Facing the Giants,
When the Game Stands Tall,
Woodlawn …
…Concussion?
I’ve been hopeful about Concussion. It’s a film about a problem that I care about very deeply.
But I certainly didn’t anticipate what I recently read about it in The New Yorker.
Ian Crouch writes:
… [S]urprisingly, the movie’s moral arguments are framed less as matters of medicine than of religious faith. It’s not a sports movie, or a medical thriller, so much as a Christian homily. And its principal question is, in a way, about just how much God cares about football.
So, yeah. That was unexpected.
Crouch continues:
“Concussion” repeatedly presents these conflicts in religious terms. In real life, Omalu is a devout Catholic, and in interviews about the movie, he has talked about the ways in which his faith has directed his work. He has also praised Will Smith, telling the Christian Post, “We met, we shared and we communed the love of God, and he also saw the light. The spirit of God also touched him.” (Smith himself has noted that his grandmother’s Christian faith inspired his performance.) Rather than simply conveying Omalu’s religiosity as an aspect of his character, though, the filmmakers shaped the entire movie as an expression of it.
Hmmm.
Is Crouch the only one picking up on this focus on faith in the movie? Let’s look around.
At Christianity Today, Alicia Cohn writes:
Concussion tries to achieve the depth and stakes of the Biblical story of Esther, without quite enough unchecked power or genocide to support the claim.
All of this is giving me a strange feeling.
I mean, seriously — people talk about so many other faith-related football movies as “Christian movies,” or titles that are part of a “Christian movie industry.” What’s preventing Concussion from being received in the same way? Why aren’t churches jumping on the Concussion bandwagon and campaigning for people to see it because of its Christian hero? Why aren’t they producing evangelical tracts and handing them to moviegoers as they exit the theater?
Don’t get me wrong: I think it’s a bad idea altogether to herald some movies as “Christian” and turn them into occasions of aggressive evangelism. That kind of propaganda does more harm than good, and is likely to spoil anybody’s willingness to entertain the questions a work of art might inspire in their minds. But I’m curious as to why Concussion isn’t getting the Facing the Giants or Woodlawn treatment, since it seems to meet the basic criteria of being A) a movie about a Christian hero, and B) a movie that explores the challenge of faith in the context of football.
A troubling answer suggests itself: Perhaps the audience that loves Facing the Giants and Woodlawn feels threatened by a movie about a doctor who uses science to challenge their other favorite Sunday ritual.
Perhaps the only Christian movies that make sense to the Facing the Giants crowd are those in which Christians are heroes achieving a victory with force on the field, victory as defined by culture rather than Christianity. Perhaps they aren’t interested in a story about a God-fearing man who suffers for his belief, seeking to respect human life and health by pushing back against worldly corporations in what will probably be a losing battle.
Is our faith really so juvenile that we only get excited about films that make Christians look like glorious and triumphant champions?
Personally, I think that any film that honors truth — scientific truth, biological truth, medicinal truth — is honoring the God of All Truth. The only definition of “Christian movie” that makes sense to me is one that includes films that invite us into encounters with beauty, truth, and mystery — not those that cut corners on beauty and mystery in order to shove a didactic version of truth down our throats.
I sense the power of God in films that, through imagination and art, allow us to engage, contemplate, discuss, and come to our own conclusions. This reflects the incarnational way in which God speaks to us “through what has been made” — through words made flesh.
But if a work of art starts organizing its information and storytelling to try and persuade the audience of a particular lesson, then its artistry diminishes and it becomes an attempt to exert power and influence over an audience instead of an invitation for them to have a unique experience of their own.
So, what is Concussion? Is it an occasion of artistic tools being employed to try and convert an audience, or is it a work of art?
In CT, Cohn says:
Unfortunately, attempting to make a fictionalized movie both a blockbuster and an educational showpiece means the film suffers in both directions. Smith delivers a fantastic performance as Omalu. He is confused and determined with equal authenticity; he is believable as an immigrant “offended” by the response to his attempt to be a “good American.” But as a story, Concussion is a fairly formulaic tale of David versus Goliath, not Esther versus the King—even though Omalu’s wife delivers an intense “for such a time as this” speech.
And in The New Yorker, Crouch says,
The message is strikingly, and at times rather painfully, clear: Omalu is a kind of prophet, an outsider who can see a truth that those around him, blinded by their own cultural prejudices, cannot, and who is punished and shunned for spreading a gospel that those in power do not want to hear. This makes for a heavy-handed, often treacly movie….
Uh oh. Now it sounds like that other definition of “Christian movie.” The over-zealous, heavy-handed kind.
Wait. Crouch concludes with this…
But as a polemic, this evangelical argument is interesting and novel, suggesting that football’s dangers are not merely physical, but spiritual as well. This might be the movie’s most subversive message: not that the N.F.L. stood in the way of scientific research about the health of its players but that it occupies a false place within the religious and patriotic beliefs of so many of its fans, whose Sabbath routines are timed perfectly so that Sunday service ends just in time for kickoff.
