Related articles and links |  1 of 4

The supernatural thriller Lost Souls won points with Christian critics for its reverent portrayal of a Christian heroine, but was nevertheless slammed for its hokey story. Conversely, The Contender was praised for its well-plotted script but dismissed for a perceived attack on the Christian faith. Meanwhile, newcomers Get Carter, The Ladies Man, and Dr. T and the Women were deemed offensive and inartistic.

No one expected much from Lost Souls, an end-times flick that sat on the shelf for a year. But it performed fairly well at the box office, besting the crop of new films this week. The audiences were apparently more enthustastic than critics. "More hokey than horrific," says the U.S. Catholic Conference, "the tangled script of director Janusz Kaminski's heavy-handed film minimally develops its characters before surrendering to an ends-justifies-the-means conclusion." The one bright spot was lead character Maya Larkin (Winona Ryder), a devout Christian who discovers that atheist journalist Peter Kelson (Ben Chaplin) will be possessed by Satan and become the Antichrist. Peter T. Chattaway of B.C. Christian News says "Lost Souls does make at least one significant departure from other films of its ilk. Most demonic-possession movies, from The Exorcist to End of Days, revolve around protagonists who are losing faith or never had it in the first place. In Lost Souls … the story is told primarily through the eyes of Maya, who remains a true believer from beginning to end." Still, the movie falls prey to other errors of its predecessors, including incorrect prophecies and a passive role for God. Preview's John Adair notes that "none of the indications of Satan's possession of the Antichrist come from the Bible. … Starting [the film] with a quote from Deuteronomy Book 17, which is not related to the Bible's Book of Deuteronomy chapter 17, puts the religious background on questionable footing." Bob Smithouser of Focus on the Family was disappointed in God's invisibility: "For all of its talk of supreme spiritual warfare, the film gives Maya and Peter—two confused, distraught humans—entirely too much control over the proceedings."

The Ladies Man, a feature-length version of the Saturday Night Live sketch about a dirty-talking, promiscuous talk show host, disgusted Christian critics. "I hated, hated, hated this movie," says Phil Boatwright of the Dove Foundation. "It's a one-joke movie built around politically incorrect sexist humor. To assume that this film is attempting to mock such behavior is like thinking The Flintstones was an earnest portrait of prehistoric daily life." Tom Neven, editor of Focus on the Family magazine, can't understand "why any woman would want to come within a hundred yards of the repellent" main character, Leon Phelps. "The most repulsive element of The Ladies Man is its underlying message: the jilted husbands got what they deserved because they weren't providing their wives what Phelps could." Preview's Paul Bicking agrees that Phelps is impossible to root for. "[He] appears to be clueless about social morals and equates love with sex. He also seems clueless to his true assets, humor and a genuine concern for helping people." Not only does the film offend; it's not funny, either, says the U.S. Catholic Conference: "Director Reginald Hudlin stretches a thin premise to the breaking point, garnering only a few chuckles with the predictable, sluggish film."

Actor Gary Oldman made news this week by speaking out against The Contender, which he appears in as a Republican senator digging up dirt on Democratic vice-presidential nominee Laine Hanson (Joan Allen). He alleges that writer/director Rod Lurie recut the film into "a Goebbels-like piece of propaganda" that makes his character unsympathetic instead of the "only true patriot in the film" that Oldman felt he was. Christian critics agreed that the final version was quite politically slanted. "The lines of 'good' and 'bad' are clearly drawn," says Mary Draughon of Preview. "Conservatives wear the black hats and liberals the white hats. Senator Runyon's pro-life passion is presented as the rantings of a self-righteous fanatic, while Senator Hanson speaks eloquently of pro-choice rights." It isn't just Hanson's politics, though, that turned off Christian critics, but her attacks against religion. Draughon says Hanson is "a self-proclaimed atheist who worships in the 'chapel of democracy' and equates Jesus with the tooth fairy." The Dove Foundation's Phil Boatwright writes, "I can't think of any reason I'd recommend a film that states matter-of-factly, and without challenge, that God doesn't exist. When her little boy tells his grandpa that Jesus created everything, the atheistic elder refers to religious beliefs as fairy tales." Movieguide didn't like the movie much either, siding with Oldman in labeling it an "evil, mean-spirited, irrational piece of propaganda," but found at least one redeeming quality: "Hanson's strong points include her strict adherence to her personal moral principle about keeping her personal life private, even when it turns out to be inconvenient and it colors her role as a public servant." Crosswalk.com's Michael Elliott also liked this aspect, writing that the film "presents a moral issue which should resonate in our hearts. … Principles only mean something if you stand by them even when they are inconvenient. … Hanson risked her career and faced public humiliation on an issue of principle. Should we, in the course of our lives, do any less?" But Steven Isaac of Focus on the Family says Hanson picked a lousy principle to stick to: "For the record, one's 'private' life has everything to do with one's character. And one's character has everything to do with one's qualifications for leadership. Laine does make good points about sexual inequality and double standards, but DreamWorks would have you believe that character is driven solely by achievement and accomplishment. It is not."

next page... |  1 of 4

October (Web-only) 2000, Vol. 44