Wie rettet man Weihnachten? Kirks überchristlicher Schwager lehnt das kommerzialisierte Fest ab, weil es nichts mehr mit der Bibel zu tun hat. Kirk will, das alle ihre Freude haben - auch se... Alles lesenWie rettet man Weihnachten? Kirks überchristlicher Schwager lehnt das kommerzialisierte Fest ab, weil es nichts mehr mit der Bibel zu tun hat. Kirk will, das alle ihre Freude haben - auch sein Schwager.Wie rettet man Weihnachten? Kirks überchristlicher Schwager lehnt das kommerzialisierte Fest ab, weil es nichts mehr mit der Bibel zu tun hat. Kirk will, das alle ihre Freude haben - auch sein Schwager.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 4 Gewinne & 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
- Kirk's Sister
- (as Bridgette Ridenour)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Just from a filmmaking perspective, it's extremely shoddy. Many portions look like home movies. A large part of the film is Cameron sitting in a car talking to a friend, and that's not interesting to watch. "Comedy" scenes have nothing to do with the rest of the story, and are creepily unfunny. A bizarre dance scene at the end is out of place and seems inserted to extend the time. Cameron's presence here is smarmy and smug; he lays out his spiritual views and his friend just gushes about how right Cameron is and how he's helped him see the light and love Christmas and all that.
A bigger problem is the misinformation that Cameron spews so authoritatively, some of which runs counter to the Bible and to known history. To give a partial list:
Cameron claims that Joseph and Mary were hiding from soldiers sent by Herod to kill all babies being born. But the Gospel of Matthew says the soldiers were sent by Herod AFTER Jesus was born, when Herod was tipped off by the visiting Wise Men that a King of the Jews had been born. Joseph and Mary then took Jesus and did the Flight into Egypt to save the child's life.
Cameron insists the Nativity took place in a cave because the manger was made of stone. No source claims the manger was stone, or that the Nativity took place in a cave. Matthew says it was in Joseph's house in Bethlehem, Luke says it was a stable. This seems like a post-hoc attempt to link the Nativity with the Resurrection.
Cameron says frankincense and myrrh were "funeral spices." Although myrrh had been used in Egyptian mummification, frankincense was not, and both were much more commonly used as a sacred incense in Hebrew temples.
He goes into detail about Saint Nicholas' life, presenting it as fact, but in truth very little is known for sure about him, and some Christian leaders openly suggest that he may never have existed. All that is known for sure is that someone named Nicholas was at one point the Bishop of Myra; everything else is unsure and in the territory of legend and myth.
Legend has it that during the Council of Nicaea, Nicholas angrily struck Arius in the face for saying that Jesus and God were separate. Cameron depicts Nicholas savagely and brutally attacking Arius and beating him with a shepherd's crook, a scene many Christians found objectionable.
Cameron depicts the historical Saint Nicholas climbing on a sleigh to deliver presents to children, something he never did in any legend. He also claims that Saint Nicholas is the gift-giver everywhere, also not supported by history. Some areas give gifts on Christmas, others at Epiphany, others on St. Nicholas' day, and in some areas the gifts are delivered by someone else entirely, such as La Befana in Italy, St. Basil in Greece, the Yule Lads in Iceland, St. Lucy in Croatia, and multiple countries have the gifts delivered by the Magi, angels, or the Christ Child himself.
Cameron says Nicholas was "sainted," when in reality Nicholas was never canonized. His sainthood was more by word-of-mouth.
Cameron makes an elaborate rationalization for Christmas trees relating to the crucifixion and to the Garden of Eden; this connection is very convoluted and labored, and doesn't hold water. And he doesn't address the parts of Jeremiah which some feel are a commandment against Christmas trees.
He claims that gifts piled under the Christmas tree are perfectly acceptable as they are reminiscent of the skyline of Jerusalem. By that reasoning, they could also be the skyline of Babylon or Rome, and could represent oppression and slavery. It's a poorly considered analogy that should never have been included.
I'm sure I'm missing other bits, but I'm not inclined to go back and watch it again. It's unsettling to see Cameron stand and claim that it's OK to be materialistic at Christmas, because that's when God came to the Earth in material form. (That's pretty much a direct quote.) Never mind the many passages where the Bible tells us to set aside worldly things and not be materialistic! He exhorts viewers to eat themselves to bursting and buy the biggest ham and the richest butter....but isn't gluttony considered a deadly sin?
At no point does he address such issues as helping the poor, feeding the hungry, giving to charity, volunteering, or anything. One is left with the impression that one should only think of one's self and one's immediate family and friends. Does Cameron remember Jesus' command to his followers to give away all they had to the poor? Somehow, I don't think so.
Cameron gives the impression of someone who read parts of the Bible long ago, but rather than fit his life to the Bible, he is fitting the Bible to the life he wants to lead, and making one justification after another without ever bothering to double-check if he's remembering it correctly, or if there's something in the Bible that disagrees with him. It's clear he considers himself a better Christian than you. Many of the faithful have been turned off by this movie, some even going so far as to declare it blasphemous and call Cameron a false prophet. I'm not so sure I would agree, but at the same time, this movie does have some value of showing how even a faithful Christian can fall victim to the sins of pride and arrogance. It's clear that Cameron's ego was in overdrive, and this movie is not as much a testament to God as it is an expression of Cameron's arrogance.
