Deixados para Trás II: Comando Tribulação

The reason this movie does not meet many peoples' standards is simple...money. Movies that are so obviously Christian based will never bring in multi-millions of dollars. Because of this, people just interested in a monetary return would not be willing to risk their money. The people that do risk the money are generally those who feel so strongly about the message that they are willing to risk the money in order to voice the message to as many as possible. It is true, the goal of the producers, actors, etc, is to relay Jesus' own words. That He is the ONLY way to God. ANY other way is a dead end. The movie points out that each individual has a decision to make. We see that repeatedly throughout the film. We are also reminded that a 'not accept' is, by nature, a rejection. Although, the use of that word does seem rather unpalatable and final. It seems that if money is a concern, the movie makers have a choice...emphasize the message or the presentation of such.

I felt the first Left Behind film was such a corny lark (if people leave behind dentures and hip replacements, does that mean they also leave behind breast implants when they get Raptured?) that I had to see what Kirk Cameron and crew were up to for their second turn at bat.

I will state this as clearly as possible - nothing happens in this film, absolutely 100% nothing. There's no progression, no forward momentum, nothing. The only thing you could classify as character development is the believers patronizingly preaching to the uninformed. Does anyone want to get their religion from the kid from Growing Pains? The plot consists of our four left behind-ers forming a group (Tribulation force, unite!) that wants to warn the world that the leader of the UN is the, wait for it, Antichrist. This plan goes nowhere. Two of the Tribulation force members contribute nothing to the cause except wistful praying.

The crux of the film is on a learned Rabbi who is to reveal to the whole wide world that Jesus is actually the Messiah. In what universe would a single Rabbi saying something about religion have the world's eyes and ears? And why would everyone systematically accept one man's words as the divine truth? If this was the case couldn't we end this boring movie with Cameron yelling, "I loves me the Jesus" and be done with it? I enjoy the Rabbi's slow reveal in his speech. He starts talking about how he's proven who the Messiah is (though we see nothing of his findings) and says it's a man who was born in Bethlehem and betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. Then he says it's Jesus. And the audience literally gasps. This whole plot device couldn't be any more insulting.

Overall Left Behind 2 is far worse than the original film, and that is something of an accomplishment of itself. I challenge you to stay awake and interested into what's going on, because there may be more nothing going on in this film than in the entire history of cinema. Cameron is the best the world of journalism has to offer? And anyone else notice that if you're not Western European in ethnicity you're either evil or dead wrong with your religious beliefs. Take that 4/5 of the world!

There are so many laugh-out-loud moments (like the explanation for millions instantaneously vanishing as "nuclear radiation," are we in 1955 all over again?) but the largest drawback of Left Behind 2 is how horrifically boring it is. The Omega Codes were equally atrocious but campy and slightly entertaining in an I-Can't-Believe-People-Spent-Money-On-This kind of way. Left Behind 2 on the other hand has no sense of humor and no sense of style, let alone competent pacing, directing, and acting. I know sixth graders that could blow the socks off these Left Behind thespians.

I can think of no possible reason anyone should every view this film at any time. I have never been more bored, and I fell asleep during The Thin Red Line three separate times when I saw it in theaters. The only reason you would recommend this film is if you wanted that person to die of boredom.

For my money, the DVD menu screen is the funniest and most entertaining part of the film.

It is interesting to approach a dogmatic movie w/out allowing my own personal values system to intrude on my aesthetic judgement - and it was in this spirit of adventure that I decided to watch this appalling excuse for a TV movie.

It is ironic, but I find that - for some reason - many of these flawed attempts at grand Christian filmmaking have much in common with their cinematic-theological antithesis : the seventies cycle of cheap, rip-off Satanic Posession movies. Primarily, derivative pulp thriller scripts with religion awkwardly shoehorned in, poor production values, hollow rhetoric, Soap Opera standard actors and absolutely no love of the medium whatsoever.

It is strange that this cycle of films has now created a cliche so strong that christian filmmaking now has such a bad reputation amongst moviegoers (whatever their religion), that the genre is a byword for pictures to avoid. This should not necessarily be the case - look at the big budget biblical epics of the 50s and 60s or the thoughtful (and occassionally chilling) deconstruction of fundamentalism in Bill Paxtons "Frailty".

Nevertherless - this movie is possibly one of the worst films ever made, right up (down) there with "24 Hours in London" & "Camp Blood" (the latter I only saw by accident - honest). Perhaps I'm being a little bit harsh, but you've got to be cruel to be kind and I think its time for this cycle of movies to be put to sleep.

Aside from movies based upon the life of Jesus Christ, there hasn't been one good Christian film. Until now.

Left Behind II is based on the events right after Left Behind, throwing us deeper into the slowly changing ruled by mastermind Nicolae Carpathia, who is quick to gain power.

The performances are better in the film; its nothing special, sadly, but is not so cheesy. It has its clichés, but in the end, you've forgotten them. My favorite was Gordon Currie, who has so perfectly become the Antichrist in the book series that it'd be difficult to see another in the role (aside from maybe Cillian Murphy).

But when it comes to sticking to the book, the movie does sidetrack a bit. The love story is shortened significantly and the entire ending of the book is left out, but it sticks much closer to the book than the first.

Some of the newer scenes were awesome, my personal favorite being Carpathia shaking the hand of Rayford Steele. The scene is so creepy and thrilling, I'm glad they decided to add it in. The showdown is also nice, although I didn't like the whole angel subplot during it.

Overall, I am glad to say the movie is good. Certainly not great but it so much better than its predecessor or successor, and should've been released on the silver screen. 6.9/10.

I JUST finished watching this movie about ten minutes ago. It's been a while since I've seen the first movie, or finished reading the tenth book, let alone the first or second. I believe I finished those in early April 2002, so it's been a while! Nevertheless, I enjoyed this film. I was extremely happy to see the scene at the Steele house with Buck and Chloe figuring out their misunderstanding, and the cookie scene!!! If I remember correctly that scene was meant to be in the first movie, but I'm not sure. It's been so long!

It was a good movie. I agree that it wasn't as fast-paced as the first movie, but I found myself excited and caught up in some of the smaller stories, especially that of Chris. His story seemed so real to me, and as I watched him twirl that gun I called out to Rayford "hurry up!"

The acting in this movie was phenomenal. I understand that due to time constraints and complexity the movie couldn't stick exactly to what the book had detailed. It was still a good movie on its own. The acting was wonderful, truly great. The plot dragged a few times, but was still good. The emotions were phenomenal.

I was a bit confused by the angelic woman though. I understand what she represented, but it seemed a bit un-natural. I did enjoy the dream sequence though, and Rayford tearing down the pictures of his family because it hurt him so badly. That was so close to my heart, having seen a family member go through that process.

It was a good film. I do recommend renting it, because it's a true joy. Though the movie has its flaws, it's still a solid movie. You begin to develop a relationship with the characters as they develop relationships with one another. I'll rate it a 7 or 8 out of ten. It was perfect, and had flaws, but still a solid movie.