Dieu n'est pas mort 2

Firstly, I'm an atheist. I was raised a devout Episcopalian but I often refer to myself as a secular humanist & non-believer but raised with culturally Christian views. Having said that, I noticed right away at the scene in the history class that nothing Melissa Hart said actually violated any hard & fast 1stAMD separation issues. She was within her rights to share those historical facts. She responded to a question in a history class about historically specific correlations between traditions in non-violent protest and passive resistance. Maybe she could have omitted the lengthy scripture quote from the Gospel---but a sound argument could be made that even that was academically relevant too. So...IMHO it was quite relevant and legal. Remember...I'm not a "believer". No school board would take this complaint seriously. I actually think that the ACLU might have defended Melissa Hart!!! It's obvious that the movie makers are trying to unfairly demonize the "freedom from religion" crowd (a rapidly growing demographic BTW) as fanatically unreasonable and angry. In fact, I've found that the exact opposite is usually true. Just research the landmark Kitzmiller vs Dover School board case. As to the ongoing portrayal of atheists and liberal religious types throughout the film, it's an inartfully constructed "straw man" set up for the express purpose of getting easily knocked down. Poor Christians! They have a Biblical persecution complex and are happiest when they can imagine being burned at the stake by the ACLU and a shouting, un-Churched mob of pagan non-believers! Wait 'til you see how they depict the ACLU lawyers as basely motivated by notoriety, power politics and publicity. Not very good...and not persuasive. I think most people can see through this bit of evangelical agitprop whether religious or non-religious.

It must greatly frustrate the religious right when they are routinely (and unfairly) portrayed in major films as fanatical, sanctimonious, comical, backwoods hicks. Well, "God's Not Dead 2" is clearly their revenge. In this movie, ACLU lawyers are all sneering, oily, evil Simon Legrees. School board characters are all smug, administrative wonks who readily conspire to persecute the sweet, perky teacher. The faces of anti-religion protesters are contorted into manic, rabid, drooling hatred. And mainstream media are all resolutely against God.

There are only black hats and white hats in this film. (Or should I say halos and horns.) No quarter is given to the many nuances or complexities of this issue. Which is a shame. It's a serious subject and deserves better. But the producer and director had no interest in any of that.

Clearly, this film is unapologetically one-sided. Conservative Christians feel embattled and marginalized in an increasingly secular world in which they are repeatedly losing watershed court cases. They haven't had much to cheer about recently and this film hits back at that "unfair", "Godless" world. Consequently, Evangelicals will absolutely love this film. All others will likely never see it unless they're dragged to the theatre and handcuffed to their seat.

As a Christian, I quite enjoyed the discussion of historical Jesus from the researchers/authors who played themselves in the film. What's more, GND2 is cinematically well crafted. But it take's more than just dreamily uttering the name of "Jesus" to make a good film. GND2 quickly deteriorates into a two hour sermon from the pulpit.

Oh, and BTW, it should come as no surprise that Pat Boone still can't act... and neither can Robin Givens.

Before I start I'd just like to say that despite being a rabid anti-theist I have met Christians who are decent people. I've also met a lot of vile atheists . I should also point out that as a traveller abroad I am treated like a king in Indo-Aryan lands in general and Islamic Indo-Aryan lands in particular with the hospitality of both the Kashmiris and the Kurds something that will linger in my memory forever . What I'm trying to say is that if someone is a thoroughly good person this has nothing to do with a belief in a creator while someone who is a bad person and has no belief the two things are completely unconnected. That said if someone crashes an airliner into a crowded building on purpose a belief system involving an afterlife might very well be the prime motive. Regardless the vast majority of believers are not violent terrorists . I feel the need to point this out because GND 2 doesn't feel the need to be objective. Nor does feel the need to be factual in anyway

!!!! SUGGESTIVE SPOILERS !!!!

Teacher Grace Wesley answers a question in class about and because the American constitution separates church and state she finds herself in bother. Actually separation of church and state is one of the very few things the film gets right because America was the first country to do this and is based on the philosophy of Thomas Paine. What is unlikely if not entirely impossible is Grace finding herself in a court of law facing trial . Did witch trials not die out over two hundred years ago ? Yes apart from the McCarthy trials which were directed against suspected communists but the film makes clear it's not communists or any other type of atheist being prosecuted here

The chief villain is the prosecuting attorney who is called Kane which indicates he's of Irish descent but might this not be Europeanised from the name "Cain" ? I think you know what's being implied here and it's not helped by Kane's main motive apart from deicide is making money. I know the film needs a motive for bringing a protagonist to court but couldn't it have been more sensible without appearing racist in anyway?

