Bells of Innocence (2003) User Reviews

One of the worst movies I've seen in my entire life

[Leonhart-PL · 2/10 · 30 June 2005]

OK, I'm 26 so I've been thru all the action heroes 80's hype, and Chuck Norris along with Seagal, Van Damme and the rest of the guys were my childhood heroes, fighting the bad guys, shooting dozens of bullets from one round only;) I saw the advert of this movie on TV a couple of days ago - Chuck Norris was throwing some fireballs from his fingers. WHOA! 'That is a must-see crappy movie!', I said. And indeed it was. Only a lot lot worse. It is very difficult to see all the movie - stuffed with some religious thoughts, ridiculous zombie-like monsters, who serve Satan, all the idea of a plot set in some forgotten community, which represent whole mankind - it is a load of Christian fundamentalist's wet dreams.

I've nothing against Christianity, even in the movies, but this one lacks taste, it lacks almost everything that connects with a common sense, c'mon, Chuck Norris playing an ANGEL, whose job is to look after little town, where Satan lives?!?! The whole plot is so damn straight and boring, not mentioning its silliness (yes, it's not stupidity anymore, we're talking silliness like... like a retarded child's joke) make altogether terrible movie, made as far as I suppose for elder people very much devoted to Catholic Church, because young viewers laugh at almost every scene. Technically it's incorrect, the fx are worse than the ones you've seen in early 90's in TV series, the plot seems VERY stupid, actors could be easily exchanged to cardboard stands, not mentioning the music which as far as I've heard was played on a childish toy piano. I've seen a lot of movies, even the worst ones (the ones from the IMDb bottom list) like 'Space Mutiny' or 'Manos - hands of fate' BUT believe me nothing compares to this ridiculous, terrible, horribly acted quasi-movie which brings some students' prank movies to my mind rather than regular production. Avoid it. At all cost avoid it. There's even nothing to laugh at. Chuck Norris has officially finished his movie career.

Terrible - Movie

[muddwhomper · 1/10 · 18 January 2005]

This is by far the worst movie I have ever seen. What were they thinking. Stop preaching to me already! This is why all of us watch Walker Texas Ranger and wont admit it to our friends. Terrible acting and a extremely phony plot. While the movie is unfolding the story stops and the actors start preaching to the audience. The director somehow believed the two meshed well. It looked like crap! When I saw the title at my local blockbusters it looked interesting. Their should have been a warning on it saying it was religious instead of the false advertisement of an action / adventure. First time in a long time I stopped a movie and couldn't tolerate finishing it.

The best of the worst

[deirdre-616-727337 · 1/10 · 9 January 2010]

Normally, I don't like Chuck Norris films. I appreciate his work as a martial artist, and his fight scenes are usually fairly well-choreographed. Chuck is undeniably one of the martial arts greats. So, in my local used bookstore, I found a film I hadn't seen before and took it home.

While the acting in this movie was worse than most Chuch Norris films, I was hoping to see at least one fight scene. I quickly began to realize that this wasn't a typical Chuch Norris film; rather it was a Christian film, destined to illustrate the "good will win out" paradigm.

There is really nothing on the packaging to indicate that this is a Christian film, with the exception of the label ... Goodtimes Entertainment, which I had never heard of before. I'll certainly keep that in mind the next time I see a film from that company.

I don't have a problem with Christianity ... I do have a problem with sneaky proselytizing. If someone is going to make a religious film, at least have the good sense to indicate to the viewer that such is what they will get. The only redeeming part about the exercise is that I spent only $3.25 to spend 97 minutes to watch a great martial artist not fight. At least it was during supper-time, and I spent some of that cooking and eating.

In short, if you're looking for a mediocre martial arts film, and not hoping for much, don't bother with this film because it doesn't even offer that.

Wow, please NEVER watch this movie.

