Was it right for Disney to cut all the Christian content from 'A Wrinkle in Time'?

[whirlingmerc]

That is reaching, IMO.

I doubt Oprah has that much influence all by herself in such a movie. Sometimes the obvious explanation is indeed the most accurate one - and in this case, it is that biblical references just aren't very appealling these days. Particularly when it comes to commercial reach, which is always a main concern for Disney.

I understand that some people may feel disconfort at it, but the fact remains that the current cultural climate (IMO wisely) emphasizes inclusiveness over Christian pride. It just isn't very realistic to expect Disney to ignore that reality.

Whether Disney or Argo, seems like if there is a classic and audience expect it to be somewhat true to the original intent something is amiss

 

[whirlingmerc]

Typically, Hollywood movies have character arcs where characters repent and change their minds and behaviors, while replacing God as Savior. Many films have just one person rescuing everything/everyone rather than relying on God or communing with God's people as a team.

functional atheism / humanism?

 

[suncowiam]

This thread just shows how you can never please everyone.

 

[Jesster]

It looks boring anyway... both the movie and the book.

 

[BilliardsBall]

functional atheism / humanism?

Precisely. "Self-actualization", which is fine to a point, but where most people pray under duress or when blessed greatly, movie characters do not.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Her opinion on a Harry Potter book she had read was, "It's a nice story but there's nothing underneath it."

I feel like this is an opinion wrought from a decidedly Christian mindset. In other words, Harry Potter had nothing going for it in her eyes because it didn't explicitly espouse Christian values or Christian story motifs. But Harry Potter has loads of "moral to the story" in its own right.

It doesn't matter how old Christianity is, or how established, in no way does Christianity have a monopoly on meaning, symbolism or good intentions. No religion does.

 

[SkepticThinker]

They have yet to make just one movie that is based on a Stephen King book that doesn't totally suck and/or isn't way off from what happens in the book. And you expect better from them?

The Green Mile was pretty darned close.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The Green Mile was pretty darned close.

That is one I actually haven't seen or read. But I remember the VHS being two cassettes, so I wouldn't think they cut too much out.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That is one I actually haven't seen or read. But I remember the VHS being two cassettes, so I wouldn't think they cut too much out.

Yeah, it's 3 hours and 9 minutes!
It's pretty much the only movie I've ever seen that almost exactly followed the book. There are a few minor differences that don't really affect the plot all that much, and probably only bother anal retentives like myself.

IMO, it's well worth the read ... and the watch.

 

[idav]

I didn’t really consider Wrinkle In Time Christian. L’Engle was an Einstein fan which inspired some of the sciency stuff of the book. The book even attributes Jesus equal to Buddha Ghandi and Einstein. Fighting forces of darkness is not exclusive to Christianity.

 

[Muffled]

I believe most media today works to marginalize Christianity. However it may simply be a matter of marketing the movie as science fiction. I am reading the book now so I can enjoy the richness of the literary quotes and Biblical references.

 

[Muffled]

It isn't often when anything coming out of Hollywood accurately, or even remotely, preserves historical or religious contexts for any book/event covered in it's movies. One has to remember that it's just the director's vision, and serves as nothing more than entertainment.

I believe the director is hired by the studio. No doubt Hollywood tends to be anti Christian but Disney is not as obverse as others.

 

[Muffled]

Why does a movie have to follow a book?

Isn’t something original more beneficial and beautiful?

Creativity is better than a copy.

Just read the book if you want that story.

I believe quite often the movie will spike an interest in the book. It actually can be sneaky that way because the movie doesn't let on that the book will have Christian content.

 

[robocop (actually)]

The book was filled with scripture quotes and the author one of the inklings, a group that included CS Lewis and Tolkien. Enter Hollywood and Oprah and the end product has lots of clever special effects,

Creative and clever it was. It was sad that the Christian content was pretty much completely removed. While the original book was filled with scripture quotes and many literature quotes given in this version, the original intent disappeared. Her opinion on a Harry Potter book she had read was, "It's a nice story but there's nothing underneath it."

Madeline L'engle criticized Harry Potter as not having enough of a point and substance, but she might have stronger striticism of this movie. This movie misses the point of the original and passed over the Christian content more in favor of Oprah's views even writing in her hero Maya Angelo and skipping over the original Christian intent of the book

In the original, the father reminds his daughter 'All things work out for good to those who love God' but this version puts the emphasis not on God but on your inner self.

Am I wrong?

I thought it still had a lot of Christian content, and Christians should be all things to all people as well.

 

[Milton Platt]

The book was filled with scripture quotes and the author one of the inklings, a group that included CS Lewis and Tolkien. Enter Hollywood and Oprah and the end product has lots of clever special effects,

Creative and clever it was. It was sad that the Christian content was pretty much completely removed. While the original book was filled with scripture quotes and many literature quotes given in this version, the original intent disappeared. Her opinion on a Harry Potter book she had read was, "It's a nice story but there's nothing underneath it."

Madeline L'engle criticized Harry Potter as not having enough of a point and substance, but she might have stronger striticism of this movie. This movie misses the point of the original and passed over the Christian content more in favor of Oprah's views even writing in her hero Maya Angelo and skipping over the original Christian intent of the book

In the original, the father reminds his daughter 'All things work out for good to those who love God' but this version puts the emphasis not on God but on your inner self.

Am I wrong?

I'm an atheist, but I can still understand your point. I have seen a number of books turned into movies and have been disappointed that the movies strayed so far from the book. I don't think everything translates into film equally as well, and movie goers want a different experience than book readers, tho.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I'm an atheist, but I can still understand your point. I have seen a number of books turned into movies and have been disappointed that the movies strayed so far from the book. I don't think everything translates into film equally as well, and movie goers want a different experience than book readers, tho.

It was a fun movie... just not as faithful to the original as I would have liked

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

It looks boring anyway... both the movie and the book.

We had to read it in school. We never read anything truly awesome. They were all stories to fall asleep to.

 

[Altfish]

The book was filled with scripture quotes and the author one of the inklings, a group that included CS Lewis and Tolkien. Enter Hollywood and Oprah and the end product has lots of clever special effects,

Creative and clever it was. It was sad that the Christian content was pretty much completely removed. While the original book was filled with scripture quotes and many literature quotes given in this version, the original intent disappeared. Her opinion on a Harry Potter book she had read was, "It's a nice story but there's nothing underneath it."

Madeline L'engle criticized Harry Potter as not having enough of a point and substance, but she might have stronger striticism of this movie. This movie misses the point of the original and passed over the Christian content more in favor of Oprah's views even writing in her hero Maya Angelo and skipping over the original Christian intent of the book

In the original, the father reminds his daughter 'All things work out for good to those who love God' but this version puts the emphasis not on God but on your inner self.

Am I wrong?

Disney ruin virtually everything they touch, so why not this too?

 

[Twilight Hue]

This thread just shows how you can never please everyone.

Well the sjw anyways.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Disney ruin virtually everything they touch, so why not this too?

I remember Disney in its heyday. It was a rare special treat for me each week. My family got together, we all made a humongous bowl of popcorn had soda and sat around the television for the Disney movie.

Now I don't care if it goes out of business. It never was the same after Walt died.