This is what becomes somewhat unpalatable. The first film has an antagonist trying to effectively "Kill God". In the sequel the antagonist is trying to effectively "Kill Jesus". I don't have to point out that for the last two thousand years the cult of Christianity has pointed the finger very firmly at a certain race who they feel is responsible for this mythical act against a mythical figure. Millions were murdered because of it and many millions more persecuted because of it. Unlike Biblical myth this is established historical fact

What the main argument of the film rests on is "Was Jesus Christ a real person ?" Christian apologist Lee Strobel playing himself is called to the witness stand and states amongst others "Gerd Ludemann ... an atheist has written many historical accounts proving there was a Jesus" Yes Ludemann is an atheist but he became an atheist after realising so called Biblical facts involving Jesus meant he could no longer believe in the concept of Christianity. His harassment by the established Protestant churches in Germany probably didn't help in his faith either. The second witness is Jim Warner Wallace another real life Christian apologist plays himself and his testimony is taken as Gospel (Geddit ?)because he used to be an atheist but became a Christian because his experience of cold case homicide cases led him to believe there was a real life person called Jesus Let me get this straight ? If there was a person called Jesus Christ living in Bronze Age Palestine that means there is a God ? And if the claim is made by atheists that makes it even more overwhelming as a fact ? Strange how Professor Richard Dawkins often talks of Jesus Christ as though he was a real life person but he still remains the world's most prominent anti-theist . That's because even if he did exist Jesus Christ could be anything from a charlatan who had set up his own fan club that got out of hand to someone suffering from acute psychotic delusion. Being the Son of God is the least likely scenario . Oh and since we're supposed to take the word of atheists who used to believe in God quite strongly why not quote Josef Stalin who trained to be an Orthodox priest ?

As you can imagine this movie has a happy ending as Kane/Cain stumbles out of court with his understudies bitter recriminations echoing that "At least you proved the existence of Jesus". One can imagine the defendants at the Nuremberg war crimes trial wishing this guy had prosecuted them

Just watched the movie, I agree with the sentiment that it was just as bad as the first one, which I also thought sucked but seriously, all these one star ratings because it offends you? Because obviously there's no other reason to rate this movie a 1 star. The acting was mediocre, the plot was predictable the complete lack of something resembling action was disappointing, however there was NOTHING in this movie that would justify it gaining such hate from you guys.

Sure it was a giant sermon wrapped up in a court room drama. Sure its agenda was extremely obvious and sure the actors weren't all A++ flawless but stop overreacting.

God's Not Dead 2 follows an ensemble cast (some old, some new), all flung into the sticky tendrils of a flimsy courtroom drama surrounding a history teacher and her answer to a contentious classroom question. Because Ms. Wesley (Hart) had the temerity, the gall, nay the malicious, impudent daring to draw parallels to Martin Luther King Jr. and Jesus Christ, the public school, teachers union, local government, and the ACLU are all out for blood. Will Ms. Wesley be able to continue professing her faith? Will she lose her job? Will Reverend Dave (White) finally be able to start his car? And did Tituba really see Goodie Proctor with the devil?

Okay let's dissect this bloated corpse of a movie by first highlighting the good parts. Director Harold Cronk has sure learned a lot since 2014 though some of the elevated crane shots and glossy establishing scenes may have something to do with a bigger budget. His ability to manipulate his audience to well up in a flurry of sanctimonious pride and self-adulation is not to be underestimated. Thankfully, God's Not Dead 2 doesn't outright vilify atheists and doubters like it's prequel; in-fact one of our heroes, scrappy attorney Tom Endler (Metcalfe) is an agnostic who doesn't become a convert by the end credits. Also as far as acting goes, returning cast member Paul Kwo is given much more to do than be a walking Asian stereotype. He exhibits a sincerity we never saw before and one can't help but think if the movie were about him, it'd be a hundred times better. Then there's Melissa Joan Hart who truth be told is a much better central figure than Shane Harper, who's pious college freshman was more weaselly than anything.

Yet what the movie gets wrong, it gets very wrong; starting with it's representation of a legal system gone rogue. While confusing and conflating basic legal concepts like "precedent" and "discovery" and "defendant", the film nevertheless aims its sights on drumming up accusations of religious persecution while playing to the very tired culture war clichés we've gotten sick of twenty years ago. Much like the film's predecessor, God's Not Dead 2 isn't based on any specific case of religious persecution. It's more cobbled together out of a few lower court cases taken out of context and those dubious Facebook posts your angry Uncle from Omaha wishes were true but aren't. In a side story, returning character, actual producer and Keystone Kops impersonator David A.R. White has to turn in three years worth of notes on his sermons to the government because of...reasons. While doing so he confronts a grotesque bureaucratic flunky who warns him in an exchange so over-the-top you'd swear the movie was hinting at a vast Atheistic conspiracy.

In response to the film being called an example of "fake persecution" by an Atheist blogger, White stated, "It's an interesting thing, because, if it wasn't real, why do they get so offended by it...I don't think it would annoy people if it wasn't true." Of course if we followed that logic every teething toddler at a Dennys would be considered a sage. Religious persecution is a big deal worldwide as explicitly stated when Reverend Jude (Onyango) warns Martin of his plan to preach the gospel in Communist China. Despite Christianity being the largest religious doctrine in the world, Christians are harassed, discriminated against and oppressed in many places all over the world. And yes it does sometimes happen in the good 'ol US of A though despite some limitations you can still express your religion at home, school, work, church, billboards, park benches, television, radio, magazines and newspapers. Why cheapen a very real problem with a false conceit? Especially one even committed Atheists and the ACLU would side with the plaintiff.

Thankfully the main takeaway in God's Not Dead 2 is something most people can get behind; we shouldn't stifle religion nor any exchange of ideas or perspectives, even in something as revered (or in this case vilified) as the hallowed halls of a public school. That message is certainly a cut above God's Not Dead's (2014) all Atheists are whining children who never got what they wanted for Christmas. With a door wide open for yet another sequel to this drivel, I honestly would rather hear the rabble in Inherit the Wind (1960) sing "Give Me That Old Time Religion" in a loop for two hours.