Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kenmorefield

Arts & Faith in The News

Recommended Posts

The Harrisonburg Daily News Record wrote:

: "I believe Gibson’s pick of a relatively unknown actor draws a line

: between the people and the story and that’s different from ‘The Ten

: Commandments’," said David Shank, pastor of Covenant Reformed

: Church. "In [‘The Ten Commandments,’ actor Charlton] Heston [who

: played Moses] became the focus."

That's kind of funny, since I don't think anyone really knew who Charlton Heston was before the 1956 version of The Ten Commandments made him into a bona fide star. Heston did have a small role in Cecil B. DeMille's 1952 film The Greatest Show on Earth, and he made some other films, but all the roles that he is most famous for nowadays -- Touch of Evil (1958), Ben Hur (1959), El Cid (1961), Planet of the Apes (1968) and so on -- came AFTER he made this Moses movie. I think it's safe to say that Heston was no more or less famous, prior to the release of The Ten Commandments, than Jim Caviezel, star of Frequency and The Thin Red Line, is today.

: Ken Morefield, a professor of language and literature at Eastern

: Mennonite University . . .

Hey, are you a Mennonite too? Or do you just work for one? smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kenmorefield wrote:

: . . . the Anabaptist community is not particularly known for welcoming

: ethnic outsiders.

Hey, as the son of a Mennonite woman and an Englishman, and as one who never got the jokes when my cousins told them to each other in plattdeutsch, I can relate! Still, having said that, the Mennonite Brethren in Canada have been really good -- perhaps too good -- about playing down the ethnic angle, even the denominational angle, in favour of reaching out in a generally evangelical sort of way to Chinese, Punjabi, Hispanic and other communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

Alan, can we make sure that the promontoryarts.com link continues to work for a long time? If people have that in print form, that's the only way they'll find us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, it's too bad they didn't link to the actual thread. Anybody running a search for "Baehr" might come up with quite a few threads that have nothing to do with this specific topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm very glad they didn't link to the thread--visitors would get an error...

Alan, my concern is that new lurkers won't know where to go. Though through "bait and switch", some might stumble on stuff they like. SHOCKED.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't quite believe the article's closing remark.

At the same time it printed its piece on Dr. Baehr and his ministry, Christianity Today has started its own branch to analyze movies, in direct competition with Movieguide. Is that Christian?

I can't believe that they have the affrontery to effectively call CT's act of setting up a film "branch" unChristian. Just where do they get off?

"Blessed are the Christian monopolists, for they shall be allowed to question the faith of any who seek to do anything vaguely related to their ministry"?

I've been considering writing to a magazine over here offering to do a movie column. This might give me that final nudge...

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt, you put great words to exactly what I was feeling about that closing remark. Well done!

And I think everyone would agree that you should offer your services to that magazine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely with you guys. I find it ironic that a staunchly pro-American, hyperconservative organization would criticize freedom in the marketplace of ideas, when they would surely criticize this in the economic arena. Since the weekend, I've been thinking about writing a letter to the eds at CT, about this hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the weekend, I've been thinking about writing a letter to the eds at CT, about this hypocrisy.

They... and I... would greatly appreciate it.

I'm still mystefied by Movieguide's claim that CT is "going into competition" with them. Competing for what? They've said themselves they "are not movie reviewers." And CT has been reviewing movies in its pages and on its Web site for a long time. All they've done is increase their coverage and organize it properly into a focused endeavor. It seems that a magazine like CT, often referred to as the Newsweek of religious periodicals, should have a regular media-review section. It's odd that it took this long to mobilize the effort. Thus Baehr's reaction just seems a) defensive, cool.gif insecure, c) inflammatory, and d) egomaniacal.

As David Poland recently said, in an argument, the person shouting is wrong about 90% of the time. If you read the different articles, it's not hard to tell which one is "shouting."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and congratulations, Jeff. Also in the latest edition, CT lists SPU as one of the best "Christian" places to work. Looks like you made the right choice!

Just saw this note, Alan, and yeah, I'd have to agree. It is a great place to work.

And now, I'm off to a bunch of meetings with great SPU workin' folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffrey Overstreet:

: I'm still mystefied by Movieguide's claim that CT is "going into competition" with them.

Especially since they announced the new movie "channel", and published their sidebar on Baehr's questionable ethics, in the Very Same Issue in which they ran a four-page article on other Christian movie-reviewing websites.

I presume that, from Movieguide's point of view, either CT is competing with all those sites too, or all those sites are competing with Movieguide. If the former, then it's an odd sort of competitor who devotes four pages of free advertising to the competition. If the latter, then boy-oh-boy does Movieguide have a lofty opinion of itself.

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffrey Overstreet:  If the latter, then boy-oh-boy does Movieguide have a lofty opinion of itself.

Ya think?? Although lofty isn't so much my impression as pompous.

Edited by Darrel Manson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Especially since they announced the new movie "channel", and published their sidebar on Baehr's questionable ethics, in the Very Same Issue in which they ran a four-page article on other Christian movie-reviewing websites.

Do you have links to these?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: Thus Baehr's reaction just seems a-defensive, b-insecure, c-inflammatory, and d-egomaniacal.

Can we have a poll on this?

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also could we have a different wink icon? A small point but I prefered the novogate one the best. (This one seems to move the mouth to the wrong side IMO)

wink.gif

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No poll, please. You can bet MGuide supporters would be sent here in droves to vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that was just a joke

Perhaps it would have been funnier if I'd said "is this suposed to be a poll?".

Matt

Edited by MattPage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a Google News Alert set up for Arts and Faith, and that's the first time I've seen us pop up in an alert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And interestingly enough, in the last two days a new user has registered from each city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×