing about the movie studio’s attempt to appeal to religious audiences to exclude the fact that Shadyac is in fact a self-described “Jesus freak.”
Nevertheless, one day later, the Los Angeles Times managed to publish 1,200 words on the film and ignored Shadyac’s pretty straightforward Christian testimony.
Note this quote from Shadyac and the following discussion from the Times about the financial impact of the movie and we’ll compare that with his more extensive conversation with CT:
“For some reason, Hollywood doesn’t make this kind of movie,” says Tom Shadyac, the director of both “Evan Almighty” and its racier predecessor, 2003’s “Bruce Almighty,” whose religious message was less palpable. “I don’t know if it’s out of fear. I really don’t. Maybe we’re not living as closely to these themes.”
Christian moviegoers have been an increasingly hot target since Gibson’s “Passion” grossed more than $370 million in 2004. In assembling “Evan Almighty,” Universal and Shadyac endeavored to create a crowd-pleasing, but nondogmatic, parable. The goal was to appeal not only to fans of star Steve Carell — last seen searching for a willing woman in “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” — but also liberal environmentalists and more socially conservative audiences who rarely venture into the multiplex.
Toward that end, “Evan Almighty” combines Carell’s distinct physical and verbal comedy with straightforward scenes about faith. Just a few minutes into the movie, Carell’s character gets on his knees and prays to God. Unlike the higher-power conversations in the George Burns’ “Oh, God!” comedies from 30 years ago, it’s not done purely for laughs.
And here is some of the follow-up in CT, which I recommend you read in its entirety if you are considering going to see this film:
CT: But between Bruce’s success and The Passion’s success, Hollywood suddenly realized that Christians buy a lot of tickets at the box office.
Shadyac: I agree, but I think that’s a bass-ackwards embracing by show business. You don’t get audiences by going, “Oh gee, there’s a Christian audience, let’s make Christian movies.” Because then you get bad movies.
But I do agree completely that Hollywood didn’t know how powerful the Christian audience was. When they showed up for The Passion, it spun heads, because Hollywood is colorblind except for one color, and it’s green. They saw green. They’ve never seen anything like it — Christian organizations and churches buying out entire screenings. They saw numbers they couldn’t believe for a movie that probably should have opened to a much softer number. It just really woke people up.
CT: Hearing you say these things, it’s kind of ironic, then, that Evan Almighty is being aggressively marketed to Christians and churches, including the Ark Almighty campaign on the side. Your movie has now become a part of that Christian marketing machine. Are you OK with that?
Shadyac: I’m okay with that. I mean, we’re all here to spread good news. I believe strongly in this creative force we call God, and I love to spread the word. As long as that’s done honestly, I’m good with it. When we started talking about making this movie, I had kept hearing that the Christian community wanted more “biblical, wholesome, entertainment. And we thought we had something that they would embrace.
An aspect I think many have missed, including me, is that the first movie wasn’t exactly rejected by the religious audiences. Yes, it had a PG-13 rating and included a few scenes that many would find objectionable, but the overall message was positive and included what Shadyac describes as the “roots in truths that are found in Scripture.”
So there you have it. Check out the rest of the CT transcript because it gets into the deep end of the “being in the world and not of the world” discussion that’s pretty interesting for those who are interested in that.
 | Posted at 5:58 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (7) |
June 21, 2007, at 11:11 pm
Thanks for the pointer to the article. I happen to be very interested in such things and enjoyed the interview. I’m much more interested in seeing the movie now. Before I thought it was a “hollywood rips off religion to make a buck movie” I was particularly taken with this:
June 21, 2007, at 11:45 pm
What everyone overlooks is the fact that Passion was a quality movie—a quality movie with Christian values. If a “Christian” movie is made specifically by non-Christians making what non-Christians feel Christians want to see, it will be formulaic since the non-Christians won’t have a clue about what really makes Christians Christian. Christians aren’t lemming who will flock to any movie professing to be Christian.
I daresay that if most movies today jettisoned some of the hedonism in them Christians would watch those movies for the character development and story lines.
June 22, 2007, at 1:02 pm
The more I read into it, the more I wonder if the “Passion” audience was a lighting strike and not the beginning of a new movie-going trend. Obviously there are lots of Christian movie-goers looking for quality fare, but I have yet to see this trend repeat itself with a huge box-office draw that could be attributed to Christian marketing. “Narnia” had wide secular appeal, and other films specifically marketed to Christians haven’t seemed to rake in any significantly larger amount of dough. At best it seems to raise a few smaller films out of total obscurity and perhaps add a few more ticket sales to some secularly-marketed films.
What “sold” The Passion was controversy and novelty (though nicely lit, it wasn’t a great film, it wouldn’t even make my top ten of Catholic themed films). It hit at the right place and at the right time. It was fervent, pitted liberal academics and believers against conservative believers in the press, and positioned itself perfectly for a Christian film-going avalanche. It certainly wasn’t about wholesome movie-fare, if it was movies like the charming “Millions” would have been blockbusters.
It should be interesting to see how “Evan” does considering the critical drubbing its getting. Will its Christian marketing attempts help it succeed? Or is the “Passion audience” (like the “Da Vinci audience”) something of a press creation.
June 23, 2007, at 8:46 pm
I must give a 15-second review of Evan Almighty, having seen it today. I found it to be an AWESOME film that, actually, doesn’t conflict with the Biblical flood event, as I previously thought. The film isn’t the regular ultraviolent swear-fest, so the NY Times and LA Times panned it. The rest of the nation will love it, even those who aren’t Christians!
June 24, 2007, at 2:35 am
I don’t understand why it was panned. It wasn’t “Casablanca,” but it was quite funny and well-played (props to Morgan Freeman’s deification). My only supposition is that those who panned it, didn’t much care for the original story.
June 25, 2007, at 12:25 pm
NewTrollObserver, you’re right. I was disappointed, but not surprised, when Richard Roepper and his Ebert-fill-in-of-the-week from a Chicago paper TRASHED the film on Sunday’s show, then lavished praise on a dark story about a hired assassin.
I think it shows where Hollywood’s values are.
July 18, 2007, at 4:24 pm
Holloywood? I hearsay is evil, that is why we are ask to pray for them and Southern CA.Universial studio and all that is in and about it are lost and have their own god I am told.
We are to be watchful against our enemies says our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Wherever we are off our watch, we lose ground. thy works are hollow and empty; prayers are not filled up with holy desires, alms-deeds not filled up with true charity, sabbaths not filled up.Also be watchfull for He will come to you [us] without warning.
Keith