God Is Not Dead

A lot of reviewers believe this is just propaganda and says the movie generalizes all (small spoiler alert) Muslims, atheists, and others; however that is not the case. It is simply telling a story,as all movies do, it can not possibly get every story/ scenario that ever existed nor can it include every friend that you know who is a nice atheist or Muslim or whatever. I am sorry to say this, but no movie actually can in 110 minutes. It is simply telling about (small spoiler alert) a few people who are connected in various ways and their journey to the Christian Faith.

And to address the "propaganda" comments, guess what you are right- in some degree. In order for something to be labeled as propaganda it must first be false or exaggerated. There was nothing in this move that is false/ exaggerated because people have been/are killed for the Christian Faith about everyday (yes it's true Google it!) so since that extreme is currently happening anything less can not be an exaggeration nor false.

The second qualification one would need to call something propaganda is to "further a cause". Which, duh, the movie is called God's Not Dead. It is telling you in the title what it's motivations are. It is being more obvious than a commercial you see on TV or an ad in a magazine. If you still think that is horrible have you ever heard of the words "product placement" or "plug". The most talented and skilled actors, producers, directors, of movies and film all do it. Think about your favorite TV show and watch how the main actor just happens to be drinking a Sprite- does this make you angry? Well, if it doesn't then you are getting mad about obvious acts of persuasion (this movie) but not about subliminal. Hmmm.

It has some great stories and it tells them well. Go see the movie!

* Absolutely horrible acting: All acting ability in every God Not Dead movies are absolutely horrible. Cannot digest it even if trying to watch it for finding a possitive review * Absolutely useless idealogy and debates: Every characters idealogy and debates in this movies is mockery and dumb and waste of times. Like some questions have answers in itself already, and still take out for an debates * Absolutely waste of money: Instead of making this wasted of times and money movies you should using money to donate to every poor community, Jesus doesn't want this way * This movies destroy actors reputation.

Usually when they make a movie out of an urban legend it is an amusing urban legend. The atheist professor dumbfounded by the brilliant young student (usually Einstein) has been making the rounds on the internet for some time now. It reminds me of the Underpants Gnomes episode of South Park: Step one, steal underpants. Step two, ???? Step three, profits. Same deal with the meek student and arrogant professor. All the variations on the internet are the same, a big hole in their reasoning when it comes to proving the existence of God. Hoped this movie would be different, it wasn't. Hoped it would at least be interesting and well written or acted, oh well. Please don't waste your time. I gave this movie a chance because I thought Kevin Sorbo could make anything funny by going tongue in cheek. The poor man had no chance. A final thought, if you can prove God exists, wouldn't some cleaver philosopher or scientist done so by now, and dispensed with the need for faith? And fortunately the need for this movie.

The premise of the movie is a great one: a David vs. Goliath type of debate over God. While the acting was very good and could have easily achieved that goal, it got screwed by a bad script and a bad (or partisan!) director: the movie is blatantly partisan for Christianity by depicting the atheist professor ("Goliath") as an arrogant asshole while the student ("David") is playing the likable, modest, and fairly smart Christian opponent.

No professor would ever act like the one in the movie (I happen to be one of them) and hardly any one of them would be as arrogant, especially in philosophy.

On the other hand, the technically outstanding presentations of the student (using fancy animations etc.) used lame arguments, e.g. "evolution makes no jumps" citing Darwin himself. Hey, that's a 150-year old argument, long obsolete, since Darwin even didn't know about DNA or mutations (surely evolution does make jumps!).

The whole psychological argument was more or less ignored although it is the most important argument in favor of religion: it simply makes people feel good, no matter whether there is a god or not. (It did come across rather in passing though).

This film is ridiculous and insults the viewer's intelligence. This "story" has so many mistakes and flaws that I am ashamed of having spent almost 2 hours on it. I had hoped that at least the debates would be interesting, a mistake.