2 of 7

Bruce Donaldson (Movieguide) voices similar misgivings. "Unfortunately, the movie reflects a phenomenon observable in the Church throughout much of the United States: the strong spiritual woman who wears the spiritual pants in the family. These women marry the 'good' backslidden or unregenerate men. As an exemplary Christian girl, Jamie should know better than to be 'unequally yoked.' If I had a daughter, I'd be concerned that, after seeing this movie, she'd get some romantic notion of finding an unruly boy and taming him herself."

Holly McClure (Orange County Register) was impressed that Jamie's "character and faith … gave her the inner strength and confidence that were her most important assets." But she tells parents, "There are several issues (standing up for your faith, teen marriage, a teen's death) that you may want to discuss with your kids and teens later."

Paul Bicking (Preview) cautions us that "almost a dozen obscenities are heard in early scenes, which prevents [Preview's] total recommendation." But he adds, "strong Christian elements, including Bible readings about love, are included without seeming overly preachy. The main character is portrayed as a Christian without being psychopathic or holier-than-thou."

(But is Jamie clearly a Christian? A fellow critic asked me if Moore mentions Christ even once. She certainly behaves morally, but do we hear her specifically express personal faith in Christ?)

"We long for good films for our youth," says Douglas Downs (Christian Spotlight on the Movies). "Well finally, here's one on the right track!" He admits, however, that his theater experience wasn't exactly ideal: "Much of the crowd laughed and made fun of the film. I can already see a shameless parody coming." But he concludes, "The message is inescapable."

That's the response from the religious press. But how does the film play for the nonreligious moviegoer?

A few mainstream critics were moderately pleased. Lisa Alspector (The Chicago Reader) says the movie "isn't manipulative" and it "has a fair amount of nuance and charm." And Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times) liked it. "After all of the vulgar crudities of the typical modern teenage movie, here is one that looks closely, pays attention, sees that not all teenagers are as cretinous as Hollywood portrays them. Yes, the movie is corny at times. But … I forgave the movie its broad emotion because it earned it. A Walk to Remember is a small treasure."

The majority, however, find it contemptible for predictability, preachiness, and racial stereotypes. Online ranter Walter Chaw (Film Freak Central) calls it "hopelessly unrealistic and often uncomfortable to watch, far more interested in presenting Moore with showcase opportunities to peddle her cavity-causing music. If you don't know every single plot point and twist after the first twenty minutes, you've done the sensible thing and left after the first ten."

Stephanie Zacharek (Salon.com) complains, "The story is secondary to the movie's grand lessons, which are thumpingly obvious." She concludes that the film is "a vehicle for teen singing sensation Mandy Moore. As vehicles go, it's an Edsel."

Jonathan Perry (Boston Globe) says, "In their zeal to create a character who embodies a wholesome, positive adolescent ideal, the filmmakers have invented an 18-year-old girl with no self-doubt, no emotional weakness, no character flaws, and a crystal-clear complexion … they've invented a saint, not a teenager." It bothers him that the only African American character is "relegated to spouting stereotyped black lingo, presumably for laughs, about 'getting my freak on' and how a 'brother' needs 'booty.'"

next page... |  2 of 7

share this page

January (Web-only) 2002, Vol. 46