[g-nappp · 1/10 · 25 June 2005]

I gave this movie a rating of 1 because it is by far, the worst movie I've ever seen in my life. This movie was made in 2003 and I've seen movies made in the 60's with better special effects. I wish I could go into detail, but words can't describe how crappy this movie was. I could have done better with a home video camera and $20! I pray that Chuck Norris never makes a movie again. Now If you think I'm downing this movie because it has a Christian theme, you're wrong. I like the fact that IL' Chuck decided to make a movie that at least attempted to make God look good, but why would he make poor viewers like me suffer through such a crappy movie? This whole film can be summed up in 3 words: RE DAMN DICULOUS.

A Must See for Everyone Everywhere!!!

[gguy-1 · 1/10 · 4 February 2006]

This is quite possible the worst movie ever made. I know people talk about how horrible Ed Wood movies were (Plan 9) but this movie makes Plan 9 look amazing.

Chuck Norris makes a cameo, for what reason I have no idea. Perhaps to ruin his movie career. Aside from Chuck Norris, the movie's cast consists of extras in daytime soaps and Mike Norris... that's right, Chuck's son.

This director doesn't even have a resume and I have no idea where the plot or screenplay originated. This must've been green lit by a horrible Southern Baptist minister that somehow had a 3rd cousin that owned a studio (which I'm sure has since been shut down).

I don't really know what else to say about this movie. I would like to give you a plot summary but I'm lost. There is something about Jesus and Satan... some eternal battle. Other than that there are Indians. And a bunch of freaky kids that don't know how to act... they're just awkward and should not be on camera. I don't know what was going on most of the time but I know the movie was a great laugh. Mike Norris pushes his daughter (on her bike) into the street somehow... but in the shot he's in the middle of the park. So somehow she learns to ride her bike with speed equivalent to that of The Flash and gets hit by a car or bus... I don't know. But she's dead. This is actually the funniest scene in the movie. I know that sounds sick but once you see Mike raise his hands in victory and then hold his head and scream in terror... you'll understand. It doesn't show the daughter getting hit or anything... you just have to assume she got hit by some vehicle. But, the movie's not clear. So maybe it was completely unrelated and she died from cancer. Anyway... after that the movie gets really confusing and I have no idea what really happens. I am a Christian and I have no idea why this movie was made. I don't see any value for this movie in a religious or non-religious sector. This is probably the first thing they show students in Film-making 101... this is what you DON'T want to do.

Just see it... you'll hate it and me for suggesting that you see it.

What an angel...

[Ace_Striker · 1/10 · 4 October 2005]

I recently had the idea to make a short film featuring a man who is hit by a car and wakes up thinking that he himself is Chuck Norris. This meant that I would have to do extensive Chuck research, and find out as much as I could about the man. I later find out that he is not in fact a man, but an angel sent from heaven. With a face like that, who could ever doubt it? I have watched more Chuck Norris movies in the last four months than any one person should. I am proud to say that Bells of Innocence ranks pretty close to the top of the all time worst list. I spent most of the film wondering if I could return my copy to the local Wal-Mart without the receipt, which I had been biting down on to keep myself from swallowing my own tongue. The biggest reason why I chose to purchase this film was that it not only had Chuck in it, but his son Mike. I was anxious to see if Mike was a chip off the old can't-act-his-way-out-of-a-wet-paper-bag block. I came to the conclusion a long while ago; the Chuck Norris is one of the worst actors in cinematic history for one simple reason. The only character he ever plays is himself, Chuck Norris. No matter what movie, no matter what situation, he is always Chuck Norris. The one thing that he holds over his son is that he is consistent. Mike doesn't seem to understand how human emotions work. In the scene where he is talking to the little girl about his dead daughter, he seems to be extremely happy! Maybe this is because he actually pushed his daughter out into traffic, as depicted in one of the oddest flashbacks of all time. His actions confused me throughout the film, making it very hard for me to focus on what little plot there was. The other two lead actors were just as painful to watch as the son of Norris. The guy, who constantly wants to eat or tell a stupid peacock joke, was simply one of the most annoying characters that has ever graced the Direct-to-Video screen. The only thing I remember him being in other than this movie, was an episode of Walker Texas Ranger, in which he plays an equally annoying character. Maybe Chuck owes this guy something. The other guy, which is the only name I can think of because he was so forgettable, was your average Christian fanatic. I don't have anything against Christians, in fact I am one, but this guy was just too much for me. To round out the story, you have a multitude of townspeople who love to call people "friend", and a couple of villains who don't seem to be able to decide which one of them is in charge. Not to mention the creepy kids who remind me of the dollar store version of every other group of creepy kids in movies. All in all, the movie is possibly one of the biggest failures of all time, on more levels than Chuck Norris can kick people's asses. Despite being one of the worst actors of all time, I still can't get enough of Chuck. Maybe he really was sent from heaven...