Wow.
So maybe Concussion isn’t a great work of art. (I haven’t seen it yet. Have you?) But as a lesson, it sounds to me like it might cause some viewers to stop and think about what they’re endorsing with their Sunday football rituals. If it encourages this kind of reflection, and if it ultimately helps change a sport that is costing good men their minds for our amusement, then I’m glad to see such a lesson being taught in theaters near you and me.
Now, hold on. There’s more. Cohn ends her CT review saying,
A movie in which the hero’s methods fail to produce any change is not a movie very many of us would pay to see. It is time that accomplishes what Omalu could not. According to the logic of Concussion, not even God could convince the NFL to listen.
So… maybe the film will be better at spreading a sense of helplessness and despair than inspiring people to seek change?
As someone whose love of football has already been shattered by the NFL’s obvious cover-ups, and by its apparent indifference to the suffering that its game and its culture causes in the lives of its players and their families — to say nothing of how many children suffer severe injuries dreaming of living up to the league’s show-business ideals — I’m rooting for whatever will change the game permanently, or persuade parents to protect their children from it.
But I also think this subject deserves the attention of great artists who will know how to draw us into a more rewarding engagement with the subject.
Thoughts?
I saw ‘Concussion’ about a month ago at a critics’ day. And while I found the depiction of faith interesting, I’ll admit the movie just sort of washed away in my memory amid the much-better end-of-the-year releases (I believe I saw this between ‘Anomalisa’ and ‘The Hateful 8,’ so…).
It’s a perfectly fine movie, but that’s it. It’s not bad. It’s competent. Smith is fine (although Albert Brooks is who I remember more). The Christian angle is refreshing, though, in that his faith informs his research, but his arguments are still rooted in science.
But rather than being struck by the faith angle, I kept walking away with comparisons to another research-heavy movie that also tackles faith, albeit in a much different fashion. It’s very much like Spotlight, in that it’s about the work and research someone undertakes to bring down an institution that’s doing wrong. But where Spotlight is subtle, effective and quiet, ‘Concussion’ is too on-the-nose, didactic and heavy-handed. So I think maybe people just aren’t writing about it because it just didn’t stick.
Thanks, Chris. So many Big Issue movies just “wash away.” It’s a particularly difficult thing, to take an important issue and make something meaningful and lasting out of it. The Insider is a rare exception. All the President’s Men is another.
Concussion is a good, passable work of art, but by no stretch of the imagination is it a great one. The excerpts you quoted more or less hit its strengths and weaknesses right on the head. It makes a very compelling faith based and science based case against football – “God did not design us to play football.” – Will Smith’s performance is one of his best; there are a few scenes where he falls into the mode of “act like this scene is an Oscar clip moment,” but for the most part he’s very good. But the script is a little too preachy, and it sets up the NFL as sneering malevolent villains who it’s almost too easy to hate. But it does have one of the most convincing portrayals of faith-motivated hero this year.
On a related note, another extremely convincing positive portrayal of faith (which the Christian film community will mostly ignore) is Spike Lee’s CHI-RAQ – a modernized LYSISTRATA set in Chicago, which contains some very persuasive faith based anti-gun arguments from both its heroine and from a very sympathetic pastor working in the black community.
Thanks, Evan. My reasons to see Chi-Raq are increasing.
Jeffrey – before I begin this I want you to know that I love your reviews, and I think very highly of you and your opinions. I finished reading your book Through a Screen Darkly earlier this year, and simply adored it. I’ve recommended it to basically everyone I know at this point.
In regards to this post: I haven’t seen Concussion yet, so I can’t say anything regarding the film itself. But I do have to comment on your quickness to imply that the only reason that “churches aren’t jumping on the Concussion bandwagon and campaigning for people to see it” is because they care more about the sport itself and being depicted as the winner than they do about hearing truth. That’s a very bold claim. Personally I hate Facing the Giants, and I have never enjoyed watching football. But the only reason I ever heard about Concussion is because some of my Christian, football-loving friends told me about it.
First, there are a lot of reasons that could have contributed to the lack of Christian “banner-waving” for this particular film – the most obvious of which is that the trailer does not communicate it to be as overtly faith-driven as it (apparently) is. (There was never a question as to whether or not Facing the Giants was an explicitly Christian film.)
Second, you said yourself that this banner-waving, or “aggressive evangelism” that can be associated with faith-driven films is NOT a good thing. And yet you are critiquing a group of people based on the fact they did not engage in this particular propaganda for Concussion. You assume that this points to a character flaw, and don’t even seem to consider other possibilities – that perhaps the Facing the Giants-loving Christians who saw this film have grown up some and did not feel the need to turn this into a campaign. Or that perhaps that particular crowd of people didn’t go see the film, because (again) the trailer doesn’t communicate just how faith-driven it is.
