Barry Levinson at the 2009 Tribeca Film Festival

Award-winning and popular filmmaker Barry Levinson recently wrote an article called “The Economics of Abbott and Costello“. It highlights how blatant the use and abuse of statistics has become. It would be funny if it wasn’t so accurate.

“Unemployment as reported is at 9 percent. But it’s actually more than 16 percent. Some smart statistician came up with a distinction. A slight of hand to make the unemployment number tolerable rather than frightening. The concept was simple: 9 percent are unemployed and are actively looking for work. The 16 percent includes those who gave up and are no longer actively looking for work. So those casualties are no longer counted. They cease to exist. The 9 percent is a fake. A sham. And worthy of an Abbott & Costello routine. If that great comedy team were still alive, the routine on our unemployment woes might go something like this.

COSTELLO

I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

ABBOTT

Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s 9%.

COSTELLO

That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT

No, that’s 16%.

COSTELLO

You just said 9%.

ABBOTT

9% Unemployed.

COSTELLO

Right 9% out of work.

ABBOTT

No, that’s 16%.

COSTELLO

Okay, so it’s 16% unemployed.

ABBOTT

No, that’s 9%…

COSTELLO

WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%?

ABBOTT

9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

COSTELLO

IF you are out of work you are unemployed?

ABBOTT

No, you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO

BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!

ABBOTT

No, you miss my point.

COSTELLO

What point?

ABBOTT

Someone who doesn’t look for work, can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.

COSTELLO

To who?

ABBOTT

The unemployed.

COSTELLO

But they are ALL out of work.

ABBOTT

No, the unemployed are actively looking for work… Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO

So if you’re off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?

ABBOTT

Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO

The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work?

ABBOTT

Absolutely it goes down. That’s how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don’t want to read about 16% unemployment do ya?

COSTELLO

That would be frightening.

ABBOTT

Absolutely.

COSTELLO

Wait, I got a question for you. That means they’re two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

ABBOTT

Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO

Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

ABBOTT

Correct.

COSTELLO

And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

ABBOTT

Bingo.

COSTELLO

So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.

ABBOTT

Now you’re thinking like an economist.

COSTELLO

I don’t even know what the hell I just said!

ABBOTT & COSTELLO did a comedy routine about fictitious ball players called “Who’s On First?” The absurdist number of the real unemployed is not a joke.

Mahmoud Abbas (Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization)

Three things recently amazed me – none in a good way.

1) The Palestinian Authority‘s top cleric, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, recently addressed a crowd at an event marking the 47th anniversary of the founding of Fatah, the mainstream movement led by the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas. He quoted a hadith, a saying attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, stating: “The Hour will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jews will hide behind stones or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.” This speech was broadcast on Palestinian Authority television and advises that Judgment Day will come only when the Muslims fight and kill the Jews.

It’s important to note that this isn’t some fringe fanatical lunatic making this speech. This is the top cleric of the ruling body in the Palestinian territories. And he wasn’t just making these statements in a private conversation or meeting, he was addressing a crowd and his speech was broadcast on their main TV network. If anyone wonders why there can’t be peace in the Middle East, they should consider these statements.

2) After these statements were made and broadcast, the Palestinian Authority did not act as nearly any other nation would. Most other nations would immediately condemn such ideas, fire the person responsible for espousing them and try to make amends with those who they offended. None of this happened.

3) After these statements Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said “The call to murder Jews simply because they are Jews is terrible from an ethical point-of-view and is an obstacle to peace. Incitement in general is an obstacle to peace. What is especially serious is that as of today, not only has the Palestinian Authority neither condemned nor taken exception to the remarks, it enabled them to be broadcast on official Palestinian television. I expect senior PA officials to condemn this act.”

And “Americans for Peace Now” stated: “Americans for Peace Now strongly condemns the belligerent anti-Jewish comments made by the Palestinian Authority’s Mufti of Jerusalem at a public event in the West Bank earlier this month… ‘We are appalled by these comments, coming from the most senior Muslim cleric on the Palestinian Authority’s payroll,’ said Debra DeLee, APN’s President and CEO. DeLee added, ‘What we find particularly disturbing is that these vile comments were broadcast on the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel, amplifying their inciting affect.’”

