Leaving You Hanging

Two new films featured tense races against death—stranded mountain climbers in Vertical Limit and an uncooperative hostage in Proof of Life—yet the scripts’ weak ruminations on life and death left most Christian critics disappointed.

What’s HotVertical Limit is a Cliffhanger clone (right down to the opening climbing accident), but this time around the most dangerous force is the weather and terrain, rather than terrorists. Planet Wisdom enjoyed that aspect of the film: “I like the basic message that you have to respect nature-even if you’re going to take it on through mountain climbing or some other extreme sport. Part of the appeal of the mountains or the ocean is that they’re so much bigger than we are. They remind us that we’re not in control. Ultimately, we need God.” In the film, a retired mountain climber (Chris O’Donnell) tries to rescue his sister and her climbing party after they are stranded on the face of the world’s second-tallest mountain. Preview finds the film’s special effects and cinematography quite accomplished, saying “the expansive mountain vistas and the quick-paced intensity of Vertical Limit will appeal to people looking for exciting, vicarious thrills.” However, the acting and screenwriting left much to be desired.

Phil Boatwright, the Movie Reporter, says “These actors are forced to utter hackneyed, contrite and embarrassing dialogue, throughout. … I’m always amazed at the effort given to make the adventurous events look lifelike in these special effects extravaganzas, yet so little effort is given to character development or credibility. This film is suspenseful, often bringing on sweaty palms, but it also becomes supercilious, much like a Roadrunner cartoon.” Christian reviewers were also disappointed by the lack of hope in the film. Debbie James, guest reviewer for Christian Spotlight, mentions that one “climber ponders the afterlife and mentions that all religions disagree on who you have to believe in to avoid going to hell, so no matter what, he’s doomed to go to hell.” The film features plenty of “sacrificial heroics,” says Focus on the Family‘s Bob Smithouser, but also “self-serving pragmatism (‘we can’t waste resources on a lost cause’),” which leaves it up the audience to “assess the ‘relative’ value of human life.” Movieguide complains that it presents euthanasia as an option. However, Scott Cripps Hollywood Jesus said the theme of sacrificing one’s life was made perfectly clear: “I counted at least ten times when someone in the film risked his or her life to save someone else. … These all serve as a glimpse of what Jesus Christ did for us.” Cripps says the film gets downright explicit about salvation through blood, mentioning “a beautiful scene in this movie that illustrates wonderfully what Jesus’ blood that he shed on the cross does for us.”

The messy break-up of Meg Ryan’s marriage, which tabloid reports attributed to a fling with her Proof of Life co-star Russell Crowe, has yielded at least one benefit for moviegoers: In the final cut of the film, the romance between Crowe’s and Ryan’s characters has been minimized, so as not to remind audiences of Crowe’s reputation as a homewrecker. “Proof of Life conveys the growing attraction between [their characters] without resorting to either implied or actual bedroom scenes,” praises Preview. “The story also implies a strong commitment to marital fidelity.” However, Crowe fan Holly McClure disagreed, writing at Crosswalk.com that the film sides with infidelity. “It’s kind of sad when you find yourself rooting for the hero—who’s trying to save the husband—to end up with the wife.” (Crowe plays a hostage negotiator who is called in to help rescue the kidnapped husband of Ryan’s character.) “That made me realize how sadly conditioned we have become,” says McClure, “to accept the socially and morally unacceptable because it’s more romantic for the story.” Movieguide says the romantic angle ruins that message that love is worth living for. While the husband “sustains his will to survive … by rediscovering his love for [his wife],” her newfound attraction to the hostage negotiator “establishes an emotional bond … that may end up betraying [his] renewed love.”

Other Christians found enough redemptive elements to make it worth watching. Hollywood Jesus says that while Ryan’s character expresses the viewpoint that life “just happens” and has no higher purpose, the inclusion of a Christian missionary who is held captive with her husband points to God’s involvement in life. “The film suggests that life does have some level of meaning and purpose … The providential presence of a helpful missionary. The use of the Bible as a literal road map to salvation. The ‘fortunate’ timing of events which suggest a certain level of destiny.” Christian Spotlight guest reviewer Doug Phillips found it powerful to see exactly what kidnapped missionaries endure. “I was interested in it not just as entertainment but also for the fact that such kidnappings (including those of missionaries) occur regularly in some parts of the world.”

Christian critics also disagreed on the use of violence in the film; the PhantomTollbooth‘s J. Robert Parks praised the film for its restraint, pleased that Crowe’s “brawn or magnificence [isn’t what] saves the day, but rather professionalism and a proper understanding of his limitations. … Rather than relishing in typical Hollywood bombast, the film chooses a more subtle path.” Movie Reporter Phil Boatwright says it’s nothing but bombast: “I have always preferred mounting suspense to exploding bombs in my movies. Guess which this film has. … It begins with explosions, then there are more explosions, then a surprise explosion that makes you jump out of your seat, and finally, it concludes with … you got it, more explosions.”

