There seems to be an unwritten rule within the Christian community that any film made with a Christian theme must be "gushed" about as if it is a cinematic masterpiece. A quick scan of Christian-oriented entertainment sites indicate that this film has been consistently rated 4 to 5 stars.
This is ridiculous because this film is embarrassingly bad. This misleading bias also means that terrible films like this will continue to get made.
The fact that these films get laughed at in the secular world is usually dismissed as "anti-Christian sentiment". The sentiment is not "anti-Christian", it's "anti-terrible films".
"Christian-themed" movies can (and should) be as good as any other film genre out there. But just like a building, a film requires good planning and skilled craftsmanship. If a local community built a church and it fell down, they would not be standing around saying "Oh what a wonderful church!". They'd be asking "what went wrong?" and resolving to never do it again.
No building is excused from the rules of good construction, and no film genre is excused from the rules of good film-making. As an (incomplete) list of principles:
1 - All characters (and especially the lead characters) must have a journey. In this film Sheri has a minor journey (though an implausible one - her response to contracting leukemia is as tepid as if she'd merely missed a TV show), her father and all the other characters are two dimensional puppets. (Their unsurprised reaction to the physical appearance of Satan is absurd. No matter how devout you are, if Satan really appeared in physical form you'd still be shocked to some extent.)
2 - "Show, don't tell". The film regularly stops for inane preaching and pointless exposition. If meeting Sheri has really changed a character's life - show it. Having the character sit on a couch saying "Oh, you've changed my life" is no more convincing or meaningful than them saying "Oh, I've grown two extra arms". The act of "showing" is simple. Before the "change" show me scenes of the character's behaviour. Then have the transformation. Then show me the character afterwards.
3 - Every moment of a film must either advance the plot or develop a character (ideally both). If you can't demonstrate what a given moment of a film is achieving, cut it.
There are some superb Christian-themed movies out there, eg. "The Apostle" with Robert Duvall. There are also dozens of truly superb subjects on Christian themes which could be made. 1 - A son raised in the church leaves so as to have "freedom", only to discover the real cost of this meaningless freedom (ie. a modern "prodigal son"). 2 - A skeptic who believes that Christians are "mindless drones" slowly falls for a Christian girl he works with and gradually discovers the true nature (and the causes) of his hostility. 3 - A Christian "faker" (someone who only claims to have faith so as to exploit the community for personal gain) is exposed and loses everything. Despite this he begins a journey to true redemption.
If you are a Christian and you are angered by this comment then I'm sorry. But if Christian films are to have any value at all then there needs to be an objective attitude towards quality.
This is ridiculous because this film is embarrassingly bad. This misleading bias also means that terrible films like this will continue to get made.
The fact that these films get laughed at in the secular world is usually dismissed as "anti-Christian sentiment". The sentiment is not "anti-Christian", it's "anti-terrible films".
"Christian-themed" movies can (and should) be as good as any other film genre out there. But just like a building, a film requires good planning and skilled craftsmanship. If a local community built a church and it fell down, they would not be standing around saying "Oh what a wonderful church!". They'd be asking "what went wrong?" and resolving to never do it again.
No building is excused from the rules of good construction, and no film genre is excused from the rules of good film-making. As an (incomplete) list of principles:
1 - All characters (and especially the lead characters) must have a journey. In this film Sheri has a minor journey (though an implausible one - her response to contracting leukemia is as tepid as if she'd merely missed a TV show), her father and all the other characters are two dimensional puppets. (Their unsurprised reaction to the physical appearance of Satan is absurd. No matter how devout you are, if Satan really appeared in physical form you'd still be shocked to some extent.)
2 - "Show, don't tell". The film regularly stops for inane preaching and pointless exposition. If meeting Sheri has really changed a character's life - show it. Having the character sit on a couch saying "Oh, you've changed my life" is no more convincing or meaningful than them saying "Oh, I've grown two extra arms". The act of "showing" is simple. Before the "change" show me scenes of the character's behaviour. Then have the transformation. Then show me the character afterwards.
3 - Every moment of a film must either advance the plot or develop a character (ideally both). If you can't demonstrate what a given moment of a film is achieving, cut it.
There are some superb Christian-themed movies out there, eg. "The Apostle" with Robert Duvall. There are also dozens of truly superb subjects on Christian themes which could be made. 1 - A son raised in the church leaves so as to have "freedom", only to discover the real cost of this meaningless freedom (ie. a modern "prodigal son"). 2 - A skeptic who believes that Christians are "mindless drones" slowly falls for a Christian girl he works with and gradually discovers the true nature (and the causes) of his hostility. 3 - A Christian "faker" (someone who only claims to have faith so as to exploit the community for personal gain) is exposed and loses everything. Despite this he begins a journey to true redemption.
If you are a Christian and you are angered by this comment then I'm sorry. But if Christian films are to have any value at all then there needs to be an objective attitude towards quality.