FREE BOOK WEEK
Things around Pop Theology have been somewhat lax over the past few weeks with end of the semester deadlines and a trip overseas. Now, with all that behind, you can expect more frequent posts. To celebrate (belatedly) the re-vamping of the website, I am giving away a copy of Tim Cawkwell’s The Filmgoer’s Guide to God. Read on for a review of the book. For those who respond with a comment about a film that revealed something about God to them, I will randomly select a response and send off a copy of the book to the author of the response. I’ll keep the “contest” open until Friday night. This post might move from the featured section to the print section, but will still be easily accessible.
On one level, Tim Cawkwell’s The Filmgoer’s Guide to God is like a host of other film and religion books that discuss how films illustrate or embody religious concepts or beliefs. However, Cawkwell’s book is different, and better, than many of its counterparts because he examines the films as films, letting the narrative, the direction, cinematography, actors, and even production notes speak for themselves. Rather than forcing a square peg into a round hole, Cawkwell’s analyses consider how films not only fall in line with established Christian doctrines or images, but how they contribute fresh perspectives on these issues as well.
Throughout his text, Cawkwell keeps his eye on four directors, Robert Bresson, Carl Theodor Dreyer, Roberto Rossellini, and Andrei Tarkosvsky, discussing at least one of them, or more, in every chapter. However, he also brings a host of other films and directors into discussion with them as well from Robert Duvall to Martin Scorsese to Francis Ford Coppola. Throughout, Cawkwell is admittedly focused on American and European films and the God to which he points is a Christian one, vascillating between Protestant and Catholic theologies. He explores specific terrain: films which engage with the meaning and purpose of human existence as it might be found in faith in a trinitarian, Christian God. Cawkwell argues early on that an increasing distrust in religious institutions have driven believers and nonbelievers to more individual interpreters of the world, most notably filmmakers. Numerous filimmakers, Cawkwell argues, resisted the “death of God cinema” and instead posed theological and religious questions in fresh ways.
Cawkwell divides his text into several themes: God’s grace and God’s silence, faith, salvation by water, violence, guilty as sin, oppression, pieta, crucifixion, resurrections, heaven, and a concluding chapter on the image of Christ (Jesus films). Cawkwell also offers a brief guide for suggested reading and how to find the films he discusses. Cawkwell doesn’t let these themes restrict him, but rather allows his discussion of directors and their films to seamlessly guide him from one concept to the next, another unique aspect of his book. Throughout each theme, Cawkwell examines how filmmakers (directors, actors, cinematographers, editors) all make decisions that directly affect the film’s religious or theological voice. A decision as “simple” as employing professional actors, like Bergman often did, greatly contributes to the resulting theological, religious, or spiritual tone.
In his discussion of “God films,” Cawkwell analyzes three “priest films” and the ways in which their characters interact with the divine. In the chapter on faith, he pays special attention to the films of Tarkovsky, who claimed that art could make visible things we cannot see. In the “salvation by water” section, Cawkwell explores “Baptist” films and apparently uses the denominational affiliation quite loosely in his analyses of films like The Apostle and Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?. In his discussion of violence, Cawkwell claims that the American gangster film “offers a context to explore the suffering of the world not just by the willed evil in living and dying by the sword but also in ideas of guilt, redemption from evil, and ultimate salvation.”
Cawkwell’s “guilty as sin” chapter analyzes films that reflect the disorder of sin and the necessity of redemption through love. Oppression, pieta, crucifixion, resurrection: all of these themes necessarily emerge from the disordered sinfulness of the human experience. In these chapters, Cawkwell analyzes a variety of films from Rome, Open City to Mouth Agape to The Passion of Joan of Arc. In his discussion of heaven, I wonder if Cawkwell doesn’t limit his view too much by arguing that few of the films previously discussed do not readily portray heaven on earth. This assertion runs contrary to his previous discussion of human interaction that directly embodies Jesus’ call to kingdom living. Cawkwell’s concluding chapter on Jesus films, while interesting, is not particularly innovative.
