MovieChat Forums > 11:59 (2005) Discussion > Bad Christian Film

Bad Christian Film

Saw it at the World Film Fest in Montreal. Walked out half way. I wish they had advertised the obvious Jesus loving nature of this film so I could have saved my money.

See my post below this for some lowlights.



Well I don't think you'd know a good movie if you saw one. I thought it was one of the top three movies I've seen in over 4 years.


Okay, I'm just going to go stream of consciousness here. Keep in mind I did walk out after the secound transportation to the field, so maybe it got way better (aka new cast, story ect.)

Spoilers below, BUT if your thinking of seeing this just read the last paragraph to prevent such a thing.

Female news boss did a terrible job acting. It's like the script called for a hard ass but she couldn't pull it off at all. You could read her as acting tough, not being tough.

The swimming in booze cut aways. Talk about cheesy and laughable. This director has the subtlety of an h-bomb, and it seriously hurt the film.

The f word. Yeah, he's confused and not thinking straight but write some new lines please! At one point I can see it as a comedic angle, but it didn't work and got annoying.

Help me out here, did he find god? I walked out half way but could see a god angle coming from a mile away. This one is personal, but I have no interest in watching Christian entertainment.

Comedy. Mostly bombed and a lot of stuff (like the sign in the middle of no wear) was just LAME.

Acting. Seemed like a lot of first timers. The only acting I felt hit par was the guy he chased down at the start.

Sound! How could I forget. Insanely bad mixing, some of the worst I've ever heard. While they aimed to shock with some of the really loud stuff, the contrast was so large that you're ripped out of the film and forced to look around to see if your sitting right against a speaker or something.

Flashbacks. Some of the worst I've ever seen. The whispers were totally cheesy.

Bad guy in bar. That guy who I assume represented the devil. Cheesy and overplayed. Again, the subtlety of an h-bomb.

Pacing. Poor, I kept wondering if we're ever going to finish the introductions and can move on to some development.

Continuity. I'm okay with the occasional mistake, but scenes filmed outdoors had cloud coverage all over the place. The main focus of the shoot would be covered with shadows in one shoot, then secounds later be fully illuminated. This happened over and over in the scene in which he is being filled in by the female journalist on the events of the day he missed.

Minorities. I'm not super PC and I don't know what happened later but I only saw three minorities. Two poor, emotionally unstable Latinos and a comically stupid and cowardice black camera man.

Quick edits. I'm not against super fast edits, but the intention to portray a "fast paced atmosphere" was just to transparent (see subtlety=h-bomb) and the effect overused. Like I said, I like the technique, poor done here.


Overall. It felt like a first time effort from the whole crew. The movie was laughable when it was trying to be serious and boring when it was trying to be poiniant. When I see the high rating and positive comments I can't help but wonder if it's partially the result of people connected to the movie voting and commenting, especially the review which claims to be "proud" of the crew/cast and the eight 10 votes.



I saw the film in Montreal as well. I don't know where you got the idea that it is "Christian," except perhaps in the opening qoute by C.S. Lewis. I don't think your beef is with the film, I think it is with religion. And this film has nothing to do with religion. Sure, each person can take it as he/she wants to, but seriously you're seeing far more than what was presented. I believe the filmmakers even mentioned it was their first feature with many first time performers. Real detective work there. I thought they did an excellent job whether it was their first time or not. Raymond Andrew Bailey was a very good actor and had us all in awe. The "Devil" character in the bar was halirious! He didn't represent anything evil, he represented humor. He wasn't the "Devil" he was amazing! The character played by Hayz II made the film worth while on a whole other level. The cinematography was perfect. The story was good. Overall this is a fantastic film. And if you don't make films, don't talk like you know a lot about making films. As an audience member I give it a 10 out of 10.


Like I said, I walked out. I'm glad you liked it. 10 out of 10? Great...

I thought it was terrible and I'm glad it hasn't seen any real popularity.

As for the relion stuff, I did mention in my above post that it was a personal distaste for things religious. I'm surprised you didn't see any religious aspects, I VERY much did.

As for what my beef is, I think I did a wonderful job pointing out my beefs above. They go far beyond Jesus into really basic type stuff.

God Bless



Tommy... What is your problem. We all know you have a beef with Raymond Bailey. The reviews are from people who have seen it. You havn't. Get a life!!! At least I saw it.



You don't have to make movies to recognize bad sound, acting, or story.


I agree with many of your points on the production quality of the film, but I never caught any relationship with/to Christianity. (I'm afraid I would have to agree that it is something in your life that caused you to see that in the film. Not meant as criticism, just observation.)

I thought the story was a good one, just not real well played out. I kept thinking what a great movie it could have been with better actingor depth of characters or scenery or something. Something was missing.

I also thought the short Spin was very good!


There is no significant connection with Christianity in this film. Many films have that element but this is not one of them.
As for the film I found it confusing and quite mediocre. I gave 6/10. I can understand why it would make someone love it, but it wasn't cut out for me I guess.