I remember, but I also try to disengage from the passions of the moment, and judge a movie like any other movie, that is like a movie. In forty years it will be seen as silly just as the biblical movie epics of 40 years ago are seen as silly today. Some things last, most don't. Written word lasts more often than a picture that leaves nothing to the imagination, as this movie does, according to most reviewers.
To my thinking, if God chose to speak to me through this one, as you seem to suggest, then God must also be choosing to speak to me through all the violent, pornographic movies Hollywood releases each week. I hope that is not is the case - man's free will, etc. The San Francisco Comical of all sources has a couple of interesting, unbiased, I think, reviews of this particular "entertainment vehicle", or "product", which you can see on sfgate.com.
Yet, there are instances within Scripture when similar situations apply.
Consider that the Nativity was not in a glorious palace, but in a stable. Consider that the Messiah appeared not in Rome, but in a backwater of the Empire.Consider that Jesus dealt with tax collectors, fornicators, adulterers, and thieves. Consider that those who became the saints were not princes or the wealthy, but rather the poor and downtrodden.
Given all this, why would not the Lord, who chose so many unlikely people to carry His message, not choose an American filmaker to do the same?
I will not attack you, but I hope you will consider what I have posted.