I went to a red-carpet event last night. You know—special premier at the movies and all with stars and producers—that sort of thing.

The stars were shining brightly—breaking through wisps of clouds fighting to race past the moon, and I thought about staying outside, but it was a premier, and I along with other “Christian” leaders had been invited to a special screening. I have a healthy distrust of commercialism. If you bring religion into the mix it gets even worse—disgusting even. The commodification of Christianity is a sin on the darkest scale, for it takes something wholly real, absolutely important, and reduces it to a glossy lie of mass appeal—tis kitsch at its worst; the deathly stench of bullshit. This is the paraphernalia of the trade, the Passion nails on a leather string, the implicating “Smoking or Nonsmoking?” bumperstickers with pictures of hell, skin-deep “inspirational” books with pretty pictures on the cover; all bullshit.

“There is something called Quality, and it’s real,” it’s not style, said Pirsig. The movie I watched last night, End of the Spear, is an attempt to capture the film market through the power of Christian conservatism. That’s the problem. I don’t mind it if captures the film market, but please take the route of superb cinematography, sharp dialogue, and intelligent story telling. Don’t ask me to promote it to my church or email 50 of my acquaintances; don’t ask me to support it because it was written by “Christians.”

And what of the film? It doesn’t know what to do with itself. My impression is this: the directors want to appeal to everyone, so they lay off on the meaningful depth of the Christian motivation to love and serve others. They want to appeal to Christians, so they leave some religious stuff in and try to make everyone look nice and martyred. Both attempts fail and the film falls on its face in a swirl of confusion and ambiguity. The missionaries come off as naïve imperial buffoons, who have wonderful intentions no doubt, but zero intelligence. The character development is stolid, and realism at the ending of the film is laughable (over 20 years have passed and certain characters show no signs of aging). I just realized I haven’t even given a plot description: the movie is the story of Steve Saint (think Jim Elliot), a missionary who was killed by an indigenous tribe in South America. His wife, and some of the wives of other men who were killed, continued to work with the tribe and eventually the tribe was transformed and began trying to share the Gospel with other tribes. Read a book on the subject, it is a good story in that format.

I think the crowning irony of the entire thing is an addendum that came to our attention at the end of the movie in the Q & A session. The lead character, the heroic missionary’s son himself, is played by Chad Allen, who happens to be an outspoken homosexual. Note: I don’t think there is anything wrong with him playing the part, but it makes it ludicrously funny, especially considering the sort of people the movie is pandering to.

Of course the deal isn’t rotten all the way through, half of the profits from the film will be donated to an organization that “helps” indigenous peoples. No comment. What do you think?