Church Sues Hollywood
Posted by Todd Rhoades in Controversy on Jul 26th, 2011 | 5 commentsDateline Hollywood: Â This just in from the Hollywood Reporter: Â A chain of evangelical Christian mega-churches (my note: Â we tend to call this a “denomination”) is attempting to halt the film, Salvation Boulevard, which played at Sundance this year and has just been released theatrically.
The subject of the film has the potential to generate some controversy — it mixes politics and religion. So too does the lawsuit from the Church of God — the plaintiff claims to have copyrighted a design based on the Christian cross symbol and intends to stop it from being shown in the film.
Salvation Boulevard sports a stellar cast (Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinnear, Jennifer Connelly, Marisa Tomei and Ed Harris) and tells the story of a former Deadhead married to a devout wife who discovers their mega-church’s pastor has committed a sinful act that will be protected at all costs. The film, produced by Mandalay Vision, was snapped up by IFC/Sony for $1.5 million after getting some laughs at Sundance this year.
The satire may not be going over too well with the evangelical community.
The Church of God, a Tennessee-based organization that runs a number of mega-churches throughout the United States, has filed a lawsuit against Mandalay, IFC, Sony, and Comcast for distributing a feature film that shows a design alleged to be legally protected.
Below you can see the Church of God’s logo and the logo that appears in the movie:
(Looks like a pretty direct rip-off to me).
The Church of God says in a lawsuit filed on Thursday in Tennessee federal court  that use of the Cross Mark by the defendants constitutes willful and deliberate commercial infringement upon its exclusive rights. The church is asking for an injunction and further monetary damages.
via Church Sues to Block Sundance Hit ‘Salvation Boulevard’ – Hollywood Reporter.
Thoughts?
Todd
5 Responses to “ “Church Sues Hollywood”
Leave a Reply
I don’t think the lawsuit will accomplish much more than boosting publicity for the satire.
Hollywood is so edgy and daring. Wonder how things would play differently if the setting was the Muslim community instead of Christian. It’d be hilarious, I’m sure.
But then again, the satire is just intended to reach another audience than the church crowd. We all need to just settle down and have a sense of humor. After all, God does like a good joke and a laugh.
Hollywood knows full-well the value & importance of a brand name & reputation. And protecting your good name seems pretty important to God … after all, it’s #3 in the commandments!
“After all, God does like a good joke and a laugh.” … I’m not disputing this, just wondering how you know this for a fact.
Well, I don’t have any specific verse that I was thinking of when I wrote that. I guess I was probably remembering what Steve Miller wrote about the NASCAR prayer when he said, “Jesus was not a stick in the mud opposed to having a fun time.”
I guess my take on Hollywood doing a satire on a church is along the line of a preacher making a joking prayer at a race. It’s all in good fun. No real harm done.
As I reread my response I figure I should clarify where I am coming from. It seems to me that formally and legally opposing the use of a symbol of the church is ultimately futile.
It seems that whenever the Church opposes some aspect of Hollywood that mocks it only serves to highlight the “artistic” endeavor. CNN, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher all run clips of the show and the church, all the while making comments that fuel the fire. I think our reputation is protected by our actions not legal rulings.
If the church rolled with the punches the satire would have to stand on it’s own. Either it’s funny or it’s not. Yes, I do believe God has a sense of humor and that we can laugh at ourselves. I thought the Wittenburg Door and LarkNews were a hoot.
Based on the reviews, the film is not good…if only those involved were half as clever as they think they are. Therefore, why give it more publicity that is deserves?