To jump to the conclusion that this lack of Christian campaigning for Concussion points to a flaw in the kind of Christian who likes Facing the Giants is presumptious and reveals a poorly executed argument. Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely open to believing that this flaw exists in much of the Christian community – in fact I think it is most likely. But this post provides no evidence to convince me of that. And I believe that if you are going to call out and generalize a people group – even if just to make a point for a section of a blog post – you need to have sound reason for doing so.
I can tell this is an issue that you are passionate about, and I absolutely believe it is an issue worth addressing. I would love to see you address this more soundly, with more charity, and without basing your argument on assumption.
Thanks for the comment, Hannah. Lots to chew on here.
Well, I phrased it in the form of a question for a reason. The possibility occurred to me and, as you say yourself, it seemed likely. I’m not convinced anything is the “only reason.” I’m not even convinced that I’m on the right track.
I’m surprised, though, that “the only reason” you heard about Concussion was your Christian, football-loving friend. I mean, that’s fine if it was. But the film has been in the news for several months because of the endeavors of the filmmakers to deal with the NFL. And it’s been betting big award buzz for Will Smith.
True, the trailer doesn’t say this. But religious media outlets get promotional stuff for movies all the time. I suspect the press packet would have mentioned the emphasis on faith. If not, the marketers were strangely off their game.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear. I’m not criticizing them for not evangelizing; as I say in the post — “Don’t get me wrong.” I don’t want them to exploit this film for evangelism. I’m just surprised that this isn’t happening, and curious as to why. I’m baffled as to the lack of buzz about this film in the typical places, in the typical ways, as other football-related films in which the main character is motivated by Christian faith. It seems like, by now, it would have caught on.
Those are possibilities, sure. But just a couple of months ago I heard from friends about a campaign video for Woodlawn that was being shown to Christian film industry types, rallying them to “Trojan Horse the Gospel” on supporting new ready-made blockbusters that promote the Gospel. It was extreme to the point of self-parody. Seems like Concussion might be just what they were waiting for. Maybe, though, this kind of gospel portrait isn’t flattering enough. Or, maybe, as you suggest, that crowd is growing up. I’d prefer your suggestion to mine. I just haven’t seen much evidence yet.
Well, I didn’t think I was making an argument. I was sharing what felt like a sinking feeling, or a suspicion. Perhaps decades of evangelical propaganda have inclined me to brace myself for the worst. I’d like nothing better than to see things change. And I do see hopeful signs, especially from young filmmakers like Paul Harrill, Joshua Overbay, and Chad Hartigan, who are open to making films that explore questions related to Christian faith. But those film, so far, remain unknown to most evangelical moviegoers in spite of critical acclaim and some vigorous support from Christians who are passionate about art.
I do appreciate the challenge to be more charitable, and I admit that I write with frustration… frustration born of being stunned again and again by the narrow, self-congratulatory mediocrity that gets labeled as “Christian” and the God-glorifying art that gets pretty much ignored and even rejected for whatever reason.
I meant to write this post in a way that said, “I’m reading surprising things about this film. If they’re true, I wonder why I haven’t sensed any buzz about this film among evangelicals. That smells strange to me. I have some suspicions. But what do you think?”
My wife and I saw it and we’re really moved by it. We had watched a Frontline documentary on the subject. I thought the film did a good job capturing the issue. I don’t think it was heavy handed as the NFL did, in reality, do everything it could to cover this up. I didn’t notice it but I heard some sports radio guys joking on Will’s accent slipping. I enjoyed it and left conflicted about a game I played and still enjoy. The movie did a good job in creating that tension. You should see it.
And stop picking on the Christian Hallmark movies. They will always exist and they do impact some folks. Remember C.S. Lewis came to Christ because of an off handed remark by an atheist. Don’t get flustered with the Christian corny movies focus your critic on other works. You’ll have less stress that way lad.
Peace.
Even the most mediocre and shoddy creativity can touch and change people’s lives. That doesn’t mean we aren’t called to strive for excellence, and to heed criticism. Being passionate about excellence artistry, having a vocation as a critic, and being committed to seeking out work that reflects the glory of God, I would never equate my aversion to shoddy craftmanship with “stress.” It is my joy to consider the strengths and weaknesses of art in order to develop greater discernment and exercise the mind God gave me. I do, however, need to guard against cynicism, and I need to be careful not to come across as condescending. (Which, by the way… “lad”? Really?)
Thanks for sharing your experience of the film. I do hope to see it sometime. Probably when it hits the bargain-ticket theaters.
Hi from South Africa, Jeffrey. My wife and I watched Concussion last night and really enjoyed it. Compared to Facing the Giants it was refreshingly non-preachy …