At times, I think Yes Man is brilliant. At others, it's a little odd--if not downright scary. To begin with, Yes Man follows the trend of modern comedies in pushing the envelope of acceptable, creating some awkward scenes which make me unable to recommend this film outrightly. Even so, Yes Man is quite enjoyable sometimes, and I think it offers some pertinent insights into life in culture that are rewarding to whoever isn't upset by its less-than-perfect bits.The very concept of Yes Man is fascinating: what if a man could only say yes to any possibility that presented itself to him? This, as the colorful tracts declare, is an opening up to life, a freedom to take any opportunity for all its worth. At times, I think this is exactly what culture needs, especially Christian culture. There is no place for fear, caution yes, but not fear in the Christian heart. If Christ Jesus is our Savior, then there is nothing to which we must surrender and nothing which must cause anxiety. At the same time, we recognize--as do the movie's protagonists at the end--that fear is a thoroughly human tendancy; still this realization should only strengthen our desire for God's grace rather than allow us to retreat from what makes us uncomfortable.
In many situations, I think this open thinking could revolutionize the way we Christians think, especially about culture. Culture would no more be an invicible pollutant, an enemy to be avoided at all costs lest our holy souls be permanently tarnished. Rather, culture--in both its clean and dirty sides--is something that at the least can be engaged, and oftentimes should, at least by someone. In the end, we must remember that Jesus is stronger than culture; He that is within us is more powerful than he that is in the world.
Still, caution and discernments are virtues that should not be rashly thrown out the window. As Jim Carry's character learns, openness can sometimes become a form of responsiblity diffusion or capitulation to destructive, controlling forces. Certainly what the world needs is not a church who agrees to every whim of culture, but rather a church with a strong backbone that can both critique and offer authentic hope for change. There are lines in the sand which must be drawn, but at the same time we must be careful lest we throw stones or show anything less than unconditional love to those we have often marginalized (John 8).
Caution also leads to another virtue which is balance. Much of life can be seen as the battle between two polar forces which have been called a variety of names: rational and appetitive, id and super ego, romantic and mundane, extraordinary and ordinary. Plato is correct in noting that these oppositionary "steeds" must be reigned in by a Charioteer which is the balanced side of the self. Only in balance can both steeds find a safe pace, even as we recognize that chariots fly faster than most would dare to dream of.
However, modern culture often tends toward romanticism, an error evident in Yes Man and also in parts of the church, which is the pursuit of passion and pleasure over against the ordinary world of responsibilities. In Yes Man, romanticism takes the form of spontaneuity, and for a good portion of the film Jim Carrey's role acts on whims, making split-second decisions and doing the impossible, and it sure looks like fun. The problem with romanticism has never been that it is not fun, but rather that it refuses to last. If it did, romanticism would become the ordinary, wouldn't it? Right at the end, the film hints that perhaps it's romanticism is being overcome as Carrey mentions to his girlfriend that a big decision (here moving in together, feel free to think of better options) should take time to be decided. This patience may be the first step toward a balanced, healthy relationship, but it's hard to tell. And, in the face of rampant romanticism in culture, a louder critique is needed (for more on romanticism, among other things, I suggest the book Sex and Love in the Home).
In the end, moderation is the only sustainable path, the only way to keep the chariot running (although, yet again, it is running, not merely hobbling at a snail's pace like connotations of a word like "moderation" suggest). Still, I find in Yes Man a compelling and entertaining "what if?" that is helpful to those like me who have been trapped in overly-conservative, fearful frameworks of mind. I like watching a movie that opens the door to possibility; I think I could use more of that, though to some doors I'll still have to say "no."
P.S. Btw, I also love the cult-critique that Yes Man offers. I find the "Yes club" to be an interesting window into a post-secular American religious scene. People are desperate for answers and for "change" (just look at Pres. Obama's successful campaign). It is always sad to me that the church has lost much of its allure to the seeking (see "The Gospel Tastes Like Chocolat"). I suspect that any historical study of the church will detect errors against romanticism which made the church institutional, hierarchical, rigid, and even politically-legitimized (think Medieval times). It seems that finally more open, vibrant church-life is beginning to break through once more, although often erring in the opposite direction, namely toward romanticism and thrill-seeking. Errors over-correct into more errors. Again, balance and critique are rare but vital virtues.
Also, I find Carrey's fear of "the covenant" compelling. Often, I fear that we Christians are prone to over-reading situations in spiritual ways, reading the handwriting on the wall so to speak when there might only be graffiti. God's will is a mystery, as is his wind-like Spirit. We must be careful lest we let our interpretation of events legitimize our courses of action. Signs from God are likely less common than we think they are.That said, God moves in mysterious ways, even bringing enlightenment through--of all things--a Jim Carrey screwball comedy.
