Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThe Biblical prophecy of Armegeddon begins when the Rapture instantly takes all believers in Christ from the Earth. A reporter left behind learns that the Anti-Christ will soon take power.The Biblical prophecy of Armegeddon begins when the Rapture instantly takes all believers in Christ from the Earth. A reporter left behind learns that the Anti-Christ will soon take power.The Biblical prophecy of Armegeddon begins when the Rapture instantly takes all believers in Christ from the Earth. A reporter left behind learns that the Anti-Christ will soon take power.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 3 nominations au total
- Bruce Barnes
- (as Clarence Gilyard)
- Alan Tompkins
- (as Philip Akon)
Avis à la une
Just from the standpoint of production value, screen writing, and movie making, this movie fails on many levels, though it succeeds on a few as well. What can you expect from a low-budget, "B" movie? Not much, and it works from the standpoint of production. However, the writing is certainly disjointed, with little in the way of character development...exactly what I'd expect when there is an agenda to a film. I didn't have a problem with the acting...the cast is solid; however, the screenplay in both movies gives the actors little opportunity to really stretch themselves. Because the film is "Christian," this is predictable, as you can't very well portray violent chaos of the "end times" without also breaking some of the ethics which are normally associated with Christianity. In other words, the mistake comes in making this into a G-rated film when the content, even in the most conservative of Bible interpretations, would be R-rated by any measure. So, if the purpose of the movie is to scare people into Christian faith, then the movie should be somewhat scary, right? However, you can't comment on a film adaptation from a book without commenting on the book, or in this case, series of books. There are certainly plenty of Christian materials worthy enough to be made into movies...but not the "Left Behind" series...and these movies ultimately fail because, while being best-sellers, they are poorly written novels based on bad theology.
As a Southern Baptist minister, I confess that the books were a guilty pleasure for me, though I have yet to finish the last two books of the series. I have described them as decent fiction, and if the books would take the point of view that this is one "possibility" or interpretation of the subject of biblical eschatology (study of the "end times), then I could live with that. However, this series is divisive in Christian circles because it promotes the "literalist" interpretation of all Scripture above a more proper hermeneutic. Inevitably, this leads to the "pre-trib, pre-millenial" dispensation point of view, which confines an all-powerful God far too by humanity's world. In other words, as I've always said, God shouldn't need our helicopters and bombs to do his ultimate work. But because many people, particularly unstudied Christians, can't think beyond their own world-views, we are left with a pro-conservative, fundamentalist stance with regard to Bible interpretation, and attempts to push it through as the "only" interpretation.
Thus, the books carry with them an agenda, not so much to get the "lost" to understand their need for Christ, but to state that the fundamentalist point of view is the only valid way to understand the Bible. I recall very clearly reading (several years ago) in the second novel a scene where the characters reference a person who was "left behind" BECAUSE of his non-adherence to this point of view; as if "real" christians worthy to be "raptured" couldn't possibly hold to another eschatology. This is disturbing for several reasons, the least of which is because a "rapture" is only briefly mentioned in Scripture and it's connection to real, end-time prophecy is tenuous at best.
But the real issue with these books is comes in the way they divide the Christian community and how they portray "true" Christian behavior. Ultimately, I feel they harden more people to an otherwise legitimate faith/religion instead of win people towards it. It turns all Christians into caricatures, equally disdained and laughed at by the world despite the fact that there is theological room for a wide diversity of believes within Christian thought and practice. As a Christian body, on the whole, we've done enough of that kind of damage to society over 2000 years of history...and we certainly don't need to promote it by film to thousands, maybe millions of others.
Thus, the "Left Behind" movies fail because the "Left Behind" books aren't worthy to be interpreted into movies.
The effects aren't great. They are on par with a USA original movie or a lower budget TV movie. But hey, Star Trek (Original) is much better than Next Generation so effects don't really matter unless all you want is eye candy (i.e. people that would never ever read a book). My wife read the books and begged me to watch the movie. I was raised a Christian but I am not really sure what I believe now, and I thought it was an ok movie. At least a 5 or 6. All of you Christians and Christian haters are no different. You are both prejudice against the other group. Grow up! I thought the story was a little better than average (6.5) and the acting & producing was average (4.5). I feel the story is the most important thing so I gave the movie a 6.0.
To have a good movie, you need to have a well-written screenplay. Left Behind fell woefully short on this. For one thing, it radically deviates from the book. Sometimes this is done to condense a 400-page novel down to a two-hour film, but in this film I saw changes that made no sense whatsoever.
Another thing, there is zero character development. When characters in the story get saved (I won't say who), the book makes it clear that it's a long, soul-searching process. In the film it's quick and artificial. The book is written decently enough where people like Rayford Steele, Buck Williams and Hattie Durham seem real, but in the movie scenarios are consistently given the quick treatment without anything substantial. In another scene where one character gets angry about being left behind (again, I won't say who), it seems artificial.
I realize as a Christian it's unedifying for me to say I disliked this film, but I can't in a good conscience recommend a film that I feel was horribly done. Perhaps it would've been better to make the first book into 2-3 films. Either way, Christians need to realize that to be taken seriously as filmmakers, we need to start by putting together a film in a quality way. I realize a lot of effort probably went into Left Behind, but that's the way I see it.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesReleased directly to video in 2000, copies of the film came bundled with a free pass to watch the film in theaters when it was later given limited release in early 2001.
- GaffesThe flags flying outside the real United Nations building are of the member nations. The ones shown are of Canada's provinces.
- Citations
[Watching TV]
Chloe Steele: Turn that up.
Raymie Steele: Mom said to turn it down.
Chloe Steele: You always do what you're told?
Raymie Steele: Yeah, you should try it sometime.
- Crédits fousThe Producers wish to thank: Karll Goodman (who inadvertently vanished during editing)
- ConnexionsEdited into Left Behind: Like Son (2013)
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Left Behind: The Movie?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Left Behind: The Movie
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 4 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 4 224 065 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 2 158 780 $US
- 4 févr. 2001
- Montant brut mondial
- 4 224 065 $US
- Durée1 heure 40 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage