Douglas Howe: May 2007 Archives

Will Ferrell just made a new movie for free, and 30 million people have already seen it. What? You didn't see the trailer? You didn't hear the build-up? Not much talk about it on E! or Premiere?

Welcome to a new trend that could be really cool or could fade really fast.

According to today's New York Times (business section, not movies!), Ferrell, "who commands up to $20 million for movies like 'Anchorman' and 'Blades of Glory,'" spent about 45 minutes making a little web-based movie shot by his production partner (Adam McKay) with a camcorder. It's called "The Landlord" and was posted on the new site FunnyOrDie.com as of April 12.

FunnyOrDie.com is sort of like a YouTube but there's way less stuff (which means way more of it is actually funny) and that mainstream actors (like Farrell) are willing to appear there. In fact, "many experienced comedians, talent agents and financiers are seeing the Web as a way to showcase talent while trying to turn a profit." The project is financed by Sequoia Capital, an early investor in Google and YouTube.

I'm hoping that it not only becomes what the profitmakers see (a chance for profit and/or promotional opportunity for the studio-backed talent) but also a chance for faith-based industry members to take some chances and engage their talents in what they really believe, for audiences young and old that would be positively influenced. The movie industry is so organized and manipulated around profit, so it'd be nice if one medium could survive and do well while not falling into the same artistically claustrophobic traps that have controlled the big screen and small screen for far too long.

Meanwhile, as the Times story said, "this being Hollywood, Mr. Ferrell and Pearl have already shot a sequel!" So check out FunnyOrDie.com if you don't have time to search YouTube for quality stuff, and join me in praying that faith-based material from big-name talent makes it on there as well. Considering the success of "Left Behind," "The Purpose-Driven Life," "The Passion of the Christ," etc., what a wonderful opportunity for Sequoia and team to not only make some money but to make a difference as well!

Lindsay Lohan was arrested again and is back in rehab. Britney Spears is blogging theology and confessions. Paris Hilton is talking about how much she dreads her upcoming jail sentence. Who decided that these women's tales were newsworthy?

I hope that someday in the near future, the party girls that the tabloids love and the networks exploit will be able to step forward and give a little bit of productive guidance, or something redeeming. As the father of three girls, I just don't see anything else these ladies have done that's worthy of the non-stop coverage.

My heart goes out to them, though.

Yesterday, the tide may have started to turn, as Britney posted some thoughts on her website, saying she "truly hit rock bottom" and calling rehab a "very humbling place."

"I was like a bad kid running around with ADD," the 25-year-old pop star writes about her adventures partying with Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan after she filed for divorce, which of course, came just two months after giving birth to their second child, Jayden James.

"I had a manager from a long time ago come in and try to direct me and my life after I got my divorce," Spears also wrote. "I was so overwhelmed I think that I was in a little shock too. I didn't know who to go to."

I disagree with her comment that "I think it is actually normal for a young girl to go out after a huge divorce," because the only thing that made it "huge" was the false sense of big-ness our society gives to someone who can sing or show up in a video. But I respect her candor in confessing "a lot of insecurities from when I was little are coming up again; it's like we are never good enough... I am only human people and I love you for still loving me."

She closes her blog by theologizing: "We will never really understand or figure out life completely. That's God's job."

As for Lindsay, the young actress is back in rehab and is also volunteering with an outstanding organization called "Teen Challenge." She has a chance to grow a bit and share the beginnings of something redeeming when the time comes. Outside of God's grace and prayers from those who love her, I don't hold out hope for Paris doing the same, but who knows, she's making an effort, and God is capable of much more grace and spiritual power than anyone of us or our media.

But someday, someone will answer me as to who it was that decided these young, immature and hurting ladies deserve the cultural pulpit? It's obviously not bringing peace or fulfillment for them.

I think we ought to all say a prayer for each of them but tune out the television and print news of their latest exploits.

I have to disagree with my esteemed Idol Chatter colleague Kris Rasmussen as well as, for that matter, several other reviewers, including CNN's Tom Charity, Rolling Stone's Peter Travis, and Time magazine's Richard Schigel, all of whom offered strongly negative reviews of"Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End."

I think "Pirates 3" is one of the few movies brave enough to think that we movie audiences have a mind that can comprehend more than just one subplot and a Michael Bay-ish or (in this case, Jerry Bruckheimer-ish) action track. And, as a person of faith, I appreciate any movie which exposes a deeper element to matters of the spiritual journey, which "Pirates 3" clearly does.

The Pirates "code," introduced so simply and clearly in the first two episodes, is taken to a new level, moving beyond the basics to the unveiling of the Codex and its various interpretations (and self-interests?), in a way not unlike Bible translations and denominational scuffles today. The main characters' decisions are made (and options leveraged) against prior covenants they are forced to live with, even if they didn't participate in their making. Such are the basic tenets of faith, a truth which many in our narcissistic and self-driven spiritual schemed age forget.

Generations ago--if you believe the Bible at all--covenants were made between God and humankind, between God and Abraham, Noah and David, between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and between Jesus and his disciples. Pronouncements (curses?) were made between God and Satan, and their circumstances have played out on earth. Perhaps a fantasy film like "Pirates of teh Carribean" can awaken a generation of non-church goers to the importance of remembering what we can't control (the code) before what we can control (our choices).