All and All...... I liked it!!

[nkwz1 · 5/10 · 19 March 2006]

I always liked chuck norris movies because of the "kick butt" action scenes. This movie through me as to the plot and content. As many movies as i've seen in my 50 years on this planet(sometime i'll tell ya about the other ones!)bells of innocence is a well produced flick! In the tradition of chuck norris, I'm glad to see him doing New Stuff! I'm not saying this movie is as good as "The order", "Left Behind", Etc... Etc.... But, it sure was interesting seeing chuck attempt this type of movie. I think he was outstanding and his son wasn't to bad either! I hope to see chuck continue his career for many more years...... And if does a few more "Kick Butt" type movies, I'll be there to rent them!

Boring!!!

[jpintar · 1/10 · 29 May 2004]

This is another one of those fundamentalist Christian movies that hit you over the head with religion like a sledgehammer. You know you are in trouble when the setup of the story is completely ridiculous. Three men are flying to Mexico to deliver Bibles. This makes no sense since the church is Protestant and most Mexicans are Catholic. Protestant and Catholic bibles are not the same. The Catholic bible has books in it that are not in the Protestant bible. I also find it difficult to believe that churches in Mexico would not distribute bibles to them. I can understand if they were going to a place where Christianity is in the minority. But Mexico is far fetched. If you cannot believe the setup of a story, then you don't the rest of the story either. A movie about religion can be entertaining, but not this movie.

good movie

[davisdebra2003 · 8/10 · 14 December 2006]

i thought this movie was good,i like any thing with chuck in,it was a different role for him, but he carried off the role very well.not much violence,which was good to see. a little bit of religion does not hurt any body and having faith in god and faith in people is nothing to be ashamed about. a nice family movie, no swearing or nudity was a nice change. was nice to see chuck's son and granddaughter in this movie, nice to see family members involved in this movie, they should all be pleased with the end result, a movie for all the family to watch. i purchased this movie on DVD, and have watched it a number of times,my twin daughters aged 13 really enjoyed watching it

Something different from Chuck Norris.

[HarryLags · 6/10 · 30 October 2016]

"Bells of Innocence" is a good Christian film, in that it includes a hero who attempts suicide on screen, an angel who is a total asshole, and a little girl who murders people. So in other words, it's not really a Christian film at all, and so none of the confusing plot twists make any damn sense because you can't just say Jesus did it.

"The Bells of Innocence" is the story of what happens to three close friends, while on a missionary flight to deliver Bibles to a town in Mexico. Having been forced to make an emergency landing in their small aircraft, they become involved in defending the innocent locals in a fight for their lives and their souls.

A very unusual Chuck Norris film that's kind of entertaining, but it's not one of his best. Chuck Norris doesn't bust out any karate moves on anyone either. What a truly strange film. It's like a religious horror western film with some action. This movie combines danger with Faith, you gotta trust in God to get through the danger.

Overall it is kind of interesting, However, there are no Chuck Norris action scenes in this movie, so don't watch it if you want to see Chuck Norris bust out karate moves only.