Here’s the really shocking part: PA Chairman of the Supreme Council for Shari’ah Law, Sheikh Yusuf Ida’is  “emphasized that the decision by the occupation Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to open an investigation against the Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories and speaker at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, is an insult to Muslims, an escalation of Israeli measures against our people, and an attempt to silence and intimidate the voice that defends Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Ida’is emphasized that our people will not agree to insults to its religious authorities and symbols. … He demanded of the Islamic and Christian sources of authority around the world, legal institutions, and international human rights organizations to denounce the brutal attack against Sheikh Hussein, since it runs contrary to international law.” Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 24, 2012]

So let’s see if I got this right. The top Cleric for the PA calls for the killing of Jews. The PA does not condemn the speech. Others condemn the speech and the PA calls for justice against those who would criticize the hate-filled words of the Cleric.

I’m at a loss for words so the best I can do is to quote two different sources:

“if there is no distance, no dividing point between truth and lies, then there can be no definition for good and evil. Because if I do something that’s very evil but I want to do it, then I’ll just call it good. And since the truth and the lie is the issue, good and evil become secondary.“ Jack Kinsella, THE 12 BIGGEST LIES.

“…in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God.” John 16:2 NIV.

—

Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (12 BIGGEST LIES, SHADOW GOVERNMENT)

Dr. Richard A. Gabriel

It has been said many times that “money doesn’t buy you happiness.” This is true but I’d like to add that neither does ANYTHING else unless you’re thankful for it.

As pop-singer Sheryl Crow says in her song “Soak Up the Sun”, “It’s not having what you want. It’s wanting what you‘ve got.” I’ve really noticed how true this sentiment is with my children and their toys.

When they receive a gift, whether it be Lego or Playmobil or Webkinz, they’re initially thrilled. It’s wonderful and new and it provides them with hours of joy. But after a while – usually after they take another look at the box that it came in – they realize that there are other Lego sets, or other Playmobils or other Webkinz that go-along with what they already have. Suddenly the gift that made them so happy before isn’t quite as good. And, if they actually receive that other addition to their toy, that first toy is often forgotten. In fact sometimes the act of playing with the toys becomes replaced by the act of trying to collect more and more of the toys – but without really playing with them.

This is one of the reasons that money doesn’t buy happiness. No matter how much money you might have, somehow it never seems enough.

The same could be said about power, fame, property and even family. The key is to be thankful for what you have. If you’re not thankful for it – whatever it is that you have – you’ll never be happy.

While doing research and interviews for a documentary called LAST DAYS: HYPE OR HOPE, I interviewed Dr. Richard A. Gabriel who is considered an expert on Political Science and the history of war. He was Professor of Politics and History and Director of Advanced Courses in the Department of National Security and Strategy at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania before retiring to write full-time. He has written over 36 books and is a consultant for NBC and 60 minutes. This is a man who knows his stuff and when asked about the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall he said that he thought the main cause of the fall of Communism was… TV. Before TV people in depressed and repressed areas of the world were happy because they thought that everyone else lived as they did. But with TV they could see others who had so much more stuff and who lived such seemingly happier lives. Suddenly these formerly happy people were no longer so happy because they wanted what others had. Communism no longer looked so good.

This key idea of the secret to happiness is something essential to remember as political rhetoric is thrown back and forth over the recent Occupy movements and claims about the “haves” and “have nots”. Bill Whittle, a social commentator, cuts through a lot of the spin and comments on recent statistics that share the differences between the rich and poor… and notes just how thankful we should be.

—

- Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, 12 BIGGEST LIES)

Jeff Douglas In Front Of The Mayan Ruins

There are many reasons to think that 2012 could be the last year for our world. Iran is getting closer to becoming a nuclear power. North Korea is more unstable than ever. The European debt crisis is not going away, nor is America’s. Larger and more devastating natural disasters seem to be increasing and medical experts agree we’re due for a major pandemic.

On top of all this, many assert that there are ancient predictions, based on a Mayan Calendar, that Dec. 21st, 2012 is the end of the world. These predictions are often backed-up by claims of disastrous solar flares, weakening magnetic poles, a rogue planet on a collision course with earth and other world-altering events.

So am I saying that 2012 marks the last year for planet earth? No. But as the R.E.M. song says: “It’s the end of the world as you know it.” The key part being: “as you know it.”

