Hellbound?

Unlike Michael Moore, whose documentaries present a clearly biased and one-sided view, Kevin Miller's documentary on the nature of hell is nicely balanced and thought-provoking. True, it becomes clear that the filmmaker is leaning towards a position on the subject but I'm willing to grant him that, as his leanings towards Christian universalism run so counter to the popular protestant understandings of hell.

As a critique, the film has a gaping hole in the shape of the catholic view on hell -- there is no mention of the doctrine of purgatory, which would have added significant weight to the discussion. Given the catholic church's position in the development of Christian doctrine, the decision to ignore that voice is disappointing.

The film is clearly meant for an audience of 'believers', but the material is well-presented and offers an opportunity for discussion amongst all people, regardless of their faith. That, I think, is the best quality for documentary films like this one -- that it can facilitate meaningful and intelligent discussion without the awkward discomfort of trying to artificially promote an agenda.

There is the good and bad with this film. The bad is many people telling lies about Hell by simply telling us their opinion and how they feel and therefore deceiving people who are watching this movie. So many of the people interviewed in this documentary don't want to believe in Hell and want to convince us that Hell isn't real. But I am very thankful that Mark Driscoll was in this movie to tell us the truth about Hell. Hell is real; it is forever; and most people go there. The only hope is Jesus Christ and for us to put our trust in Him and to repent. I still found this documentary interesting and worth watching and recommend this movie but I do not want anyone to be deceived.

If God is our pure, all-loving creator, can he really turn his back on sinners and allow them to suffer for eternity in hell? Where did this vision of hell come from? Is it possible we have got hell wrong? Or are recent challenges to the traditional view merely an attempt to avoid the inevitable?

This documentary involves talking to a lot of people about hell, from pastors to Westboro members, to atheists.... to Gwar. Some believe, some do not, some argue that hell cannot be eternal if it exists because that is incompatible with a loving god.

Of all the various concepts of hell -- which is right? Are any right? I think this provided a good overview of the problem, but never really got to the meat and potatoes. Are some theories better than others? Is the whole idea just not possible to sort out? I think a bit more depth would be nice...

Kevin Miller's Hellbound? comes equipped with one monstrous question and that is, "can God and Hell coexist?" Can God really send people, regardless if they're bad, to hell and still viewed as the almighty being? The question is one that has often been forced onto the sidelines, yet is beginning to come back in recent religious discussion.

Miller talks to various people with all different beliefs and backgrounds, including members of the Westboro Baptist Church (the church famous for spreading their hate-mongering "God Hates Fags" signs at military funerals), screenwriter Robert McKee, various evangelical priests, noted Christian author William Paul Young, and David Bruce, head of the Hollywood Jesus website.

We learn early on that there are three different beliefs of Hell that many people hold. The first one is the most basic, "eternal torment," meaning that there is a place called "Heaven" and a place called "Hell." If you're good, you go up, if you're bad, you go down. The second is ominously called "annihilationism," which states that the ones who have lived wholesome lives (to whatever extent of that vague statement) will go up to Heaven and be rewarded with eternal life while the ones who have sinned will be destroyed and cease to exist. The final belief is called "universalism," in which everyone is reconciled to God, sooner or later, no questions asked.

Hellbound? features lengthy, intelligent monologues by people who clearly grasp the idea of spirituality and are in touch with their faith, regardless of what it might be. Documentarian Kevin Miller's strength is that he can take the strong subject matter and juggle it objectively and without a noted bias. Considering all the documentaries that try and take a micro look at a macro issue, Miller also never shortchanges his film's concept and devotes eight-four long, insightful minutes to a debate that has long been alive and will not be solved anytime soon.

Directed by: Kevin Miller.

Hellbound is a movie that deals with the question of is there or is there not a hell, and who goes there after death. The movie contains interviews with quite a variety of people ranging from members of the Westboro Baptist church who protest at military funerals (and in this movie are shown in New York City on the day of the 10th anniversary of 9/11), a pastor of megachurch, a heavy metal rock band, to various authors who have written about what they believe about hell.

It becomes apparent that the filmmakers believe in universalism, meaning all people will eventually go to heaven and that evil people such as Hitler, Stalin etc will have a chance to be redeemed. There are interviews with people who do not agree with this viewpoint, though I think more time is spent on the 'all dogs go to heaven' belief than on other viewpoints. I think too much film time was spent on the fringe people such as the Westboro protesters and not enough time was spent with those who do not believe in universalism.

I do think this is an important movie to see and though there were only 7 people in the theater for a 620pm showing on a Friday night (plus this was the only theater in the Chicago area that had this movie that night), I am hopeful more people will attend future showings.