What’s NewDungeons & Dragons, a movie based on the popular role-playing game that has earned the ire of Christians for decades, is apparently such a bad movie that Christian critics didn’t waste their energy getting too vehement about its origins. Michael Elliott of Crosswalk.com dismisses it as “a loud, dark and mind-numbingly idiotic movie,” and although he warns that it could “raise spiritual doubts or questions,” it’s not “inherently evil.” Most Christian critics even found elements worth praising. “To its credit, this wizardly tale is amazingly free of sex, profanity and bloody gore,” writes Movie Reporter Phil Boatwright, although “all in all, Dungeons & Dragons is a waste of time and money. … Millions were spent on special effects of the CGI kind, but looked more like those from TV’s Hercules and Xena than a major motion picture.” Movieguide says that while “the worldview of Dungeons & Dragons is a pagan one that fosters moral and cultural relativism … there are some moral and redemptive elements … including a possible resurrection at the end of the story.” Holly McClure of Crosswalk.com says it’s “about making right or wrong choices and depending on each other, rather than trying to achieve the glory alone,” although it still contains “dark sorcery and evil mixed with magic and fantasy, and the two need to be explained and clarified for your children or preteens who might be curious and want to see it.” The U.S. Catholic Conference says the plot, which centers on an evil wizard (Jeremy Irons) who wants to take control of a magical kingdom ruled by the empress Savina (Thora Birch), is downright dull, and “plods predictably along with one-note characters and ordinary special effects.”

The Thanksgiving comedy What’s Cooking? which intertwines the stories of four Los Angeles families of different ethnicities, was rejected by Christian critics because the tensions in each family were caused by adultery, homosexuality, and premarital sex by the younger generation. “What’s Cooking? is a low-budget independent feature that asks viewers, What is America?” says Movieguide, but believes that the answer to the questions is “a politically-correct view of America. … Such an ideology tries to turn so-called ‘minority groups’ into angry, self-righteous victims rather than functioning citizens of society who work together.” Mary Draughon of Preview is more generous, saying it “serves up generous helpings of food for thought along with the turkey,” and calling it “a well-done smorgasbord celebrating contrasts and similarities in good ol’ American families.” However, Draughon says the values eventually turn the stomach: “Watching women kiss and caress, explicit sexual behavior, and listening to obscenities spoil the appetite.”

In Two Family House, Michael Rispoli plays Buddy, a machinist from New York City who dreams of opening his own tavern, but has a hard time evicting the pregnant woman who lives above the tavern he just purchased. John Adair of Preview likes Buddy, who “has a soft spot for anybody struggling to make it in life, which eventually allows him to develop significant relationships with people of different backgrounds,” but was put off by his wife, who is “neither concerned about the plight of anyone outside her own small circle of friends and family nor supportive of his dreams.” Movieguide, too, liked how it “values human kindness toward people in need,” but was upset that “an act of infidelity [that] leads to further complications for the whole neighborhood” is ultimately condoned.

What’s Noteworthy In the latest newsletter from Hollywood Jesus, David Bruce posed the question “Why do you think Christians resist the visual image?” Specifically, he uses the popularity of comic books, as seen in Unbreakable, to ask why evangelicals don’t use iconography. “Visual language is the language of the world,” Bruce says. “I was wandering through a comic book store the other day and I could not believe what I saw. … I was surprised by all the spirituality that these and other comic books contained. Spirituality in visual form is selling at the comic book store just like it is selling at the box office. … [But] in the seminary that I attended there were no religious art classes offered. No media classes. No classes on icons, images, statues, symbols, film—in fact no classes on anything visual. Why? … The 20th century failed to produce a single significant Evangelical master painter artist. Try going to a Bible Book store to purchase fine art prints by a contemporary master artist. There is no such item. Why?”

Reader Kath Wells says “I think the cause is an evangelical hang-up based on the verse ‘You shall have no graven image,’ which is interpreted to mean we should never depict God or any spiritual things. It completely ignores the way God expresses himself in the Old Testament through symbols and signs and enactments, through Jesus and his pictures of himself as The Vine, Bread, Water. … We are being robbed. When I discovered (at about 50) that I was very visual and God spoke to me profoundly through the visual I wept for days. Why had no one told me before? I felt cheated.” Reader Jim Kane wrote to suggest that evangelicalism might be changing: “I was at a location here in Indiana attending a CCN seminar on worship, and it was pointed out that symbols and the more liturgical services are becoming very important in worship again.” Reader George Pytlik agreed that the younger generations are more open to artistic expression in worship. “I believe that our young people are seeing things differently. My prayer is that they don’t become disillusioned, and are able to hold on to their passion for self-expression.”

A comic-book fan named Todd said he’s pursuing comic art as a way to reach youth. “The medium exists in comic to reach many lost souls. The problem is that all the Christian attempts to use this form of evangelism have failed horribly. I believe it is due to terrible writing, lousy art, and story lines that real people can not relate to. I have been called to take up penciling in an effort to use my skills I learn to make a comic worth looking at and reading.” Susan Buczak, a Christian painter, says it’s not so easy to make it in the business. “I have been unable to find a market and thus am unable to proceed as needed. Lack of funding vs. bills to pay means you’ll usually find me painting houses.” Christian graphic designer Cynthia Topaz faces the same problem, and is upset that “if people do support the artist, it seems to me, they just want to control the artists. If they can’t, then they back out. I’ve seen it too many times. It is almost like they want the credit for the artist making it, or making sure they get a good ‘return’ for their money. As if you can measure that.” Paula, a reader who became Episcopal after leaving her Southern Baptist tradition, agrees the that visual is unquantifiable. “One of the most powerful moments I ever remember in worship was during a Eucharist celebration one Sunday when the priest held up the bread and the cup and said in a deep, loud voice, ‘Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed for us.’ I will never forget that moment—not only the words and the way they were spoken—but the imagery of the bread and cup. These symbols feed us in some mysterious way.”

Steve Lansingh is editor ofTheFilmForum.com, an Internet magazine devoted to Christian conversation about the movies.

Photography by Columbia Tristar