This movie bites

[worxpace · 1/10 · 29 July 2005]

Boring, rank nefarious plot, some of the worst direction I've ever come across, inane acting and horribly clichéd. The movie ends with one of the main characters waking from a dream. WHAT's WITH THAT? Even JR from Dallas couldn't survive that lame twist.

You have what can only be described as an inappropriate relationship developing between a main character and a young girl, which is ostensibly meant to be fatherly, but which comes off as perverse. You have freshman community college movie school special effects with loopholes the size of the Kimberly Hole. This is like Children of the Corn meets Passion of the Christ imposed on an endless loop of government administration training video - by the end of it, if you aren't contemplating ending it, you have no brain.

Don't bother.

Religious mambo jumbo with bad sound track

[stefanrohlaender · 1/10 · 2 July 2005]

OK, Chuck Norris has shown up in many an entertaining movie over the years. This is not one of them. I won't even bother trying to get into the plot about a Bible shipment gone wrong. The "acting" of the main characters is so wood like, Pinocchio would have done a better job! The synthesizer based soundtrack is even worse than the one in Deathstalker. Whereas traditionally low budget spooky movies are often trying to catch their audience by adding plenty of graphic violence, this one is trying to catch an audience by throwing religious mambo jumbo at the spectator. The plot boils down to different versions of the Bible.

Wow

[ploaker54 · 1/10 · 2 December 2005]

my friends and I are always on the lookout for chuck norris films to just bash and make fun of. One of our favorites so far is Lonewolf. i went to a wal-mart Christmas shopping and i came across this movie in the 5.99 bin. i had to get it. i had high hopes for this movie and although being absolutely hilarious at times, we agreed that bells of innocence is the worst movie we've ever seen, made, produced, thought up, etc... who the hell would think this is a good idea. not only is it confusing at times, but the acting is just hard to watch. the man who plays oren has acting i can compare to my own vomit, and chuck took a dive on this one, he's not the greatest actor, but this was terrible. and what kind of names are oren, conrad and jux........ jux. come on people. if you honestly thought this movie was at all watchable, great for you because it was hard for me and i seriously had a headache and stomach pains after watching it. I'm telling you now if you haven't seen this movie, DON'T!!. For the love of god please do not subject yourself to such a horrible 90 minutes of your life.

A real mission from God

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 14 March 2014]

For those of you expecting Chuck Norris to do some fancy karate moves on Satan's minions in Bells Of Innocence you will be disappointed. Chuck is getting a bit old for that and he's playing a senior citizen in Bells Of Innocence. Son Mike Norris who is the real star of this film does take care of a couple of them while he and his friends are fleeing for a few seconds.

The younger Norris is a Christian who's fallen away from the faith with the death of his young daughter and friends David A.R. White and Carey Scott try to bring him back to the church by taking him on a mission trip. The mission as they plan it is a trip to Mexico to give away Bibles. But the plane has to make a forced landing in a strange town called Ceres, Texas where time seems to have stood still for about a century and a half.

As it turns they've got a real mission now. The place has been taken over by devil worshipers and there's a passing of the torch of leadership of sorts by the Satanist crowd. The coming of these three strangers has been foretold in their lore.

Chuck Norris plays a rancher who has the only communication with the outside world, a short wave radio. But that won't be much help. Chuck has some other help available though in the crunch.

Bells Of Innocence seems to be a modified rip off of the Stephen King classic The Stand. It's not great, but it's not deserving of some the trashing it's getting from other reviewers. Christian audiences should appreciate it.

No vegetables in my dessert, please

[EdwardMartinIII · 1/10 · 28 November 2005]

(Chances are, I'm gonna spoil Valuable Plot Points while writing this and because I can't determine and don't really care what YOU think is a Valuable Plot Point, then if you are thinking of watching this film and have an issue with learning such things, then I suggest you hop right on to the next review.) You know, I don't mind the cult films being filed under the "cult" section. And people who believe it can go there and get their fill of the "reality". I mean, is it too much to ask that the overtly pseudo-Christian propaganda films be filed with the other Special Interest movies?

