Choosing To Be Contrarian On “The Chosen”
Way back in 1965, George Stevens took the Biblical story of Jesus to the big screen, and the ensuing film The Greatest Story Ever Told became something of a Hollywood legend for the very earthly reasons of it’s budget. One of the most expensive movies ever shot in the United States, with a who’s who cast and cameos by dozens more, and even a good old fashioned studio lawsuit, Stevens reportedly shot enough film to wrap around the Moon to try and get his Biblical epic to be the Next Big Thing. It was a flop at the box office, panned by critics, and today is mostly forgotten about except for the occasional listing for over-the-top filmmaking, although it did garner five Academy Awards mostly for the sheer audacity of it.
While Biblical epics were not uncommon in Hollywood, and 1950’s Hollywood was awash in them, for every “Ben-Hur” or “Ten Commandments” that set a high bar with their filmmaking, treatment of matters of faith, and that made good financially, there were several “Esther And The King” and “King David” disasterpieces. The modern era has also proved hit or miss for what now are mostly referred to as “faith-based” films. While Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” hit a religious nerve and drove box office sales to the heavens, other efforts like Darren Aronofsky’s “Noah” and a re-make of “Ben-Hur” were crucified at the box office by an uninterested audience.
So, for a Biblical epic to find major success, and mostly on its own, and to be crowdfunded to the tune of $40 million without any major studio or media help, sounds like something of a modern miracle. But it isn’t a miracle; it is the business model of “The Chosen“, which has become something of a phenomenon. The Wall Street Journal details the rise of “The Chosen” both in audience and in its unique business model:
The success of the series is a powerful reminder to Hollywood that faith-focused projects can sometimes become breakthrough hits. But what makes “The Chosen” even more of an outlier is the way it is supercharging the crowdfunding model to sustain production through multiple seasons. Though “The Chosen” is free to watch, viewers have poured $40 million and counting into its production budget, enough to pay for three out of a planned seven seasons. The costs of building the new production facilities, on a 1,200-acre camp owned by the Salvation Army, are being covered by a smaller group of the show’s fans.
Producers say viewership was sluggish when the first season premiered for a fee in 2019. But the audience spiked when they made the series free on a “Chosen” app, now the show’s main distribution hub, and viewers continued to multiply during the pandemic’s lockdown months. The show has been translated into 50 languages, and is licensed to video services from Amazon to Peacock. Producers estimate that its 16 episodes have been viewed 312 million times. Now the “Chosen” audience is set to converge in person in movie theaters.
Starting Dec. 1, about 1,700 theaters will feature screenings of a “Chosen” Christmas special, including musical performances and a new episode in which Mother Mary (a series character played by Vanessa Benavente) flashes back to her son’s birth. Distributor Fathom Events, known for one- or two- day releases of classic movies, live opera and other specialty fare, expanded the “Chosen” event to 10 days. Ticket sales are approaching $6 million so far, putting “Christmas with ‘The Chosen’” on track to be Fathom’s bestseller ever, according to chief executive Ray Nutt.
There are two parts to the story of the “The Chosen.” The first is the mold-breaking production and crowdsourcing. Generally speaking, this strikes me as a fine thing, letting folks not only be a part of their entertainment but to actively support and invest in things they want to watch. As long as such crowd sourcing is on the up and up and everyone involved is transparent this is a fine model that should, theoretically, allow passion projects to find life outside of a Hollywood that seems rather bereft of fresh ideas as of late. The second part is that whether you want to call it Biblical, or “faith-based”, or whatever else, Christian programing sells in America when done well and it connects with the intended audience.
But this isn’t a review of “The Chosen” because, while I’m curious if the business model holds up and/or is replicable, I am not going to watch it.
I don’t watch direct interpretations of Biblical events in film, tv, or other media. You can call that contrarian, or curmudgeonly, or whatever else but it is another “c” word that is the most applicable: consistency. I haven’t watched a film or show portraying Biblical times and characters in a long time and am not going to start now. That wasn’t really a conscious decision, nor can I pinpoint exactly when it happened. It was solidified right around the time “The Passion of The Christ” was becoming the biggest thing in American Christian entertainment since the advent of televangelists.