The film begins with an uncomfortable scene involving Kirk Cameron sitting in a chair, lecturing at the audience. "They don't want us to love Christmas," Cameron declares authoritatively, never bothering to define exactly who "they" are. Cameron drones on for several more minutes, and at this point in the film, I heard a kid in the back of the theater yawn loudly—perhaps an audible protest that this film would not be the exciting romp promised on the poster.
Finally, the film cuts away from Kirk Cameron, and we see several characters enjoying a Christmas party. But then we see Kirk Cameron again, the film freezes, and we hear Kirk Cameron narrating about himself: "That's me—Kirk!" More lecturing ensues.
Eventually, a character by the name of Christian (almost as clever as "Josh Wheaton"), a Christian himself, despondently finds his way to a car, apparently disillusioned by the materialism of Christmas. Enter Kirk Cameron, who enters the vehicle and does what he does best—more lecturing.
The majority of the film takes place in this car as Kirk lectures to Christian, with occasional cutaways to Biblical imagery. Cameron tries to make the case that Christmas traditions, such as celebratory trees and gifts, all somehow originated with Christianity, not paganism. (Never mind the fact that ancient paganism predates Christianity.) "Last time I checked, God created the winter solstice!" is the type of asinine reasoning you'll hear from Kirk Cameron throughout the film. Cameron's facts are both dubious and sparse, and his connections are spurious—but Christian is nevertheless invariably blown away by Kirk Cameron's apparently amazing insight.
Perhaps aware that interminable lecturing on its own would be unbearable for an audience, the film provides characters with quirky personalities in an effort to break up the tedium. In particular, we are treated to a scene back in the house of two characters rambling schizophrenically as they drink hot chocolate. It has nothing to do with Christian's story, it makes the movie feel unfocused, it goes on for far too long, and if my theater is any indication, it is not funny at all. In fact, there was dead silence in my theater throughout the entire run of this "comedy" film.
The film ends with a dance sequence that feels like it lasts ten minutes, as well as multiple, gratuitous blooper scenes—I suppose for no reason other than to pad the running time. Just when you think it's finally over, we see Kirk Cameron again, and he continues to lecture the audience—this time about how materialism is just fine, because Jesus came to us in a material body, after all.
One gets the impression that Kirk Cameron actually started reading his own Bible, was disturbed by what he found (such as Jesus' instruction to "go sell your possessions and give to the poor"), and produced this film as a desperate justification for his own hypocrisy.
At my theater, nobody laughed, and nobody stayed for the end credits. This purported comedy film fails at every level. If you're really looking for a laugh, go back and take a look at what Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort have to say about the glorious design of the banana.
Three margaritas seems to be the minimum for watching this one. With that much tequila in you, you will be able to appreciate the subtle humor and profound wisdom of Kirk Camer...hmph....hmph....hmph....BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!!!! Sorry. I thought I could type that with a straight face. I couldn't. Must be the margaritas.
At any rate, this is a laughably bad movie that should go a long way toward torpedoing Mr. Cameron's already sinking career. And I say, fire at will!
This film isn't even bad in a fun way like BIRDEMIC or THE ROOM or PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE. Instead, it's just ponderous and preachy-- things no one wants from a movie. Totally misguided and terrible.
This movie is a total waste of time and money, and I honestly believe it's the worst movie of 2014.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesShortly after the film's release in November 2014, Kirk Cameron responded to the film's almost universally negative reviews by pleading with his fans on his Facebook page. His post read: "Help me storm the gates of Rotten Tomatoes. All of you who love 'Saving Christmas'--go rate it at Rotten Tomatoes right now and send the message to all the critics that WE decide what movies we want our families to see. If 2,000 of you (out of almost 2 million on this page) take a minute to rate 'Saving Christmas', it will give the film a huge boost and more will see it as a result! Thank you for all your help and support in putting the joy of Christ back in Christmas!". The following day, Cameron took to Facebook again to claim that the film's rating had rose to 94% thanks to his plea to fans and supporters. However, the call to manipulate votes angered some film fans who took to Rotten Tomatoes to leave negative reviews (Saving Christmas's current rating is 0%). Cameron later blamed the negative reaction on "haters, pagans and atheists" and also claimed there was "an atheist conspiracy" to ruin the film that was allegedly hatched on Reddit.
- PatzerDuring Kirk Cameron's opening monologue his cup (which is supposed to be full of hot chocolate) is obviously empty.
- Zitate
Christian White: This is a complete hijacking! This is a hijacking! High-handed, hijacking! Handedness-jacking! It's like a car-jacking of our religion!
- Crazy CreditsLess than a minute into the end credits, there's about 3 minutes of bloopers. After all the credits have rolled, about 2 more minutes of bloopers follow.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Cinematic Excrement: Left Behind (2015)
- SoundtracksHark! The Herald Angels Sing [Inst]
Music by Felix Mendelssohn (uncredited)
[Incorrectly credited as written by Henry Stuck]
Courtesy of Extreme Music
Top-Auswahl
- How long is Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Budget
- 500.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 2.783.970 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 992.087 $
- 16. Nov. 2014
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 2.783.970 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 19 Min.(79 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1