‘Book of Daniel’ actually is a bit much
—Posted by Deanna Zammit Credit: Virginia Sherwood/NBC |
|
January 11, 2006 | Permalink |
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
(disclosure: I haven't seen the show, and I wouldn't have known about it without the hard work of AFA)
Eh, it was the pilot. They probably had to cram the major storylines into the one episode. I would wait until the second episode (of any show) to pass any judgment (heh).
There are a lot of Episcopalian ministers blogging about the show, and for the most part, they're fine with the message and the portrayal of Christianity, if not the show's quality.
Posted by: spinachdip | Jan 11, 2006 11:36:25 PM
I am a pastor, Baptist, who likewise finds the AFA too narrow in its crusade; however, I left the program feeling disappointed and offended. As a pastor, I understand better than many who watched the program-- whether or not followers of Christ-- that the life of faith is no guarantee of smooth sailing, only of God's presence, provision, and guidance during the journey. We pastors and our families experience our tragedies and failures and dysfunction, but this episode is far beyond any moral/ethical failures I have experienced, or see colleagues experiencing. Most pastors and their families in my relational universe know nothing of this level of dysfunction!
Further, I found none of the program's characters for whom the life of faith seemed to make any difference in their daily decisions. Strip away the collar, the church building, and the appearance of the Jesus character and ask "where's the faith?". The evidence of a vital faith is absent in the characters' characters.
While I understand that we believers provide too much legitimate grist for the criticism mill, I found the pilot's characters to be soap opera caricatures of the faithful. From the pictures drawn, I'm left to wonder if the writer is using the program as a vehicle to take his turn at the mill for personal reasons? How I regret that any positive contributions of the Christian faith were absent from the pilot episode.
For weeks to come, in those outside the faith who have seen this episode and whom I attempt to serve, I must expect to meet the niggling questions: Could he be an addict too? Is his family falling apart? How can I trust someone whose life is that messed up? If his life is like that pastor's life, what does he have to offer me?
Some may think I'm giving too much power to this single episode, but the very presence of the article on which I and at least one other comment makes a case for the possibility. Further, I know how the media influences perceptions of the Church and the Faith. Do you remember "The Last Temptation of Christ" and Mel Gibson's latest movie. For two months after those movies left theaters, I fielded questions and comments about the faith, some negative and some positive. The TV & movie media wield more influence than they are willing to be held accountable, I think.
Last comments:
FIRST, I have no persecution complex, but I think this pilot gives those with a bias against the Christian faith more ammunition to fire at those of us who confess the faith, no matter how genuinely-- and non-judgmentally-- we try to follow our Lord.
SECOND, I was NOT looking for a channel to express my disappointment in the program, don't usually participate in such commentary, and am surprised to find myself commenting today.
Posted by: bill | Jan 12, 2006 10:23:24 AM
TV characters are just strawmen for the opinions that the writers don't agree with?! In Hollywood?!?
Huh....what do you know about that. I guess there's a first time for everything.
Posted by: DanO | Jan 12, 2006 12:19:20 PM
It is a satire... it is nothing more than a Soap Opera style program played in the evening slot. The whole point of the show is to show every possible way a family could be dysfunctional. I see no difference between this show or Desperate Housewives. Both use over the top, extreme situations to draw the crowd in. Had it not been for the AFA expressing their opinion i never would have watched this show, and I look forward to watching it evolve over the next few episodes. I am almost positive that every week will be more over the top and "edgy" because it is entertainment. Noone would watch a show about a family that is functional and without problems, and if the show was not so over the top I would think it was more offensive because then it COULD actually happen. I don't think anyone in their right mind actually views clergy persons in this way. I am not going to freak out and start thinking that my Minister is a drug addict with an alcoholic wife and a gay son, adulterous son and lesbian secretary. The whole storyline is off the wall humor and if you do not enjoy it then don't watch.
Posted by: | Jan 12, 2006 1:13:38 PM
After seeing the commercials I tuned in on the first episode because I thought it would be a quirky, surreal show. While that may have been the goal, it left me with the impression that it is just another soap opera. The humor was weak, they tried to introduce too many characters at once, and Daniel's conversations with Jesus seemed to be an afterthought rather than a major part of his character.
Posted by: DaveMcKnight | Jan 12, 2006 7:04:57 PM
TV shows portraying people in real-life jobs but with stupid, unbelievable problems and situations?
... As an ad guy not dressing in drag to save rent while living in an all-women hi-rise in New York with Tom Hanks, I'm shocked.
Stupid? Yep. Insulting? Yep. Worth getting bent out of shape over? Nah. It'll be gone in half a season.
Posted by: David | Jan 13, 2006 8:50:09 PM