Let’s pull up and park right here before we continue for a disclaimer that I pray you will hear me carefully on. The following opinions on faith are mine and mine alone. The fact I don’t write about my personal faith a whole lot is mostly to not besmirch that faith with an association with my various sins and failings. I’m with Johnny Cash, in that I claim only to be a “c- Christian” trying to muddle through as best I can. But though I’m not publicly overt with it, I do take it seriously. I’ve studied religion and theology for the better part of 20 years now, both academically and just because I enjoy it. I’ve often mentioned I learned more about leadership and managing people studying religion than anything else because you learn the nature of people, how they think, and what motivates them. While I don’t get anything from or partake in the things I’m going to talk about here doesn’t mean I think no one should, or shouldn’t get something spiritual from them. Those sorts of things are between them and their God, and short of either asking my opinion on the matter I’ll keep it to myself. As are the beliefs of other folks of other religions or lack thereof. I have, and forever will, adamantly uphold their right to worship or not as they see fit, as is the right of all folks everywhere, as is their right to disagree with me.
Now, having said all that, about Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of The Christ.” I have never nor ever will watch it. It is one of the few movies I’ve drawn such a line on. This was by far the minority opinion in my circles of Christian friends both at the time and currently, but I am unmoved in my opinion. Hindsight has taught us much about Gibson himself and folks can factor his truly appalling behavior and frankly bizarre personal religious beliefs however you want. But even before that, I greatly disliked churches bringing him in to promote the film in person, and the scenes of churches renting out whole theaters to shuffle the faithful through the box office. I get it; it was about Jesus, it was moving to folks, it was marketed to them since the major studios wouldn’t touch it. Folks connected with and got much out of that movie and many will testify their faith is the better for it, and good for them. But call it contrarian or whatever else you want, that was the point where I was out on faith via major motion picture and I won’t bore you with the ins and outs of my particular issues with it other than the standing policy has been observed mostly before and religiously since.
So, no, not going to watch the portrayal of Jesus in “The Chosen” either. Nothing personal against what Dallas Jenkins and company are working on down there in Texas. For what it is worth, I abstained from his father’s “Left Behind” books and films that were all the rage way back when in the non-biblical times of the 1990s as well for many of the same reasons. The holes in Jenkins’ co-author Tim LaHaye’s eschatology game, not to mention plot development, not withstanding I felt then as I do now that raging popularity just doesn’t feel like a good path for working out your faith. I wish him well and hope “The Chosen” audience feels they get their money’s worth. I really do hope this business model turns out to be a positive thing in entertainment as a whole. But the Christian faith survived and thrived for nearly 2,000 years without any more audio/visual enhancement than folks talking to each other, so call me old fashioned but I’ll stick to that. At least for my own personal faith, there isn’t any need for an app for that, let alone a movie or tv series.
King David! For what it’s worth, our church told us not to go see it. It warned of getting a lot of stuff wrong and there was nudity.
Since then, I’ve also learned that the movie was a stinker. If you read the stories, there’s a lot of good stuff in there (and, yeah, nudity) but if you can’t make the Goliath scene the tentpole, you done messed up.
I mean, if a *SPORTING* company makes a better David/Goliath scene for a freaking *COMMERCIAL*, you should just go back down to the minors and let someone else up there.Report
Props for getting “Tentpole” and “nudity” in the same sentence without things going terribly, tragically wrong.Report
Seriously. Compare to what they did in the movie.
That is a crappy promoter.
That is a crappy Goliath.
That is a crappy fight.
Seriously.
I am still pissed off about that.Report
That’s because this was in production before they had time to read/copy/steal from Joseph Heller’s ‘God Knows’ which came out in 1984.Report
You’ve definitely written an article about a decision you’ve made without explaining why you made it. No one can take that away from you.Report
There’s probably a post buried in there somewhere about biblical-themed movies in general, which I would be happy to read.Report
I’m with you on Biblical movies with Jesus as the main character. I just don’t think they can be pulled off – not as cinema/film. I think you can do a sort of documentary where the character is a live-action stand-in for the narrator.
I think there’s more room for art where Jesus is off-stage, like, say, Ben Hur or Quo Vadis (for classics) or even Anne Rice’s depiction of the flight to Egypt which is biblical, but not biblically narrated (though it does get a bit dodgy with toddler Jesus – but hey – lots of great dodgy toddler Jesus art/music).
So, I’d like to see more art which accounts for Jesus off-stage (in the fullest sense)… and there have been some recent films where this has been done well (A hidden life, Bella and a others come to mind)… but other than the documentary placeholder, I just don’t think it is really reasonable to try to ‘model’ Jesus in a script.
Finally, since we’re *not* talking about The Passion of the Christ, I *won’t* say that I find the film really is about The Passion and counter-intuitively Christ is appropriately ‘off-stage’ … but since we’re not talking about it, I’ll leave it at that.
