Part III in the Series “Movies and the Values War.”  Click here for the first article and here for the second.

Is it possible to infuse great stories with the virtues and values of Godliness — and all that that implies — without diminishing the level of entertainment, the power of the premise or the quality of the characterizations?  Absolutely!

A paradigm shift from evolution (and man as a beast) to creation (and man as God in embryo) seems revolutionary at one level but is in fact subtle and sufficient at another. I am convinced that the use of virtues and values to evaluate a story, measure a theme or define a character can significantly enhance a motion picture and ultimately provide a more positive, rich and satisfying experience for the audience. [More about the Matrix of Virtues and Values when we announce Audience Alliance Motion Picture Studios on November 17.]

Yesterday I was in the heart of Hollywood. I attended a private “work-in-progress” screening at Universal Studios. Friends of mine asked me to look in on the movie they are making. I’m glad I did. It reminded me — in the midst of my tirade over the absence of virtue and values in so many “Hollywood movies” and the prevalence of films that reflect moral relativism — I need to reiterate that there are myriad talented “Hollywood insiders” who struggle to make excellent films that delight and entertain without an unexpected ambush. How often must we lament,” except for that one scene”?

Fly Me to the Moon, the film I watched at Universal, is going to be wonderful. It is being produced in revolutionary digital 3-D animation for general release. It is a great story. The quality of the animation rivals Pixar. The clarity of the polarized 3-D images will have everyone reaching out to touch the characters when they fly close. They “fly” because the main characters are three — are you ready for this — cute “fly kids” who want a great adventure and decide to stow away on Apollo 11. Trust me. You and your family will love this movie when it comes to theaters next year.

The “fly kids” from the upcoming movie Fly Me to the Moon.

So what’s my point? Simply this. My “Hollywood friends” -— with over a hundred years of accumulated experience in the mainstream of the film and television business — had to go outside the system to get this movie made! And it took them years! Even now, with the evidence clearly on the screen, Hollywood Studios are reluctant to “put their arms around” this 20 million-dollar picture. Amazing!

There is a great need for an alternative place where value-oriented filmmakers can go to get films made outside the Hollywood system. There simply must be an alternative motion picture studio dedicated to entertainment with values. There is a great need — and huge demand — for highly entertaining motion pictures in all genres that cater to the virtues and values of a broad and largely un-served audience.

Still in the heart of Hollywood later that day I sat with a woman who has been working in Hollywood for 26 years. She has endless energy, great talent and though we share very different religious and political ideologies we have been great friends for a long time. She is in postproduction on a $52,000,000 “family film.” She has relentlessly pursued her project for almost four years and finally gotten it produced.

She was fortunate in getting the backing of a powerful independent production company that tends to favor “family friendly fare.” The company is a curious mix of inside influence and outside money, but the other partners in the deal are hard-core Hollywood. Since she must continue to work with these people I have omitted titles, names and obscured telling details.

Horror stories about getting movies made in Hollywood are endless, of course. This woman’s reflections and reactions to an alternative way to get good movies made may — or may not — be unique. There follows a transcript of a few of her comments used by permission. 

I said to her, “I’m writing an article and would love your ‘insider’ perspective on Hollywood.”

“Everyone lies about everything all the time.” Those were the first words out of her mouth. “That,” she said, “defines Hollywood.” We talked for an hour.

She went on to relate an experience she had at a Hollywood studio only the day before.

Listening to this producer I was reminded of a conversation with a documentary filmmaker who recently returned from the Middle East. He has become increasingly involved with filmmaking and ever closer to the heart of Hollywood. He made the best — though most controversial — analogy of Hollywood I’ve ever heard:

I introduced my friend, the Hollywood producer, to Audience Alliance Motion Picture Studios. The next morning I received the following e-mail.

I began this article by asking, “Is it possible to infuse great stories with virtues and values without depreciating the premise or the power?” The answer is yes! You have heard it from me. You have heard it from a Hollywood veteran — albeit “estranged insider.” You can be sure that it is possible. 

On November 17, I will announce the public launch of Audience Alliance Motion Picture Studios and the Audience Alliance Academy. It is based on a simple idea. The Audience is the most powerful part of the motion picture industry. The power of a single ticket — when organized into a broad alliance of people who love movies and want movies that reflect their values — will create a new major motion picture studio. This bold idea has never been possible until now. But the convergence of digital technology, the Internet and growing disenchantment with the values of Hollywood make this —cliche’ notwithstanding — a powerful and inevitable idea whose time has come.

Last week I wrote about the “anti-religion religion” of Hollywood. The next article in this series will examine some specific films you “could have liked a lot” and how lifting otherwise offensive movies through a matrix of virtue and value can make an enormous difference. The moment we talk about how to avoid “an ambush” on the silver screen and making movies without “one or two bad scenes” the MPAA “big three” pop to mind.  Language. Violence and Sexual Content.  We’ll deal with each of these in turn next time.

Of even greater concern is the increasing absence of “godliness” as defined and discussed in part II.  There are precious few examples of characters in movies who turn to faith or prayer or God when crisis strikes. That’s what most real people do. We don’t expect James Bond to pray for courage before leaping a chasm in a rocket sled or Spiderman to seek divine intervention in his quest to save the city. But it is difficult for “common folks” in the flyover states to identify with a father’s lost child or mother’s wounded son when they do not turn to prayer or faith or plead with God.

For all but a very few characters depicted in movies religion is not a part of their lives and often held in open contempt. Clergy are most often depicted as evil, duplicitous and hypocritical. [Sadly, of course, the gravely disappointing high profile cases of celebrated clergy like the recent Ted Haggard incident affirm the cynicism of the anti-religion religion. Without excusing hypocrisy at any level, the few dishonored should be overwhelmed by the reality of the unsung and unspoken thousands who serve with faith, integrity and goodness]

But in the movies — and on TV — hours and hours of the worst kinds of crisis are depicted with nary a glimpse heavenward. How could trainer Frankie (Clint Eastwood) kill his young friend Maggie (Hilary Swank) in Million Dollar Baby without the slightest consideration of a greater purpose in life than avoiding pain or at least a moment of prayerful reflection?

We shouldn’t wonder. The answer is self-evident. Most of the characters who populate Hollywood movies are reflections of the people who create them. Both characters and creators believe in man not God.

Next time: A look at language, sex and violence and lifting stories through the virtue value matrix proposed by the Audience AllianceMotion Picture Studios. Watch for the announcement November 17. You have the power. We can make a difference.