The controversial movie Unplanned can be approached as a narrative drama, a dramatized documentary, a piece of pro-life advocacy, and a free expression case. Just how satisfactory one finds the film will depend on what one is looking for.
Based on the memoir by Abby Johnson of the same name, Unplanned tells the story of a woman who works as a volunteer for a Planned Parenthood clinic, rising to the position of director of the branch at which she works. When she is brought to the realization of what the practice of abortion truly is – the murder of an unborn child – she resigns her position.
Viewed simply as a narrative drama, Unplanned certainly fails. Unconvincingly, all of the characters are two-dimensional, simply verbalizing the arguments opposing the pro-life movement and the arguments supporting it. In fact, the film resembles nothing so much as a medieval morality play.
The fictionalized documentary approach might well be valid, however, if one could accept the film as faithfully presenting the true story upon which it claims to be based. Unfortunately, though, considerable doubt has been cast upon Johnson’s narration of the events in her book, as a quick Internet search will reveal.
Did she, in fact, undergo her change of heart by watching an ultrasound view of a 13-week unborn child struggling in the mother’s womb as a surgeon emotionlessly destroyed that child? This particular event is depicted in horrifying detail at the beginning of the film and is the determining factor in the woman’s conversion, so it might be regarded as a crucial yardstick by which to judge the rest of the film.
It is true that Johnson did work for a Planned Parenthood clinic and did become an active member of the pro-life movement. Few “based on a true story” films adhere closely to the original facts, so it might well not be a problem that the story includes some invention, though in this case it does significantly undercut the key motivating factor.
Even so, many members of the pro-life movement will welcome Unplanned for its fierce support of the cause. Unfortunately, it presents a pro-life case in a way that will do little to convert anyone not already onside. It may well be justified to show the bloody horror of abortion procedures, but is it really valid to shock viewers with bloodshed, particularly when an actual childbirth is almost as terrifying? One wonders how effective it is to include harrowing images of the parts of destroyed unborn children.
Even less helpful is the strategy of consistently portraying supporters of abortion as ruthless, lying, unfeeling, merchandisers who are concerned only with making money at the expense of the vulnerable. Many people may favour fewer legal restrictions on abortion because they are sincerely trying to be understanding and humane. To identify them as monsters is, in the end, likely to alienate them even more. This is especially true if they do not believe in a loving God – the ultimate argument which the film employs in support of its position.
If Unplanned truly wanted to argue convincingly in favour of the pro-life view, it needed to be far more nuanced, and, above all, far gentler in presenting the approach that Christians should take towards their opponents (as is indicated in the film by some pro-lifers’ outreach ). It should have been far more careful in trying to understand the views of the supporters of abortion. The filmmakers should have borne in mind the adage “Hate the sin; love the sinner.”
Of course, Unplanned may be welcomed simply for presenting the viewpoint of the pro-life movement, which is frequently regarded as politically incorrect today. I was impressed that a couple of hundred people had chosen to view the film early on a Friday afternoon. In fact, Cineplex has had to publish a defence of screening the film in the face of abortion activists’ criticism of the company. Their criticism is ludicrous, since many of those same people would fiercely argue for the right to free speech. Here, whether one approves of the film or not is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Cineplex must be applauded for its determination to show the film – though, at the time of writing, I had to travel to Langley to see it.
After all this, one really looks forward to a film that will help those who support abortion to arrive at a true understanding of what the pro-life movement stands for. Sadly, despite its clearly good intentions, Unplanned largely misses the mark.
Meanwhile, I can think of no presentation against abortion more cinematically effective than the original Michael Caine version of Alfie (1966). In the space of a few minutes it shows, movingly, humanly, the narcissistic womanizer being brought to an understanding of what it means to kill an unborn child. Now that’s the sort of approach we need.