I recently completed a documentary called 2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC? It looks at the ancient Mayan Calendar and claims that it predicts the end of the world on Dec. 21st, 2012. Along with it we examined other related claims about the possible end of the world. And while none of it convinced me that this year’s winter solstice will see the end of everything, the research did point to some world-changing events coming very soon.

Dr. Joe Van Koevering, host of “God’s News Behind the News” says that “We really are on a collision course toward destiny causing people to stop and think about wow this could really happen in my lifetime, the end could come in my lifetime.”

Gary Kah (author of “The New World Religion”) warns that “we’ve been told in scripture that when we see certain signs of the times we know that we’re getting closer and closer and I believe we’re coming into that time.”

And Jack Kinsella (“The Omega Letter”) notes that incredibly “Today, everything is in place.  For the first time in recorded human history everything that the Bible prophesied for the last days is not only possible, but trending in the Bible’s direction… wars, rumors of wars, famines, earthquakes, signs in the sun, the distress of nations with perplexity, a centralized global economy, even the predicted political alliances; everything is in place.”

While there are many sources predicting something about the future (Nostradamus, Harold Camping, the Chinese I Ching, etc.) only one has a proven track record of being 100% accurate: the Bible. So while Bible Prophecy experts like Mark Hitchcock, Donald Perkins, Grant R. Jeffrey and others are fascinated by how world events are lining-up with biblical prophecies – including increasing interest in the 2012 phenomenon – they know that the world can’t end in 2012 because it doesn’t line-up with scriptures. However, they do all note that an event called the Rapture, where Christ returns to take all of the believers off the face of the planet home to heaven – could be right around the corner.

Certainly sounds better than “Planet X” crashing into us to me!

—

Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, SHADOW GOVERNMENT)

Shadow Government

I recently made some changes to the small investments that I have. I didn’t do so after the big 2008 crash because I’ve always heard: “you only lose money when you sell low. Ride it out.” So I stuck it out but as the Republicans and Democrats battled over the US Debt Crisis and Europe struggled with its own sovereign debt issues I thought to myself: “how is this ever going to be solved?” And I couldn’t come up with an answer.

I asked some investment advisors and stock traders and the best they could offer was that markets always go up and down and while governments may not have money, big companies still do. But what if you’re a regular guy who doesn’t own Apple stock or Gold? And what happens if these governments get really desperate for cash? Where are they going to get it? Aren’t we getting close to that now?

So a bigger question formed: if I’m wondering about these things, surely those in control have been as well and what are their answers to the growing monster of debt? Having recently produced the documentary SHADOW GOVERNMENT, I couldn’t help but wonder if a crisis was being managed to help force the US and World into a new direction that before would have been out of the question. Was there something bigger coming?

And then of all things I saw a political cartoon from a 1934 Chicago Tribune. I checked it out and it’s authentic.

Make sure to read the plan on the bottom left.  To say that I found it relevant to today would be an understatement. We avoided the predicted dictatorship in 1934, can we do so again?

—

Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, SHADOW GOVERNMENT)

Matthew Chapman

Outspoken atheist, and great-great grandson of Charles Darwin (“The Origin of Species“), Matthew Chapman has written and directed a new film called THE LEDGE (Charlie Hunnam, Patrick Wilson, Liv Tyler, Terrence Howard). He hopes that it will be the BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN for atheists. He says that this movie is an “emotional appeal…for people in the middle of the country questioning what it’s all about” and for people to see atheists in a more positive way.

The film follows an atheist named Gavin who gets to know a married couple, Shana and Joe. After a heated debate about God and faith where Gavin is insulted by Joe’s evangelical Christian and holier-than-thou views, Gavin decides to seduce Joe’s wife. Joe finds out about the affair and gives Gavin an ultimatum: either Gavin kills himself by jumping off a building ledge or Joe will kill his wife. Ideas about where morality really comes from and whether there is an afterlife are explored.

What I find fascinating about this film and its intentions is that it can’t exist without attacking Christianity. By its very nature atheism is a belief in nothing. Which means that it can’t stand on it’s own. It can only stand in opposition to something else. Therefore, a protagonist who fights for this ideal, also believes in nothing. That doesn’t sound very exciting or interesting. But what if this hero could fight against an evil Christian?