"Producer Jerry Bruckheimer does deserve a shout-out: It takes a kind of genius to sucker audiences into repeatedly buying the same party tricks," said Travis. "'At World's End' left me at wit's end wading through nearly three hours of punishing exposition, endless blather (pirates take meetings--who knew?), an overload of digital effects and shameless setups," said Schigel. I find it fascinating that the same critics who find some movies too thin or superficial can't see the depth of this one. It is fulfilling on so many levels, and perhaps these guys just went to the movies after checking their brains at the door. If so, they missed it!

"If you are like me, and you appreciated the heart and mythology of the original 'Pirates' as well as the zany humor of the sequel, you are going to be deeply disappointed in this latest chapter," Kris wrote in her blog piece. While I agree with her on most things, this isn't one of them. This film takes the mythology deeper and requires the zany humor (in several layers, Disney style) as a welcome reprieve from the plot's tension and conflict.

"I hope Depp and the others choose to drydock this franchise," Rasmussen said. I hope for the opposite. As it is with faith, the journey is always inspiring when the drama of future possibilities is weighed against prior covenants which will be put to the test. It is there they find meaning, and when we get to our own "World's End," we'd do best to have remembered such things.

Beliefnet's Dena Ross has a current story and gallery up, a feature on the Christian music artists.

"According to Nielsen SoundScan, the Christian/gospel category was one of only four genres that saw its overall album sales grow last year," she writes, "proving that many artists of faith not only have an impact on other Christians, but also on music lovers everywhere."

You may have heard of Jars O' Clay, CeCe Winans, Rebecca St. James, Third Day and Switchfoot, although Switchfoot would prefer you don't think of them as a "Christian" band. You will keep hearing of Yolanda Adams, Israel and New Breed, Kirk Franklin, David Crowder Band, Flyleaf, as well as MercyMe "my wife's favorite concert last year" and Casting Crowns, who just put on a great show to raise money for kids in Cincinnati. Somehow Michael W. Smith and Amy Grant have stayed on the list, which I should be glad about since I still listen to them!

In the wake of the recent Scientology controversy in England and the frequent clips of John Travolta and Tom Cruise in association with the movement, it got me to wondering: Who are the celebrities faces of Christianity? If the Scientologists get Cruise and Travolta--and for that matter if the Mormons get Mitt Romney and the Buddhists get Richard Gere--who do we get?

I wonder if our younger generations can be some confused as if there "are no Christian celebs" since so few of them are widely associated with their Christian faith in the media? I know there are some--they just don't show up as readily and often in association with the faith as do those associated with these smaller movements.

While pondering that, be reminded that Dena's feature includes music as well, so I hope you'll check out these great artists and their work, and be inspired by authentic expressions of faith and inspiration, rather than just the celebrity attachments that we've come to know too well.

I really wasn't too cynical about yet another mega-franchise sequel in this summer's movie line-up. I wanted to be sure that I saw "Shrek the Third" with a lot of kids in the audience, including a few from my own family. What I found was exactly what I expected: The younger the audience, the better (and funnier) the film was received.

And since humor was the primary inspirational influence in this one, I think most parents were left uninspired while most of the kids left having had a good laugh …but also uninspired, as in "Mom, can we go out to eat?" or "What are we going to see next?"

Ever since Disney started making animated films for the whole family, the secret formula for animated movie success has been the ability for a flick to have "layers" of comedy and content for all ages. In the most beloved (and recent) animated films that we want to see over and over again, we find that for every piece of visual humor and childspeak (for kids), there's also some bathroom humor and teen culture chat (for adolescents) and some dry humor and current events for the adults. (Think "Finding Nemo")

"Shrek the Third" had what the kids required, but much less for the adolescents and almost nothing for the adults, other than the air-conditioned theater and a screen to keep the kids occupied.

The film was neither heartwarming nor witty when compared to the first two Shreks, and the laughs were fewer. Maybe this was because Eddie Murphy (the donkey) seemed to have far fewer lines, or perhaps because Mike Myers’ Shrek had to play truer to formula then to character. Yes, the layered comedy for adults (including some sarcasm that the chitlins wouldn't get) was present, but just wasn't all that funny. The choreography was very nice, but the characters within it were less inspiring.

The first two Shreks tugged on the heartstrings and brought inspiration through both the characters and the plot. "Shrek the Third" felt simply like another episode in the series of a mega-franchise that didn't leave me wanting to see the next episode. My kids however, may have a different answer.

In either case, this movie felt like the poster example for how good actors and writers can be muted for the sake of the exact formulaic approach that the first two Shreks made fun of. To get rid of that taste and leave the franchise on an inspiring note would be the only reason to make a Shrek IV.

The fact that Jerry Fallwell’s passing is being treated as a major media event brings both a resounding affirmation of his impact upon the politics of our country as well as the compelling question about who will take his...

Tonight’s national 6:30 pm time slot features a potentially wonderfully new kind of drama. This one has to do with the future, but there will be no voting, no calling in, and no consolation prize of an appearance on Leno...

Spider-Man 3" took a huge fall this past weekend. Sure, it took in $60 million, but that was a 60 percent drop-off from its opening weekend, which meant the hype and marketing worked great but the movie itself didn’t go...

A new kind of heroic character trait has emerged on "24:" Brokenness.Brokenness happens far beyond issues of ethics, morals, or even heroism. It's the occasion of a life event that almost none of us would ever ask for but that...

One of the newest versions of an old TV series is off and running, and I think it shows signs of being the best its ever been--and the most faith-based as well. Like "American Idol," the losers will dwindle towards...

Time Magazine's current issue focuses on the many actors who are moving somewhat out of (typical) character to play villains this summer, and reflects on some of the more memorable villains of all time.James Franco will probably be the most-seen...