AN INTERVIEW WITH GOD
US, 2018, 97 minutes, Colour.
David Strathairn, Brenton Thwaites, Yael Globglas, Hill Harper, Charlbi Dean Kriek, Bobby di Chicco.
Directed by Perry Lang.
The tone of the title indicates that this will be an earnest film. And it is.
Clearly, the themes will be religious. But there are many philosophical issues, especially about evil and free will. The screenplay touches on some biblical themes; the film has been produced by a Christian company, emphasising that the path to God is very much focused on the Judeo-tradition and its culmination in the person of Jesus Christ.
Audiences who have an aversion to explicitly religious films will find their version reinforced. Audiences who are sympathetic to explicitly religious films will find a lot to interest them, to provoke them, although they might find the tone the time is rather didactic, at times preachy.
This said, there is a lot of questioning (on the part of the interviewer, of course, but also God being able to reverse the interview, making demands on the interviewer), which demands answers from the audience for their own integrity, authenticity of belief or non-belief.
A large part of the film consists of the interview, although there are storylines which come to the surface. And, which get the attention of God.
It should be said that God is played by the veteran actor, David Strathairn, a man of serious demeanour, intelligent and articulate, a credible incarnation for God in the contemporary world. The interviewer is played by the Australian actor, Brenton Thwaites, eager to score an interview with God, an exclusive for his publication, ready to front up and asked the questions, but frequently thrown off balance when God returns the questions.
Thwaites plays journalist, Paul, who has been on an interview mission in Afghanistan and is seen initially returning on the plane with coffins of military draped in the American flag. He has experienced some of the trauma on the frontline, making him sympathetic to post-traumatic stress disorder, reaching out to help some of the soldiers who have returned home.
He is married, but immediately there is tension in the apartment. Interesting for the audience, the screenplay has been written in such a way that would lead the audience to lay the blame for potential breakup with Paul rather than his wife. It does not quite work out that way. The marriage situation surfaces throughout the film, Paul trying to contact his wife, she busy and not answering her phone, an intervention by his sister-in-law – and some challenging interventions by God.
But, the core of the screenplay consists of the three interview sessions. Paul, earnest, riding his bike around New York City, meets God first of all in a park, their sitting on park benches. Later, they will meet on the stage in an empty theatre. And, finally, in an office in a high-rise building.
The questions raised are those which are expected, which the audience themselves might raise were they to have an interview with God. Actually, God is more skilled at asking questions of Paul than Paul is of God. And, despite his concern about Paul and his life, God is able to keep his cool.
One of the features of the film is the range of clever lines, arresting religious quips, thoughtful aphorisms. Some audiences may find the interview sessions heavy and demanding. They might work better as an audiobook where attention is on the words and expressions rather than focusing on the characters and their reactions during the interviews. To that extent, many audiences might find there is too much talk for them to deal with.
Some examples: faith is not a goal, it’s a process; concerning the question why bad things happen to good people, Paul notes that God could be considered a “Cosmic Killjoy�; life is not an audition for the afterlife; most people only notice bad things when they happen to them; some people go through life feeling that they are judged every day by God.
There is an interesting discussion about the Ten Commandments, God noting that in the Gospels, Jesus quotes only six, those focusing on our dealings with our neighbours, not reiterating the commandments about God (and God adds there aren’t many polytheists around these days). Ultimately, the challenge to Paul is not so much the theological nor the philosophical but to look at his own life, to look at the command of love, to see whether humans can overcome the bad things, planting of crops for food, psychological assistance for war veterans, marriages being saved. A final theme is forgiveness.
Ultimately, the film could make its audience ask about the questions they would prepare for an interview with God – and, ask where God actually does intervenes in their lives; and through whom?
1. The title, expectations, challenge, provocation?
2. An American interpretation of God? American questions, challenges? How universal?
3. The tone of the screenplay, earnest and serious? The three sessions of the interviews and the questions raised? The background narrative, war in Afghanistan, psychological stress, the war dead, marriage, commitment, infidelity, forgiveness?
4. The film as an allegory of contemporary life? Paul as an Everyman? (Though in the guise of a white American male)? The appearance of God, coat and tie, contemporary gentlemen, and the revelation from the identification of the photo, someone who was killed in Afghanistan 12 years earlier? God’s choice for the guises in which he appears?
5. Paul, returning from Afghanistan, reflection, the war dead and the flags, his journalistic task? His going to the war, his wife’s reaction? At home, in the morning, on the phone, arranging the help for the veteran? His wife wanting to talk? Her looking at the photos of their marriage and their life together? Audiences assuming that Paul has done something wrong – and the irony of the revelation that, even before he went to Afghanistan, and without his knowledge, she had had an affair? Her going to work, threatening to leave, not answering her phone? Paul and his continual calling? The ambiguity of the phone call from Grace? Her coming to the office, people’s suspicions? The irony of the truth, Grace and her concern for her sister, her sister staying with her, urging some kind of reconciliation, Grace saying she did not pray but urging Paul to prayer? The revelation of his religious background, Christian commitment, Sunday school education?
6. Paul and his meeting God (and his later puzzle about how the invitation to the interview came about), the arrangement for the interviews, his notes, recording, God introducing himself and spelling his name? The range of the questions, theological about the nature of God, humans as children of God, care and providence, the reality of evil in the world,, free will? The philosophical questions about the meaning of existence, life and death, wanting to know the time of death or not? The existential questions, contemporary 21st-century questions?
7. The to and fro of the interview, Paul and his questions, limited follow-through? God taking over the conversation, reversing the questions, continually challenging Paul, Paul saying his life was not the subject of the interview, God insisting that it was, the continued developments?
8. Paul, riding his bike, the warning of his imminent death, the potential crash in the traffic, at home, his tensions, injuring his hand on the cup?
9. Gary, his concern about Paul, wanting him to take a break, the aftermath of Afghanistan? Paul refusing to have a break? Gary, his own story, the divorce, enthusiasm about the interview and publishing it? The visit of Grace?
10. Paul, the return to the theatre, the continued interview, it becoming more personal while continuing the perennial themes? The issue of whether Paul would return? Going to the building, the office, as checking with his friend about the photo, the identity of God? The end of the discussion, the potential for the article? The repercussions for his life?
11. The bike being stolen, his return home, his wife sitting on the steps, her asking forgiveness, their both declaring their love, the future?
12. How well would audiences identify with Paul and the experience of the interview, men? Women?