Chapman said in a CNN interview: “I’ve traveled a lot in the Midwest and the South and seen a lot of people like Joe, the fundamentalist in the film. And I’ve never seen a portrayal of that kind of a character put in conflict with someone who shares my beliefs, which are that there probably isn’t any God and we need to think about, you know, reality in life in a rational, humane way.”

The problem is that in trying to show people that atheism is good, the film attacks some of those who Chapman is trying to win over. Not only does the atheist hero, Gavin think it’s okay to sleep with a married woman (one on-line reviewer defended this by saying: “no laws were broken”) but the film inaccurately portrays how a true Christian should behave.

Wherever a story is posted about this film, fierce on-line debates about it follow. In reading through them though, it’s clear that the film isn’t winning anyone over except those who already hate Christianity. One supporter of the film defended it by saying: “This is the first Hollywood movie ever with an all-star cast and an atheist hero. I am an atheist and I think it’s great to see a handsome, positively portrayed atheist. … More importantly, I love how Joe, the Christian character, is somewhat likable in the beginning but he slowly becomes more evil as his situation and his religious reasoning bring him closer to tempting decisions, not further from them. In a lot of thrillers, the bad guy has no real reason to be bad, he or she just is. But in this movie, there is a direct connection to the motivations of the bad guy, and it shows very clearly how religious thinking inflates rationalizations.”

Ah… so this is a good movie because it attacks Christianity.

Chapman wrote on the film’s website: “This could be the BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN moment for atheists, our tipping point, when we finally get the attention we deserve.” However, just like his intention to win people over to atheism seems in doubt, it also seems unlikely that THE LEDGE will get the attention Chapman thinks it deserves either.

Despite a strong cast and some publicity surrounding the controversial nature of the film, the film didn’t do well. THE LEDGE was produced for $10 million dollars, was released on July 8th and made about $5 thousand at the box office. Maybe a film actually about nothing would have done better? It worked for “Seinfeld”.

- Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, 12 BIGGEST LIES)

F1 Diamond

I belong to a church that is about to celebrate it’s 102nd year anniversary. That’s a very long time. It is full of Godly, kind Christian people. Unfortunately, it’s located in a depressed area of downtown Hamilton, Ontario and the size of the congregation has been shrinking over the past number of years. Many of the parishioners are older and many have recently passed away or are no longer able to make it to church on a regular basis. The minister is wonderful and offers strong Bible-centered sermons in unique and engaging ways but only a few younger people have joined the church.

There are many ideas of how to reach people in our area and ideas of how to grow the congregation. We’ve had movie nights, garage sales, live auctions and are actively involved in many local ministries (Wesley Center, Medical Missions International) and with the local public school.

Some of the ideas to build our church family focus on the type of singing done during the service. Traditionally it has been with a practiced choir and an enormous, impressive organ. Over the past few years there have been ‘worship teams’ that have brought in electric guitars and drums who sang up-beat songs of praise. I personally enjoy both types of worship and feel that both have their place. Some of the old hymns sung with an organ are extremely powerful and I think could draw almost anyone in. Some of the new rock and popular songs can also be very uplifting and seem to energize everyone.

My father has always been suspicious of any type of music that has a beat. I think that goes too far and the judgment on a hymn should be on its lyrics and theme. Is it encouraging people to worship the one and true God, Jesus Christ? If it’s doing that (while being respectful and without being offensive) then I’m okay with it.

But I’m not sure I’d ever have encouraged someone to begin rapping at one of our services. That is until I saw this video:

I’m not a believer in the idea that anything that is new or modern or different is automatically good. But while sometimes change is scary, it’s sometimes a needed and good thing and should be judged on its merits. A few years ago I was introduced to “The Pastor of the Traphouse”, F1 Diamond who is definitely a worker for the Lord. He’s a Rap and Hip Hop artist who loves Jesus and his songs reflect that love.

I can’t see my church having any rap artists coming to lead worship with us soon, but I’m hoping that if they did they’d give our organ a try as well.

- Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, 12 BIGGEST LIES)

Maranatha Film Festival Organizer: Bryan Little

Now I don’t want this to be taken as an endorsement of being unprepared but I have to share a remarkable recent experience.

I was asked to be the key note speaker at the first annual Maranatha Film Festival in Rochester, NY. I checked out the website and saw the line-up of films and speakers and was honored to be asked. So I said yes – this despite the fact that the festival would run right when our fourth child was due to be born. It felt like I had to go.