I couldn't have been more flabbergasted had Pat Robertson made a porn movie. (or would that be "flubbergasted"?)

It was bad enough that there was an egregiously insufficient count of kicking and punching in this. It was bad enough that the same story has been done repeatedly in much better ways. It was bad enough that it wasn't filed under Special Interest, with other cult films. It was bad enough that it somehow is receiving nods for being "realistic" as if we live in the world where towns get possessed by the "debbil" and the really profound and nasty evil ISN'T done by human beings -- usually in the NAME of religions based on the god of Abraham. It was bad enough having to simply shut the thing down because people were complaining so loudly that it was awful.

No, the really BAD part was when one of our guests stood up after we finally had to just turn the damn thing off, and declared "I for one would like to see something really violent or pornographic now, just to get that OUT of my head. Preferably both, if you have it." And we had just MET her.

Unforgettable!

[economopoulos-78660 · 1/10 · 23 April 2019]

I've watched this once, 15 years ago. I can honestly say that from the countless movies i've watched over the years none left an impression as much as Bells of Innocence.

Since then, every bad movie i watched i thought to myself "at least it's not Bells of Innocence". Even after i started rating movies in IMDb, to decide on a low rating i was thinking how much better than Bells of Innocence it is.That is why that's the only movie i ever rated with one star, while i watched numerous terrible ones, Bells on Innocence lowered the bar so much that no other could ever compare.

Bells Of Innocence Review

[KWilksD · 5/10 · 14 May 2005]

This is one of the darkest Christian movies I have ever seen (and I have seen a lot of Christiann films). Bells of Innocence tells the story of three men who crash in the desert when taking a small airplane to deliver bibles to a town in Mexico. They come upon a mysterious town that is being controlled by an evil force. The acting is pretty good. The visual effects were good at the beginning and during the middle of the movie but I think their quality went down somewhat towards the end. The movie does well in its attempt to depict the struggle between good and evil. The story is pretty easy to understand although I got a little bit confused with Mike Norris's characters death at the end. I would say the movie is probably not suitable for children, who could get scared from some of the scenes.

The Burn Without The Violence

[DKosty123 · 1/10 · 31 July 2009]

When you watch the making of with this DVD - they tell you what is attempted here- they are retelling the bible story of good versus evil & trying to preach it to a main stream movie audience. In a modern society such as ours, this is where the film fails. There are way too many sheep depicted in this movie. People are too empowered for this type of preaching today.

As far as the acting, directing, & technical functions, they are done OK. Chuck Norris actually is OK as an angel as the unpredictable appearance of Norris as an angel is no more absurd than Tommy Smothers was in the 1960's sit com.

A very good movie with a good message for people intelligent enough to understand it

[punchfront · 8/10 · 28 December 2004]

It appears as though some people have a major problem with anything dealing with Christianity. Lets face it Christianity is a live and well and very much a part of many peoples lives today. As for me, I have been to Mexico on 7 different occasions, each time bringing with me Bibles. I am not Catholic, and the Bibles I brought were excitedly accepted. This movie focuses not on anything more than Good vs. Evil, only it comes from a standpoint of Angels vs. Demons, with the Angels being victorious. It does not come across as a fundamentalist Christian movie trying to cram beliefs down your throat. As a matter of fact, there were about 3 or 4 inappropriate words, as well as an angel that smoked cigars and handed out beer. If this were fundamentalist Christian as some have asserted, this would not have occurred. Overall, a pretty good movie.

Interesting little movie 6 out 10

[WingsStef · 6/10 · 18 July 2004]

I just watched this movie with a friend of mine. It was a little corny yet it was entertaining. Yes, it is a religious movie, but not very preachy. But if you are not Christian, it might bother you. Over all, this movie is a heartwarming movie that you can watch with the family. Though, I wouldn't recommend this movie for kids under that age of 10 because of some violence, unless you are sure they know the difference of fiction and reality.

