Thank you for posting about the Left Behind movies.
I wonder if you describe the first as "Godawful" because of the acting? Perhaps the special effects? I mean (please excuse my ignorance about the making of movies and all that's involved) if it had received the same financial backing as say the Star Wars epics etc. perhaps it would have had more appeal?
IMO I didn't think it that terribly bad, especially if they were making it on quite a low budget.
I understand Kirk Cameron and his wife (Chloe in the movie) are both Christians.
Well, it could have been a good movie, but typically these "Christian" movies (i.e., made by Christian groups outside of Hollywood) are so saccharine and maudlin they make cheesy Mexican soap operas look Shakespearean by comparison. Only a small niche market (Jesus Freaks who won't even go to a PG movie) buys tickets for them, so these movies never have any "legs", in showbiz parlance.
I'm not just talking about production values. I'm talking about the script, which was lifeless, the continuity, which was non-existent, and the licenses, which were just this side of unforgivable.
Here's a taste:
You're a reporter at a major international event. The technology does not exist for you to go out in the middle of a battlefield, prop a camera on a rock, and immediately begin broadcasting live, with no hookup to any satellite truck or network.
Even assuming such technology did exist, a reporter who expected to go live on the air HAS TO COMMUNICATE WITH HIS NETWORK BEFORE DOING SO. You don't just go out there, turn on your camera, and say "This is Buck Williams reporting Live from Israel."
For the exact same reason, I consider "Up Close and Personal" a godawful movie, and it head great production values.
By the way, what time was the rapture? Ray's in Chicago at the beginning of the movie. We know he travels to NY, gets on a plane and starts flying toward London. It's vedy vedy dark outside when the rapture itself takes place.
But son of a gun, it's still the middle of the afternoon in Chicago, where Chloe is still driving in broad daylight. Sure enough, when they get back to whatever airport they get to, it's daytime again.
Now I've seen fast planes, but I've yet to see a commercial jetliner fast enough to outrace the sun.
The rise of Carpathia is given such short shrift that one has to wonder what on earth is the big deal about him.
The best acting was by the men who played Bruce Barnes and Nick Carpathia. Cameron was okay, and Chelsea Noble... well, God bless her, but she was given a character who was too stupid for words. And she did things in the movie that are not in the book, just to make her character even MORE stupid!
Example: showing up at Ray's house, not knowing his wife and child are gone, and asking him to follow her to New York. I'd have punched her lights out!
Now, is it an enjoyable movie? Sure, the same say ABC Afterschool Specials are enjoyable. But is it any good? Blech.
I finally saw the second movie, which actually bears a passing resemblance to the second book.
Characters are alive who shouldn't be in the beginning, middle and at the end. Carpathia gets short shrift. And the plans to get close to Carpathia seem more ridiculous on video than they do in print.
The first movie is goofy fun and watchable, even though it has its problems. The second one dispensed with the watchability while keeping all the flaws. Sigh.
I want to get a copy of that 70s Christian movie, "Thief in the Night", to place on my video shelf alongside "The Giant Gila Monster", "Curse of Bigfoot", and "The Giant Claw".
That flick was campy and hilarious.
Danny
[This message was edited by TheInvisibleDan on July 15, 2003 at 2:25.]
Recommended Posts
ohbehave
Hi Rafael,
Thank you for posting about the Left Behind movies.
I wonder if you describe the first as "Godawful" because of the acting? Perhaps the special effects? I mean (please excuse my ignorance about the making of movies and all that's involved) if it had received the same financial backing as say the Star Wars epics etc. perhaps it would have had more appeal?
IMO I didn't think it that terribly bad, especially if they were making it on quite a low budget.
I understand Kirk Cameron and his wife (Chloe in the movie) are both Christians.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Well, it could have been a good movie, but typically these "Christian" movies (i.e., made by Christian groups outside of Hollywood) are so saccharine and maudlin they make cheesy Mexican soap operas look Shakespearean by comparison. Only a small niche market (Jesus Freaks who won't even go to a PG movie) buys tickets for them, so these movies never have any "legs", in showbiz parlance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I'm not just talking about production values. I'm talking about the script, which was lifeless, the continuity, which was non-existent, and the licenses, which were just this side of unforgivable.
Here's a taste:
You're a reporter at a major international event. The technology does not exist for you to go out in the middle of a battlefield, prop a camera on a rock, and immediately begin broadcasting live, with no hookup to any satellite truck or network.
Even assuming such technology did exist, a reporter who expected to go live on the air HAS TO COMMUNICATE WITH HIS NETWORK BEFORE DOING SO. You don't just go out there, turn on your camera, and say "This is Buck Williams reporting Live from Israel."
For the exact same reason, I consider "Up Close and Personal" a godawful movie, and it head great production values.
By the way, what time was the rapture? Ray's in Chicago at the beginning of the movie. We know he travels to NY, gets on a plane and starts flying toward London. It's vedy vedy dark outside when the rapture itself takes place.
But son of a gun, it's still the middle of the afternoon in Chicago, where Chloe is still driving in broad daylight. Sure enough, when they get back to whatever airport they get to, it's daytime again.
Now I've seen fast planes, but I've yet to see a commercial jetliner fast enough to outrace the sun.
The rise of Carpathia is given such short shrift that one has to wonder what on earth is the big deal about him.
The best acting was by the men who played Bruce Barnes and Nick Carpathia. Cameron was okay, and Chelsea Noble... well, God bless her, but she was given a character who was too stupid for words. And she did things in the movie that are not in the book, just to make her character even MORE stupid!
Example: showing up at Ray's house, not knowing his wife and child are gone, and asking him to follow her to New York. I'd have punched her lights out!
Now, is it an enjoyable movie? Sure, the same say ABC Afterschool Specials are enjoyable. But is it any good? Blech.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ohbehave
Thanks for the explanation there Raphael 1969
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
I liked it.
I liked seeing the bad guys lose.
I liked seeing the Christian aspect of a favorite from Walker, Texas Ranger.
I liked seeing a real-life husband and wife team enjoying working together.
I bought both of them.
Hopefully,
Kit Sober
I love to hear you laugh -- God
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I finally saw the second movie, which actually bears a passing resemblance to the second book.
Characters are alive who shouldn't be in the beginning, middle and at the end. Carpathia gets short shrift. And the plans to get close to Carpathia seem more ridiculous on video than they do in print.
The first movie is goofy fun and watchable, even though it has its problems. The second one dispensed with the watchability while keeping all the flaws. Sigh.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
I want to get a copy of that 70s Christian movie, "Thief in the Night", to place on my video shelf alongside "The Giant Gila Monster", "Curse of Bigfoot", and "The Giant Claw".
That flick was campy and hilarious.
Danny
[This message was edited by TheInvisibleDan on July 15, 2003 at 2:25.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.