Malin Soleil van Heerden

As chance would have it our little girl arrived a bit early (Aug. 28th) so by the time I had to head to the festival (5 days later) I was running on very little sleep, had a head full of new baby things, and was not well prepared. This was made worse in that I had enthusiastic festival organizer Bryan Little, choose what topic he wanted me to speak on: “Faith on a Movie Set.”

There are a number of topics that I feel comfortable talking about without any preparation – this wasn’t one of them. WHY did I let him choose it?

So I made some notes, did some research and planned to put it all together before I was called to speak. But when I arrived at the festival I found myself getting acquainted with John David Ware (who runs the remarkable 168 Hour Film Project), assistant festival director and producer Tony Baratta, actress Marcy Grams and enjoying some great music from Jeremiah Garcia.

And then suddenly I was called up on to the stage! I had some rough notes and talking points but nothing was cohesive, nothing was rehearsed and it was all still looking for direction.

Thankfully that direction seemed to come from the very topic itself (Having Faith!) and the song just before I was introduced: “Blessed Be Your Name”!

Suddenly the points had a purpose. The anecdotes made sense. The message came naturally as did the words. And incredibly I was learning as I was speaking – right up on stage. Stumbling blocks on current projects suddenly seemed simple to solve; challenges came into perspective and my focus was sharpened. Sometimes when I’m writing screenplays my characters seem to “talk” on their own. This felt like I was one of God’s “characters”.

To those who prayed for me: thank-you! It worked. To God the father: “Praise be your name!”

PS – A big congratulations to Producer Skin Mead whose film “Finding Hope Now” won for best feature film.

Brad Pitt at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival - Photo courtesy of Georges Biard

I recently watched the Pixar / Walt Disney movie RATATOUILLE with my children. It’s a very entertaining, sweet movie about a rat who wants to be a great chef. During one key moment a famous food critic writes in his review: “In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read.”

I immediately thought of a number of negative movie reviews that I’ve read which weren’t just bad, but strived to be scathingly and humorously so. As a filmmaker you certainly don’t ever want to get bad reviews. No matter how thick your skin may be, bad reviews can hurt. And certain words and phrases in those reviews can hurt more than others. One such word is “pretentious.”

The Webster’s dictionary definition for pretentious is: “Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.” Such a description for a movie is worse than it just be called “bad” because while both mean that the film isn’t worth much, pretentious means that it’s intentionally proclaiming itself to be worth much more than it actually is.

This is why I was so surprised to see the reviews for THE TREE OF LIFE, (Brad Pitt, Sean Penn, Jessica Chastain) a movie that is getting a lot of positive buzz. http://moviereviewintelligence.com/movie-reviews/the_tree_of_life_2011/

Overall the critics love this film. Yet when you read parts of their actual reviews, you’d think that they were panning it. Below are some excerpts of various reviews and as you read them – try to pick out which are saying that the film is “Outstanding” and those that are saying that it’s “poor” or “weak”.

“Call it outlandishly pompous, messy, whatever.” Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune.
“Gorgeous and ambitious, pretentious and baffling, tightly controlled yet free-flowing…” Christy Lemire, Associated Press.

“…confusing (if gorgeous) art film…. extremely pretentious — and at 138 minutes, it unspools as slowly as tree growth.” Thelma Adams, Us Weekly.
“… long, often redundant and certainly on its own wavelength.” Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News.
“…overweening in its spiritual ambition…. [has] very little human interest…. less profound than profoundly eccentric, while too solemn, pompous, and genteel to be truly crazy.” J. Hoberman, Village Voice.
“Malick’s style — wide vistas and extreme close-ups strung together by interior monologues built on non-sequitors — will challenge even the most ardent Malick fan to admire the Emperor’s New Clothes this time.” Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel.
“Beautiful, baffling, poetic, pretentious, it’s one big ball of moviedom… won’t be for everyone.” Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic.
“Could it be more borderline profound? This movie weighs so much, yet contains so little. It’s all vault and little coin.” Wesley Morris, Boston Globe.

In case you want to know how you did, here are the overriding opinions of the reviews above (in order): Outstanding, outstanding, moderate, excellent, poor, weak, outstanding, good.

