And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. - Romans 1:28, ESV Friday, March 19 of 2017 was mine and my wife's fifth anniversary. It also happened to be the opening night of Disney's much-discussed live-action remake of their 1991 animated classic, Beauty and the Beast. As a massive Disney fan from childhood, my wife had been excited for months for this movie, and despite the avalanche of controversy stirring among the internet and social media, we went and saw the movie anyway. It was everything that she had hoped and dreamed it would be. As for me? It met expectations, which were that for two hours I'd get to sit in a relatively comfortable seat and try to tune out the sounds of squealing kids and annoyed parents.
But about that controversy: openly homosexual Director Bill Condon touted in an interview with magazine Attitude his inclusion of an "exclusively gay moment" in the movie, and it's been revealed in a much earlier interview with Passport Online that he wishes he were like Ian McKellen and "immediately go rip pages out of the Bible, but there don't seem to be any Bibles in the hotels I stay in these days." Needless to say, these sorts of statements did not sit well (and deservedly so!) with a number of evangelical Christians, many of which boycotted the film or even signed petitions to let Disney know of their displeasure with the inclusion of homosexual propaganda within the film. Armed with this knowledge, I watched the movie firsthand and can say with certainty that the amount of sexually-charged content in Beauty and the Beast has been greatly overblown - by both sides (it's unfortunate when a controversy starts before people have had the opportunity to even objectively observe what the controversy is over). The much-maligned content is as follows: Near the beginning of the film, villain Gaston discusses his infatuation with Belle, while the character LaFou (mockingly) says, "Who needs her when you've got us?" During the song, "No One [Does Anything] Like Gaston," a visual gag has LaFou wrapping himself in Gaston's arms before asking "too much?" Gaston replies, "Uh, yeah." Afterwards, Gaston asks LaFou, "Why hasn't a girl snatched you up yet?" To which LaFou responds, "They say I'm too clingy." The two look at each other awkwardly before the scene cuts. Later, during the storm of the castle, LaFou tells Mrs. Potts, "I used to be on Gaston's side, but we are so in a bad place right now." Mrs. Potts tells him, "You're too good for him anyway" (which could be taken in a strictly platonic way, given the context of the line). Three men are then attacked by the wardrobe and made to look like women, with dresses, wigs, and makeup. Two of them run screaming, while one looks at himself and smiles, seeming pleased with the result. Finally, in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene at the end of the movie, LaFou and the aformentioned cross-dressed man wind up together on the dance floor, looking somewhat surprised and perhaps a little uncomfortable - the "exclusively gay moment," that lasts less than two whole seconds. If that sounds like a lot of pro-homosexual content, remember that all of these situations constitute a handful of seconds in an hour-and-a-half long movie. And in all of them, the characters are played for laughs - LaFou is a weak-willed and confused fanboy, and Gaston seems comically ignorant to any attraction on LaFou's part. The other (unnamed) man probably gets a whole thirty seconds of screen time throughout the entire movie, meaning there's no character development for him at all. Most of the kids laughed at these scenes. If anything, they didn't normalize or promote homosexuality - they seemed like a mere extension of the characters in the cartoon, and if anything, made them look decidedly abnormal - these are the weird people in the movie whose antics are supposed to amuse us. If this was Disney's attempt to normalize homosexuality, it's a strange one indeed - making the two "gay" characters punchlines to be laughed at. It's true that getting people to laugh at a person's moral failings is one way to disarm them from getting angry at or decrying them, but at the same time, it's equally destructive as it teaches the audience to point and laugh, which reduces them to freaks and weirdos. That's an equally un-Christian-like response as it would be to approve of homosexual behavior. We don't watch movies and say, "Ha! It's so funny that man is divorced!" or "Isn't it hilarious how that woman just cheated on her spouse with another man?" or "Hysterical! That guy just got caught in his pornography addiction!" Why would we then laugh at homosexuality? We should accurately assess the gravity of the sin and be appropriately appalled by it, but never reduce the person to anything lower than the beloved creation of God that he or she is. Beauty and the Beast makes homosexuals little more than a joke. I would have rather Disney removed the offending scenes altogether - and I feel strongly there will soon be LBGTQ+-affirming groups that wouldn't disagree for that very reason. But