The Last Sin Eater

This is a work of art with universal appeal. The fact that the "Christian right" is claiming it as their own, should not turn off everyone else. Whether your world view is shaped by Jungian archetypes, Western philosophy, Eastern karma, or the books of Judaism, you will find deep meaning in this tiny-budget film.

The landscape is overwhelming, the characters captivating and the last few minutes of the film will require at least two hankies. Liana Liberato turns in a stunning performance as Cadi, the guilt burdened child around whom the story revolves; and Peter Wingfield brings incredible warmth and passion to a character whose face is obscured for most of the film. This work will endure as an art classic.

First off the budget is small so be kind. Its a pretty solid story although it probably could have been fleshed out and feels a little disjointed in places. It is still a solid film and an excellent addition for fans of Christian films, unlike many Christian films it does not whitewash its message.

The best part of the film is the performance of Peter Wingfield as the Sin Eater. While he is almost a minor character as far as screen time his performance makes the film. His voice is so sorrowful in his scenes (he is hidden for the majority of the movie) that you could just sob for him. His pathos is spot on. He is not overly dramatic but succeeds in selling the believability of the film.

I watch these missionary films from time to time. There is an earnestness in most of them that makes up for the fact that they are so horrible.

In my city is Pat Robertson's film school, training hundreds of people a year to make these things. I often wonder what will happen when they actually are able to make good movies?

I am beginning to believe that this may never happen. Film may be making Christianity obsolete. I know this may sound strange. Cinema seems profoundly malleable, a vehicle for any story. And Christianity has survived by adapting far, far from what Jesus believed, making any necessary compromise.

But film has rather rigid dynamics when combined with the forces of how we define ourselves through stories. It is extremely flexible, but only within a conceptual marketplace where the collective projections of self reinforce each other. Cinema allows us to define our own cosmos. It worries me that the rivers are sometimes so banal, but such the way of the collective — and young imaginations have surprising sophistication.

Christianity on the other hand is about accepting a prefabricated story. Well, different ones depending on the preacher's agenda, but the cosmos is defined in a very top down manner. Theoretically, they could overlap a lot, but that is not what the world seems to want. Even the most obvious Jesus stories like Harry Potter don't follow the rules of the Christian institution.

This film has prompted me to believe that it may be impossible to make powerful cinema with the existing dogma. Everything about it fails.

The irony is that the story flows are about rigid superstition being made obsolete, not by the Bible in the story, but because people simply want to explain for themselves what the world is.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Let me start off by saying I am not a Christian (I DO believe in God but I'm afraid that doesn't make me a Christian) - and to answer your question: YES, this is a *Christian* movie, with a very clear message, but I won't spoil the plot for you.

The story in a nutshell is the awakening of a Welsh community in early America, coming to terms with their dark history, seen through the eyes of a ten year old child.

There are flaws. It's based on a novel, so the director had to make difficult choices to narrow down the plot for screen time. The editing wasn't good and led to some incoherency and superficial plot holes. The story sometimes wasn't going anywhere, and the 'horror' scenes best could've been left out, they seem out of place. Special effects looked cheap. Last and least: the accents. They should've invested a bit more in accent training because this sounded like a far fetched (teethless) dialect..

But there's some good performances to be admired. First of all, I tip my hat for Liana Liberato. What a great actress at such a young age. Secondly Soren Fulton did a great job and there was lots of chemistry between him and Liana. And what about Louise Fletcher?! Excellent. The actress who once played the horrid nurse Pratched (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest).. she performed wonderfully and was brilliantly cast.

So let's see what we have here. If you take all these things into account and you're not scared off by evangelism - not bad for a Sunday afternoon.

This movie had very good elements, a grieving family, a community secret, dark undertones, a message of hope.....but it was all destroyed by the editing. While this movie was being filmed, the emotions were palpable on the set; the hair on the back of my neck stood up many times. Unfortunately, the director was so concerned about not showing any violence on screen, that all the passion was edited out.

Mr. Landon edited the most emotional scenes like it was an MTV video. He did not allow many of the camera shots to stay with one character for more than 2 seconds. This created very choppy scenes and disconnected his audience from the story. Mr. Landon did allow the scenic shots to pan, and zoom in (they were beautiful shots due to the DP), but we could have done with shorter scenic shots and longer camera time during the emotional scenes.

The three most disappointing scenes were Brogan Kai choking Caddie, the Sin Eater taking Caddie's sins away, and the Indian Massacre scenes. When these were being filmed, many of the crew had tears in their eyes. You could have heard a pin drop, no one was breathing. These were intense, emotional scenes, and Mr. Landon edited them down to very bad, home movie play-acting.

It is ashame, because Mr. Landon directed this film very nicely, and the original camera shots stayed on the actors for a much longer time. Mr. Landon should not have been allowed in the editing room.