So whether in the glowing reviews, or the bad reviews, there was almost unanimous agreement that the film is pretentious. How is this possible? Did self-important, self-aggrandizing filmmaking suddenly become a good thing?

The director of the film, Terrence Malick, is an art-house favorite and considered by many as a filmmaking genius. Wikipedia writes: “Malick has received consistent regard for his work, and his films are often considered masterpieces.” Malick was nominated for an Academy Award for both Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Director, and won the Golden Bear at the 49th Berlin International Film Festival for THE THIN RED LINE.

It seems to me that the reactions and overall feelings about THE TREE OF LIFE may have more to do with Malick’s reputation rather than the film itself. No one wants to seem like an uncivilized boor by calling a “masterpiece” bad. Lou Lemenick in his New York Post review stated: “While it’s entirely possible to dismiss this philosophizing head trip of a movie as pretentious, tedious and often inscrutable New Age hooey… you may be doing so at your own peril.” Read that again. This was part of an “outstanding” review for the film!

When TREE OF LIFE won the Palm d’Or at the 2011 Cannes film festival, movie star Robert DeNiro said, upon presenting the award: “it was difficult to choose a winner, but The Tree of Life “ultimately fit the bill”. He explained, “It had the size, the importance, the intention, whatever you want to call it, that seemed to fit the prize.”

I’m sure directors everywhere would LOVE to have their films judged on intention. If they’re anything like mine, they’re always the best.

- Blog by André van Heerden, Writer, Director (2012: PROPHECY OR PANIC?, JUDGMENT)

Is he infamous for violent behavior or drunk driving or trash-talking? No. He’s infamous for being a Christian. He’s infamous for taking a knee before a game and saying a quiet prayer – now known as “Tebowing”.

A Washington Post religion columnist sums him up this way: “For those who steer clear of sports news, here’s the Tebow persona in a nutshell: Good looks and wholesome magnetism. A rugged, gung-ho playing style, times ten. A throwing technique that leaves you shaking your head in dismay. A pronounced, outspoken Christian religiosity that, depending on your religious persuasion, sets your teeth on edge or makes you swoon in appreciation and reverence. It’s that very outspoken Christian piety, in particular, that seems to have made Tebow not so much a young athlete as a flash point in the culture wars.”

Is there really such a culture war going on?

In the Bronco’s recent defeat to the Detroit Lions, Tebow was sacked a number of times. After one sack, defensive lineman Stephen Tulloch celebrated not by pumping his fists or making a tree-cutting gesture, but by mimicking Tebow taking a knee and praying.

Let’s put that in perspective: one athlete is mocking another athlete for praying. You’d expect league fines, editorial outrage and calls for religious sensitivity training. Well, that’s what you’d expect if it wasn’t a Christian being mocked. Instead, the mocking gesture made the NFL’s “top 8 nuttiest moments” list – as well as Deion Sanders’ “Prime Time” segment where he too mocked and mimicked Tebow. Evidently because Tebow is a Christian he’s fair game.

How else could you explain the existence of such websites as: TebowHaters.com and a Facebook page dubbed “I hate Tim Tebow.”

One on-line comment about Tebow being unafraid to speak about his faith wrote: “…normal people just don’t want to hear it. Can you imagine if an over-achieving atheist went around proclaiming the falsehood of religion after each of his successes? Those same religious zealots would then be in an uproar and probably call for his head. Sick of the double standard afforded to the religious right.” What this comment seems to misunderstand is that Tebow is just expressing what he believes in. He’s not criticizing any other religion or belief. If an atheist went around attacking religious beliefs he wouldn’t be stating his faith – he’d be attacking another’s. There’s a big difference. And I’m sure if some player wanted to honor “Festivus”, no one would have a problem with it.

One of the most surprising things about those who hate Tebow and relish his failures, is that in most ways he represents what the NFL and American Society as a whole should be supporting. In many ways he represents the American dream.

“It really blows my mind,” said Dolphins center Mike Pouncey, who spent three seasons as an offensive lineman for Tebow at the University of Florida. “You talk about a guy that’s in the church, doesn’t do drugs, doesn’t drink alcohol, lives right, won the Heisman, won the national championship in college. ‘Why do you criticize a guy like that?’”

Why indeed?

- Blog by André van Heerden, President of Film and TV Production at Cloud Ten Pictures