MovieChat Forums > The Rapture (1991) Discussion > interesting idea, but...(long + spoilers...

interesting idea, but...(long + spoilers)

posted 19 years ago by LordBeezo
6 replies | jump to latest

Okay, so the writer makes some theological discussion points. Should you always do what God tells you to do? If God tells you to do something wrong, does that make it right? Are you justified in defying God for asking you to do something you knew to be wrong? That's all well and good and can make for a nice late night dinner conversation.

The problem though, is this is a movie. And it is lacking in many regards. One, the dialog is horrible. It's like the writer is sloshing his way through hoping only to get a few points across, not to actually provide realistic conversation. A prime example is the scene where the main character is confronted by two Christians at her home.

Two, the rapid transition of the characters is contrived. The characters mearly change when they are supposed to, and never have to earn their new identities. Someone reasonably skilled in debating the other side of Christianity could easily have pursuaded, or at least caused serious doubts, to the main character and her husband, who merely accepted the Christian faith because they believed there was more to life, and had a few arbiturary conversations with some Christians.

Three, Will Patton's character, the sheriffs aid, ultimately adds nothing to the plot. He is only there so Mimi Roger's character can voice what she is thinking. However, as I will explain later, he could be the best thing this film has!

Four, the main character's decision to not ask God for her salvation in the end doesn't ring true either. She kills her daughter and is heart stricken, but, then, as she tries to kill herself, the gun won't fire, but does when it's fired in the air. Explanation: God wanted her to kill the kid and provided a miracle so she wouldn't kill herself. Sure, she's dismayed, but, in what seems like a 48 hour time frame, she's standing next to her daughter in some kind of limbo like place. Here, she continues to deny God her love claiming, "He let me kill you." Lady, you have the chance to spend eternity with the God you've loved for 10 years (give or take). He saved you from killing yourself so you can go to heaven. You're daughter is now in a unique position to help you love God even more. You have the chance to spend the rest of eternity with your daughter. You're going to throw ALL of that away and spend eternity alone because, in a 48 hour period, you were without your daughter?!

Mimi Roger's character, had she been a real character, would have jumped on the opportunity to be in Gods arms for eternity. Instead, the writer is less interested in making real characters and is more interested in providing the audience a question to ponder. A question addressed in my opening paragraph.

NOW, I'm not one to complain unless I have a solution, so here it goes.

Make Will Patton's character, the sherrif's deputy, the main character. He's got a regular, do good life, making sure camp fires don't get out of hand and keeping the vagrants to a minimum at the park. He gets a call saying there is some woman about to overstay her two weeks at a camp site.

He investigates and finds Mimi Roger's character. They are cordial, and she's clear why she's there; God told her so. She says she will move to another campsite when her two weeks is up and start again.

Wills character goes through some tough questions. Is she for crazy? Is this good for her daughter? Will this blow over soon? Could this get out of hand? Will is skeptical of her beliefs, but not condenming. When he realizes she is serious, he helps her out, bringing food and conversation. He finds out her husband was recently murdered which further adds intrique for the sheriffs deputy.

Blah, Blah, Blah.

The sherrifs deputy finds Mimi Roger's character on the side of road, where she confesses to 86ing her daughter. Will tries to be professional but is starting to go nuts. He could have gotten the daughter to saftey. He knew the mom was crazy, but didn't want to believe it. The press are going to find him responsible, he's going to lose his job. etc...

This story is much more interesting and can have multiple worthy endings. I don't quite know which road I'd take, personally. So, I'll leave that to more gifted men than myself.

Thanks for reading all of this, and, please, I'm curious to read your responses.

[–] ericmann 18 years ago

The only problem with what you have said is that after Mimi kills her daughter she can't bring herself to shoot herself, cuz you can't get into heaven if you kill yourself, and it's not that god prevents her from doing it.

[–] LordBeezo 18 years ago

I'm sure that if you watch the film, she puts the gun to her head and fires many times. The gun SHOULD have gone off. Only when she aims the gun in air and fires does it fire. Thanks for responding, though.

-Beasley

[–] DarkWarLord 18 years ago

...Beasley?...
Wouldn't happen to be Rick Beasley would it?...

[–] LordBeezo 18 years ago

nope...not me. sorry to dissappoint.

[–] solitaire40 18 years ago

I could have sworn (I just saw this again last weekend) that she pointed the gun under her chin once (not sure if she pulled trigger) and then pulled it away and shot a few shots in the air. I just thought she had chickened out. I didn't know the gun didn't go off because of some miracle.

My Ex Husband swears when this movie first came out the beginning of it with Mimi Rogers and Duchvney in bed was like x-rated but later copies have since been edited. Does anybody know anything about that?

[–] groucho_de_sade 18 years ago

It all depends I think on what you think the movie is really trying to say. My take on it basically goes like this:
Mimi Rogers and David Duchovny are two sexually active, even promiscuous, adults. They have thrown themselves into excessive sexuality. They live their lives from one conquest to the next. The reason that they convert so completely and so quickly is that they want to believe. They allow themselves to be completely changed, for better or worse. But I think that the director's point is that they have thrown themselves with equal abandon into blind belief. It is this blind belief that causes Mimi Rogers to murder her own daughter. (And I just watched that scene again, and she does not pull the trigger before firing it into the sky.)
If people really do give their lives to Christ, for better or for worse, I think that Michael Tolkin (who wrote the script and directed) was trying to demonstrate that blind faith can be as destructive as complete sexual abandon. He seems (though this could well be my own projection) to be implying also that some personalities should not be exposed to the influence of fundamentalist belief systems.
I could be way off, but one thing I've noticed about this movie is that people have different interpretations according to their spiritual beliefs. If you're religious, it's either a piece of blasphemous nonsense or a shocking but moving spiritual parable; if you're non-religious it can be seen as a psychological thriller, a treatise on secular morality vs. religious morality, a commentary (even satire) on contemporary religion in America, and so on. The fact that the director is an Orthodox Jew (and if I'm not mistaken, is also a Rabbi) makes it all seem so much more enigmatic.
It's true that the dialogue is a little obvious and stilted in places, but if you look at the movie as a treatise or an essay on film, I think it becomes quite fascinating. It's also visually beautiful, making the most from what was obviously a small budget.
I disagree with your opinion that it's not a fully realized film. I think it's a masterpiece of its kind, and one of a handful of films that is truly and sincerely about (not for or against) religion.

I don't want some renegade necrophile princess as MY roommate!