I get offers to review Christian films all the time. 99% of these offers involve me sitting in front of a cheaply made, poorly constructed flick, cobbled together by people who either haven't made a movie before, or by people who should just stop trying. In other words, they're just like regular independent films, just with more chatting about Biblical living. This is on the upper side of the scale. Yes, it is done on a shoestring budget and it has some seriously annoying technical flaws. I'd still recommend it however to those used to the genre.

I will admit a bias towards Christian films. I will also admit my bias comes along with a stricter eye as well. I am more willing to accept a Christian film given that I'm theologically on their side, I'm rooting for them. This said, I am also more willing to get frustrated with their efforts than I would if it were some dimwit indie flick some dolts pieced together with their friends and took to the festival circuit. A Christian film is presenting my worldview after all. Please remember my bias as we go forward.

The film at first seems like a commercial for Patrick Henry College. Caleb (Austin Kearney) and Rachel (Victoria Emmons) are students who fall for each other during participating in the college's moot court competition. There are plenty of scenes showing the campus and presenting the place in the best possible light. This is fine, but it comes across a little obvious that the filmmakers intend on promoting the place (this said, I'd be happy to send my kids there.) Since this is a Christian film, the debate of the moot court is of course Roe vs. Wade. The two students frustrate one another because Rachel, who is very orthodox believes the argument should work to undo Roe while Caleb thinks the argument should undermine it while leaving it in place. The two also begin courting, which brings the films best elements. the coupling of Kearney and Emmons works, as the two actors do have chemistry. The characters are both likable and they are handled well. Rachel is very restrictive in how she conducts her love life, to the point where she won't date until she knows it serious. It is refreshing to see such a philosophy presented in a positive way. She's not overly idealistic about her views, as they seem to come from an understanding of self-respect, something that is commonly misunderstood by most screenwriters. The script by Manny Edwards, George D. Escobar and David Halbrook (there are a total of five people who worked on the story/script - it took two more people to write the script than it took to man a ship to the moon,) does a good job of expressing her worldview. The problem is that her conduct isn't strange in the environment she lives in. She's at a Christian college, flirting with a Christian guy who fully understands her chastity. While the relationship between the two works well, it is also lacking in compelling drama. These are good people and its nice to see good people come together. In a film however, there needs to be conflict to hold interest. The fact that the two agree on everything saps the story of its potential. Had Caleb been more secular in his thinking it would have given Rachel more of a chance to explain her lifestyle. This would have been a chance for the filmmakers to show their competing worldviews in conflict. Which would in turn have put a real argument at the center of a story about arguing - something this film fails to do. Instead of placing this conflict on the students, the script leaves this for Caleb's parents Don and Judith (played by Kenneth and Karen Jezek.) Don is a firm pro-life Christian and Judith a morally pliable, pro-abortion lawyer. While the conflict between the parents is good, it would have been more striking if the students had an equally strong disagreement working in tandem. Since they don't, the pro-abortion mom, Judith is weighed down by carrying the entire secular argument by herself - making her the odd person out in a world of Christians.

The results of the film are not brilliant, as I have mentioned. Then again, I doubt they intended for this to be Citizen Kane. Even when lowering expectations to meet the budget, there are still issues to contend with. The editing in particular is distracting. Please, a note to all of you budding filmmakers out there, when you film a conversation, you do not need to snap between positions on every line. If you do, make sure your composition will allow for this continual back and forth. This kind of technical mistake is common to this film and becomes a little schizophrenic at times. Along with these technical mistakes are moments of potential. The script is loaded down with overt, on-the-nose dialog, and then there will be a scene where everything works and the film is very enjoyable. Same goes with the camera work. There will be a terrible handling of a conversation followed by a well placed composition that really supports the production. During the viewing I was swinging between wanting to turn it off and being impressed with how much they got out of their very limited resources. The actors likewise are hot and cold. When given a well written scene Kearney and Emmons, in particular, do quite well and carry their own. The dialog does let them down at times however, not giving them enough to work with. As is the problem with many films, when it comes time for an agenda to be presented, the script stumbles trying to pretend its not propagandizing a particular viewpoint. Where the film really gets it right is when it doesn't shy away from its agenda. There are scenes where Don frankly explains the pro-life position on when life begins and another where Caleb's professor explains why Roe should be dismantled. These scenes present a clear and concise point-of-view without trying to mask it. If the whole film had the clarity and grace of these scenes the film would have been far superior. This combined with starker conflicts the actors could have sank their teeth into? It would have worked.

This review isn't about what would have been but what is. What we have here is a mixed result. For people who are used to the lower quality of Christian films, they will find this is better than many in the field. For those who are used to independent films, they're used to shoddy material as well but will probably balk at the frank Christian messages. Just watch Hollywood studio films? This will seem like someone's home movie. Me? I can see what they were trying to do, think they got part way there but needed to do more planning. I look forward to the next production to see if they improve.


Related Reviews:
Christian films
The Visitation (2006)
Fireproof (2008)


Other Critic's Reviews:
The Dove Foundation
The Christian Pulse

Labels: Christian film, film, movie review