* SLIGHT SPOILERS WARNING *

The movie starts out with a mission to bring bibles to a village in Mexico. But something goes wrong on the way there. The trio is forced to land in the middle of the dessert, where they discover a mysterious town. I'm not going to say anything else, but let's just say this town is *different*

Chuck Norris for the loss

[skudav · 29 May 2006]

Chuck Norris spews Christian BS on audience. This is ridiculous. Mike Norris was eyeing that girl's body. Does that constitute good Christian morals? Priests might agree. A short synopsis would be as follows: A damned village is saved by the miraculous acting of Mike Norris and the two other shmoes that follow him around. The special effects were on par with ILM and Pixar.

Caution: Spoilers: Mike Norris saves the day by finding Jesus. He then dies inexplicably and goes to heaven with his dad and granddaughter, Gabby. Gabby remains an annoying little twit, but, also inexplicably, the best actor in the movie. Go figure.

Chuck Norris's tears do not cure cancer. They cause cancer.

An Okay B-Horror Film

[adam-462 · 5/10 · 2 December 2006]

Everyone has an opinion. Certainly, there's a good reason that this movie didn't get nominated for an award. It's simply a B-horror flick complete with cheesy contrivances, and music that rather than setting the mood, told us what was going to happen. However, the movie has strong points such as: 1) Chuck Norris-As Matthew he's cool as ice, proving you don't have to hit someone to be intimidating-particularly if you're Chuck Norris.

2) The film while suffering from some predictability kept me watching by making me wonder, "What exactly is going on?" Yes, the Devil's working in the town, but what the heck is he doing? The movie revealed exactly what over the movie and kept the audience's attention.

3) The movie opted for weirdness. Movies can stumble into blasé or they can stumble into completely cheesy, but weird is a choice. The people of the town, the leader, and the peacock joke all made this like a Mexican border version of Fargo if you think about it long enough.

So is it the greatest movie of all time? No. Is it the worst? I'd suggest that people who say that need to expose themselves to "The Beast of Yucca Flats." "Bells of Innocence" is a B-movie with a positive message. For those of you expecting something else, to paraphrase the great Forest Gump, "The $5.50 DVD bin at Wal-Mart is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get."

This movie does not bite. It is rather good.

[john-regan-1 · 9/10 · 24 October 2005]

The last reviewer said that Jux woke up at the end of the movie, having a horrible dream, making the movie really stupid. The 'waking up from a dream' part was actually Jux having a mental flash before he was murdered by the little girl. Also, Jux was not being a pervert when he was being friends with the little girl. He was acting like a father to her, as he really was having a hard time dealing with his daughter's death.

This movie is excellent. It is very gripping and intriguing. However, there are no Chuck Norris signature action scenes in the movie, so don't watch it if you want to see an action movie. :)

It isn't as bad as everyone says

[underthescars-96 · 6/10 · 5 May 2020]

Ok, so it's a little cringy as far as how the Christian aspects come in. It's an obvious low budget film, like definitely obvious. The story line is ok. The intentions were right, but it does fall short on what everyone expects. If you want to see Chuck Norris fight in this movie, than you are going to hate this movie.

At last, a good one...

[Gargon · 9/10 · 12 July 2004]

This is one you can watch with your older children. No profanity. No offensive sex scenes. It does have a Christian slant to it. But what's the problem with that? You know who the bad guys are. You know who the good guys are. And there's one guy torn between both sides who holds the balance in his hands. Just like the old B westerns that I loved as a boy. No question as to where the lines are drawn. We need more movies that have well defined heroes that take stands against evil. We need more of that in the real world... since we have some definite bad guys lurking out there now. I'll get off my soapbox now. Have a great day.