In the end, The Filmgoer’s Guide to God is an entertaining and informative read that will, I imagine, introduce the casual and even more intense filmgoer to a host of new films of much spiritual importance. Cawkwell’s book emerges from work done with a film group at the Norwich Cathedral Institute. In fact, each chapter of his book would be a perfect starting point for a film and religion group in a local faith community.
So what film or films have been a helpful guide to God for you?


If you want to contribute tutorials, news or other stuff please contact us. We pay 150 for each approved article.
Consectetur adipisicing elit. Sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore.
This site uses valid HTML and CSS. All content Copyright © 2010 Newscast, Inc
If you like what we do, please don't hestitate and subscribe to our
[...] Trish Berg wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptRead on for a review of the book. For those who respond with a comment about a film that revealed something about God to them, I will randomly select a response and send off a copy of the book to the author of the response. … [...]
Is this where we enter the free book contest?
Well, anyway, I don’t know much about God, but if you ask me about what films speak to a divine presence in life, it would be movies that deal with big life changes. That’s every film, you say? Well, in anticipation to Pineapple Express, I’m going to have to go with a not too appreciated Apatow production, Knocked Up. In almost all of the films/TV shows that I hope to review in the near future, and hopefully with some help, Apatow’s crew deals with big life changes, where the characters must adapt to a new situation, a new lifestyle, often times experiencing some difficult growing pains in the process. In Knocked Up, we see stoner Ben Stone (ha!) deal with just that. Ben (Seth Rogen) meets an up and coming TV host, Alison Scott (Katherine Heigl) at a bar. After many drinks and dancing, Ben goes to Alison’s place and they accidentally have unsafe sex. An awkward morning after shows how different these two cats really are, and Ben is left with a business card at a diner in L.A. OUCH! He even says something like: That was harsh, after she leaves. However, to their surprise, Alison contacts Ben after two months to let him know that she is in fact, Knocked Up! In a commitment perhaps to life, but certainly not each other, they decide to try to make it work, for the sake of their child. The movie takes us on the bumpy road of the two lifestyles clashing, but ends with a perhaps all too Hollywood optimistic ending, where Ben moves out of the stoner house, gets a real, paying job, and creates a home with a nursery for his child. He changes – he grows up. It was probably difficult, but he does it. And in a sweet line at the end, when he’s holding his daughter, he recounts how she was accidentally conceived and says: And I’m so glad I did, because if not, I wouldn’t have you here.
So my point? God is in hard and easy changes in life, as people grow up, become a little less self centered and devote themselves to the wellbeing of others (of course, not to the levels of self-deprecation… but that’s another story). And the ultimate symbol of that is Ben Stone’s utter devotion to his daughter at the end. The movie closes with a song that says: “thats my daughter in the water. everything she’s got, i bought her.”
Ok – is that good enough? Did I do it right? Give me the book!
so i guess i get it right? hey – i misquoted the film earlier. Seth says “You wouldn’t be here” instead of the more awkward I wouldn’t have you here. – what!?
Ah, so many films to choose from–The Mission, Sweeney Todd, Hero, The Italian, and more recently, WALL-E and The Dark Knight. In the end, I think I choose The Dark Knight, as it’s freshly on my mind (and not letting me go). The themes get to the heart of the struggle between good and evil, the nature of evil, the work of Satan as chaos-creator whose biggest goal is to watch the world burn (as Alfred puts it), what it means to be a hero and how we choose to fight evil, but what strikes me (today, at least), is the nature of humanity, the balance of corruptness and Imago Dei.
It’s easy to see the corrupt nature in anything from “white lies” to gang rape, war, murder. And, for me, it’s easy to see the presence of the Imago Dei in some of the products of humans, their art and inventions, for example. But this movie challenged me to see the Imago Dei in a person. While I don’t believe that this “goodness” in a person is enough for salvation, I believe it’s a testimony to God’s continuing presence in this world. He created this world, and He has not left it. So, for example, the prisoner who threw the detonator out the window witnessed the Imago Dei in unexpected places.
God has not left us. He created us. He is with us. And He’s fighting for us.
So I just noticed the date of your post. Oops. Oh, well. It is what it is.
hello
i am cinema ms student. i need some papers or books about tarkovsky for my thesis. can i help me?
regards