even if the regressive Left decided that this was, in fact, a triumph of pro-LGBTQ+ propaganda (spoiler alert: it's not), should we be surprised at this from a vehemently secular corporation like Disney? I think we should respond with a yawn and a shrug, because, in fact, this movement is just one point on a much longer line of cultural Marxism that Disney has been pushing for decades. Let's consider some of the animated films: The Lion King presented us with a subtext of aggressive secular naturalism. Pocahontas escalated by using pantheism as a key plot device. Hercules and Mulan understandably incorporate mythological religions into their stories, but nonetheless have to be approached carefully by Christian families. Most recently The Princess and the Frog frequently depicts the practice of animistic Voodoo as a crucial part of New Orleans culture. So, we're offended by a maybe-not-maybe-so gay supporting character, but not by a main villain who is granted magical powers in exchange for offering a blood sacrifice to a clutch of mask-wearing demons? Let me be clear: I would trust a young child with this remake of Beauty and the Beast long before I would find it appropriate to show them The Princess and the Frog, a movie that made me slightly uncomfortable even as an adult. This is not to diminish the discernment practiced by conscientious Christian parents who plan to do otherwise; this is an individual decision that shouldn't be taken lightly, and most importantly, we need to be respectful of each other's decisions. As Paul writes in relation to eating previously "forbidden" meats in Romans 14:3 (ESV), "Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgement on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him." We all are on a journey, being sanctified in Christ, and many of us are at different points and may have different convictions. Despite that, we (of course) should never be approving of sexual immorality in the church - but we cannot expect the world to practice the same discernment. In 1 Corinthians 5:9-10 (ESV), Paul writes, "I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people - not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would have to go out of the world." Disney is not and will not be the only worldly institution to hold moral positions we disagree with, and we should not be shocked when it does. Ultimately, restraining ourselves or our children from watching a relatively innocuous fantasy film does little to establish a strong foundation of biblical morality within the family. We should not be scared of Disney, because it's not Disney's job to teach Bibical morality. Sure, many of their films have a message to them - most of them positive (Beauty and the Beast's main plot, included). And while it is dangerous to take as a firm promise, Solomon's words in Proverbs 22:6 are certainly wise to consider: "Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it" (ESV). Families that are grounded will not be taken by surprise at the few moments of Beauty and the Beast that go against Biblical morality, and I think those moments would, even then, elicit little more than an eye-roll. However, I applaud those that feel convicted to quietly refrain from taking part in viewing such movies, and I wholeheartedly respect that decision. Although I would caution those people to be consistent in their practice. There is a tendency for us to draw lines in the sand we're not tempted to cross, just so we can feel "holier" when we've already compromised in so many other ways. You who refuse to watch two men dance for two seconds: do you watch movies of action heroes that bed women indiscriminately? Do you watch sitcoms where talk of immoral sexual relationships are a frequent topic of conversation? Do you listen to music or engage yourself in video games that treat women as less than the wonderful creation of God that they are? Paul warned the church about such legalistic practices in Colossians 2:23 (ESV): "These indeed have an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh." This sort of hypocrisy is not lost on the world around us - and neither will it be lost on our children. Be alert, be knowledgable, be vigilant, be consistent, and be holy, for our Father in Heaven is Holy, Holy, Holy. As for my thoughts on the movie itself - it was actually very good. I enjoyed the seamless mix of live-action and computer-generated cinematography and the more mature, fleshed out story behind Belle and the Beast, but I don't think it does quite enough to distinguish itself from the animated film before. It's a project for the fans more than it is a must-see for all audiences. However, the best part is this: I can now use this as leverage when I ask Courtney to go see Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi...
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Clifton J. Gardner lives in Birmingham, Alabama with his wife, Courtney. He is a Registered Nurse, musician, and writer, as well as an active member of Ezra Baptist Church in Oak Grove, Alabama. Archives
January 2017
Categories |