I doubt I will ever dread seeing a film for the rest of the
year more so than this one. The first film was one of the first that I covered
on this blog and… well, it is ugly on just about every level imaginable. As
such, I spent two weeks prior to the film’s release to try and convince someone
I knew, anyone I knew, to see this
film with me. Needless to say, trying to sell someone else on a film that even
you don’t want to see is a tall order. Thankfully, I did find someone else to
watch it with and share the pain, but that kind of shows just how much seems to
have changed over the last two years. Back then, I was that ill-prepared that I
had to edit down entire pages worth of notes on the film out of some fear that
I’d piss off Christians; now, I actually some confidence in being able to be
non-biased and fair to this film. Does it deserve such treatment? Well, only one way to find out as we look at this inexplicably wide release; seriously, this
is the biggest release I’ve seen for any Christian film in the last several
years over here in Australia.
The plot: High school teacher Grace (Melissa Joan Hart), after answering a student (Hayley Orrantia)’s question about Jesus in class, finds herself under the threat of legal action for supposedly preaching in her class room. With her livelihood at risk, and plaintiff lawyer Pete Kane (Ray Wise) itching to make an example of her, it’s up to her and her lawyer Tom (Jesse Metcalfe) to stop this religious persecution before it becomes a precedent… like that is ever even remotely likely to happen.
There are a lot of recognisable actors in this thing, and
while I would question how much these people actually believe in this material,
Christian films are kind of the last rung in terms of acting gigs. Let’s not
forget the Apocalypse series, which featured actors like Jeff Fahey, Margot
Kidder, Howie Mandel, Gary Busey and even Mr. T at one point or another;
usually, it’s agreed to because it’s the only work they can get. That said,
there isn’t really a whole lot to complain about in terms of acting. The bigger
budget and wider exposure for the film meant that they had to put actual actors
in play, rather than the large gang of amateurs they did last time, and they do
what they can with the material. Hart holds her own with the waif that they
have given her and Metcalfe has a few 'atheists are still douchebags, guys' moments to placate the choir but he shows serious conviction in the courtroom scenes.
A. R. White stays in the background for the most part, thankfully, and while Orrantia has some real stilted moments with Hart, she is fine as well. Wise is just slumming it here, pulling off this despicably evil lawyer and making every word just ooze scumbag from every pore; much like Kevin Sorbo, he fulfils his strawman villain role quite nicely. Pat Boone as Grace’s father is kind of fun in the few scenes he gets (even if he delivers the single worst line in the film about Atheists having all of the pain and none of the hope of Christians), and regardless of context, it is good hearing Ernie Hudson’s awesome voice on the big screen again as the presiding judge. Given his last big-ish performance was in the woefully uneven Torchwood: Miracle Day, I’ll take whatever I can get from the guy.
A. R. White stays in the background for the most part, thankfully, and while Orrantia has some real stilted moments with Hart, she is fine as well. Wise is just slumming it here, pulling off this despicably evil lawyer and making every word just ooze scumbag from every pore; much like Kevin Sorbo, he fulfils his strawman villain role quite nicely. Pat Boone as Grace’s father is kind of fun in the few scenes he gets (even if he delivers the single worst line in the film about Atheists having all of the pain and none of the hope of Christians), and regardless of context, it is good hearing Ernie Hudson’s awesome voice on the big screen again as the presiding judge. Given his last big-ish performance was in the woefully uneven Torchwood: Miracle Day, I’ll take whatever I can get from the guy.
With the last film, I had nothing but ill will for the
filmmakers and furthermore had no guilt for wanting terrible things to happen
to them because I like seeing the universe inflicting karma on the people that
deserve it. I find myself changing my tune ever so slightly and, even if I
didn’t express it so much in the other review, I no longer hold a personal
grudge against these people. The reason for that is it seems that they have at
least taken on board some of the
criticisms made towards the first film (by much bigger critics, because I doubt
they were among the 12 people who initially read my take) and made changes
accordingly.
In the first film, we had not one but two morally
reprehensible “””Atheists”””, one whom physically threatens people and openly
mocks his loved ones and the other who broke up with his fiancée because she
got cancer. Here, nothing nearly that outrageous takes place. The actions shown
by the Atheist majority (yeah, figure THAT one out in terms of this film’s
attempt at realism) feels like more of a collective mindset as opposed to
individual actions, meaning that we don’t get any fundamentalist hogwash this
time around. We only have one truly evil Atheist with Kane, and even he doesn’t
push the boundaries too far. They also corrected a bit of “you might have
missed it” racism with Martin and his father speaking in separate Chinese
dialects, presumably because the filmmakers couldn’t tell the difference. Far
as I can ascertain, and I welcome being corrected on this, it is normalised
this time around and, given the religious persecution that goes on in China,
it’s also the closest this film gets to poignancy. It doesn’t hit it, but it’s
nearer the goal than anything else in this thing.