I’m ambivalent about marketing for religious art/movies… the relationship between Patron/Grifter has been fraught through the ages. And because my role as the pointy-end-of-the-offline-Catholic-spear is to watch bad popular art (usually left/liberal) I’ll probably watch an episode(?) of The Chosen — for science.Report
The Passion of the Christ gets away with it I think because it can be looked at as an ultra high budget passion play. As ‘big’ as it was it dodges the question of artistic merit. You can make the case that it isn’t the point anymore than it would be for a living stations of the cross. All but the most intentionally secular of audiences will intuitively get that.
An interesting point of comparison might be The Message. I saw it in a world religions class I took long ago. I wouldn’t call it good in any normal sense but I actually thought the attempted adherence to Muslim prohibition on depictions of Muhammad helped more than it hurt. As much as the movie is about Muhammad the cinematic focus is on his followers.Report
Yeah, that’s a really good point and probably an even better way to put it about The Passion.
Haven’t seen The Message, but sounds like conforming theory.Report
It’s long as hell. And there’s definitely some moments where it sounds like an episode of Lassie. ‘What’s that the prophet said? That we should flee Mecca to seek refuge in Ethiopia?’
But where that isn’t happening it gets close to the standards of the golden age biblical epics, which IMO is pretty good as far as the religious film genre goes.Report
But then good religious epics are about the chariots we flipped along the way…Report
He’s also offstage in The Life of Brian.Report
Yes, and it would have been insufferably bad if He were anywhere else.
The Sermon on the Mount Scene reads better as satire than sarcasm.Report
Yeah, the problem with writing The Man Himself is that you’re going to get it wrong according to a good third of your audience no matter what you do.
Heck, I was in a church play back in 1991 and Jesus only showed up with his back to the audience for the crucifixion and, in the script, he was doing his lines in standard English and the guy changed his lines to the KJV version when he did it live.
sigh
Anyway, it’s best to do the stories that were off to the side and show how much that Guy over there was changing things at the time. Show the ripples from the stone thrown into the pond.Report
Exactly.Report
“I’m with you on Biblical movies with Jesus as the main character. I just don’t think they can be pulled off – not as cinema/film.”
Feel the need to give a shout out to Last Temptation here.Report
I was wondering why Chaim Potok was trending.
Seriously, it’s quite a good book; https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01BCEPO58/Report
The considerable extracurricular baggage aside, The Passion of the Christ was a brilliant film. I say that as a non-believer.
Your stance touches on an adjacent topic – can you separate art from the artist and, if not, where do you draw the line?Report
Bible stories were popular choices during the first half of the 20th century because nearly everybody knew enough of the story to get what was going on. Their main problem is that you can tell many of them in not a lot of time and need filler to get them to movie length. Like the entire story of Jesus from beginning to end could be done in two hours or maybe two and half hours and hit all of the highlights. The other Bible stories are going to be shorter in film form unless you add a lot of filler to make things movie length. Noah is an example of the later, same with the Ten Commandments.
These days the problem with Bible movies is Culture War. During the first half of the 20th century, nearly everybody in the United States was nominally some type of Christian besides the Jews and atheists and agnostics kept their mouth shut. These days you have a much more diverse religious demography and lots of Americans who are entirely non-religious. A few months ago, a young woman in my social circle, didn’t know what the Golden Calf from the story of the Exodus was. This means that Bible films are niche products rather than for the general public. Comic book movies are where the modern universal mythos are in the United States.Report
One interesting thing I’ve noticed about Bible movies is that every attempt to turn the Book of Esther into a movie seems to have failed even when Bible movies could make big bucks with the general public, My guess is that they felt compelled to add God into a story that doesn’t really have much religion. If they told the story of Esther as a glamorous epic movie with colorful clothing, palace intrigue, and sex it might work better.Report
1. Tell the story as it is actually written and include all of the sex and violence
2. Appeal to an actual audience
I mean, seriously: The Elijah story? There is some good shit in the Elijah stuff. Ahab and Jezebel, the challenge to Baal, the bottomless jar of food and bottomless jug of oil, the scene with the earthquake and the tornado, the whole “dogs will lick your blood” thing? And how he didn’t, you know, actually *DIE*???
That’s not a movie. That’s a season of Netflix television right there. Make Jezebel a name and give her a body double and give the audience decapitations and tits and you’re going to have the best word of mouth ever. Have pastors say “I can’t recommend it… but… it is *TECHNICALLY* accurate, though it enjoys being lurid far too much for me to call it ‘Biblical'” and you’ll get word of mouth like you wouldn’t believe.
End the show with Elisha walking away with the mantle and have him hear some kids making fun of his baldness. Final shot is him looking at the kids.
Seriously. This is a license to print money.Report
“Are you laughing because my head is ..” (on go the sunglasses) “… bear?”Report
But have you seen Gibson’s Apocalypto? I recently rewatched it. Quite interesting.Report