The plot is also a minor upgrade as, instead of having a
college student argue the existence of God with his teacher, we have a plot
with actual stakes as Grace could lose her job and never be able to teach again
if she is found guilty. However, as much as I applaud nearing closer to actual
relevancy, I find myself preferring Josh Wheaton on this one. He may have been
an Evangelical fundamentalist who needed to be proven right for little more than
pride (let’s not kid ourselves here), but at least he had urgency as a
character. Grace, by contrast, is ultimately a scapegoat for the discussion of
church and state to be made around
without directly involving her too much. And speaking of the discussion, while
this may have improved in certain cosmetic areas, we are still dealing with an
unfathomably wrong-headed story and intent for production. As this is a more
concrete debate than proving the existence of God, which is a goal that is
fruitless regardless of which side you’re on, it needs more concrete talking
points as opposed to just throwing bad science and bad gospel into a blender
and forcing the mixture down our throats. Rather than debating God’s existence,
they spend some time debating the existence of Jesus, which is already kind of
a dumb question in that there is definite proof that Jesus the person existed
but then again we’re not dealing with the best tools in the box.
These screenwriters are not particularly smart; rather than
delivering reasonable (if intentionally weaker) arguments against their point,
they manufacture dead simple platitudes that even non-believers would be able
to correct. It sets up easy targets for the good guys to knock down, which is
largely done by reiterating one of the most brain-numbingly basic issues with
the plot itself: She answered a question asked in class, which is her job as a teacher; case closed. And yet
somehow, because the system represents the Atheist aggressors, it takes an
entire film to even hammer that point home. Hell, the point the case concludes
on just involves Tom (who is pretty much converted by this point, so it’s okay
to like him) facetiously telling the jury to convict her in a moment of… well,
preachiness that is so over-the-top that I was seriously waiting for a
heel-turn on his part.
But this is all ignoring the biggest problem with this film,
and while I don’t abjectly hate the filmmakers, I do want to correct them on
this issue: This isn’t real. This persecution complex, where people must be
martyrs because the world is against them, is unwarranted. There is no Atheist
agenda to wipe religion off the face of the map. They don’t care about someone else’s faith; a
benefit of not strictly adhering to the printed word is that they don’t have to
hate another group just because they were told to. Now, I understand the
increase in volume when it comes to non-Christian ideals may have some people
worried about the condition of their own faith, and while it is a real
overreaction that potential feeling still has relevancy. I can understand
having something you hold in such high regard being questioned and the
emotional effect that can have; ask me about 2013’s The Great Gatsby and you’ll
see raging betrayal in my eyes.
I can safely say, by that same token, that no one’s beliefs
are at risk. The separation of church and state doesn’t mean the neckbeard
invasion is happening, prayer not being done in school isn’t going to curse
anyone’s souls, and simply having faith won’t save you from cancer despite what
happens to Amy (Trisha LaFache) over the course of these films. Actually, her
entire arc here is just a watered-down version of the first one, come to think
of it. The previous film had some serious antagonism towards anyone who is
non-Christian, and here they seem to have focused in solely on the Atheists and
the apparent agenda possessed by them. But I reiterate: They don’t care. The
only times that they do care are when
people of a certain faith try to push it onto others by, rather than standing
up for themselves, standing on top of others in order to get their point across. Like, say,
a film that actively paints Atheists as the enemy and Christians as the
victims, not to mention the minority that they most assuredly are not. This is
nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy; if people keep making material
like this and it gets taken seriously (someone openly applauded in our audience
during one of the courtroom scenes, I shit you not), it will only fuel the same
antagonistic behaviour.
All in all, this isn’t despicably heinous like the first
one. However, that merely means that it is laughably awful instead of
teeth-grindingly awful. The acting is alright, and for once the production
looks cinema-grade, but the writing is ludicrous and the arguments presented
are the most basic think-for-a-split-second dilemmas that only serve to make
Atheists look like idiots. That, and aggressive dictators if you take this film
seriously, but with how it replaces the woeful strawman bile of the original
with just more ridiculousness, this is almost impossible to buy into. How
fitting that a film where a woman is put on trial for preaching is absolutely
nothing but preaching. Preaching to a choir that I know is smarter than to buy
into this crap, but considering not only this film’s wider release and
acknowledgement but its after-credits bit of sequel-baiting, only time will
tell on that one. I do not think that the obvious conservatives who crafted
this thing are vile human beings; I just see this, especially in contrast to
the first film, as the work of a group that wants to express its own fears and
anxieties about society’s reception of their faith. They’re just really, really shite at conveying that on film.
Honestly, if you’re the kind of person who can laugh at how stupid
fundamentalists of any ilk can be, I’d recommend streaming this for some
cheap yucks.
No comments:
Post a Comment