IMDb user comments for
Left Behind (2000) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

368 comments in total

---

56 out of 81 people found the following comment useful :-
Well, from an atheist perspective, it's just a bad movie, 4 December 2002
Author: GAZZA666 from Perth, Western Australia

I picked up Left Behind for no other reason than it was in the new release section (that's Australia for you), and it looked as if it might be worth watching.

In my opinion, I wasted my money. And considering that I used a free coupon to rent it, that's saying something.

However, I must point out that I'm not objecting to the Biblical content. Viewed simply as a fictional text, there's nothing wrong with the Bible; this is a fictional movie, so I don't have a problem per se with the content (although IMHO it makes it more fantasy than science fiction).

No, the problem with Left Behind is just that the movie totally fails to excite. The plot dawdles along at a painful pace for far too long, and even I figured out the Rapture part about ten minutes into it (I didn't initially believe that they would try and use that as the REAL explanation, but I wasn't exactly shocked when they did).

The story is not internally self consistent. We're told about a world wide hunger problem, but we're never shown this (all of the cast seem well fed, for example). We're expected to believe that the population of the planet buys the idea that some mysterious form of radiation has selectively wiped out millions of people in a wide spread area with no particular pattern (they wouldn't, especially considering that some of the world's top scientists are unlikely to have been "chosen"). Basically, given the situation at the START of the movie we should see a very different society - one on the edge of survival, with martial law and even open warfare (and we don't; America looks pretty much the same as it always does in Hollywood). AFTER the rapture, it should be even worse - and yes, we see a few signs that things are breaking down, but it's still largely business as usual.

Finally, the story doesn't have an ending. Apparently there's a sequel, but that doesn't excuse the lack of a finale in this movie. To all intents and purposes, they figure out what's going on and then ... it ends. No confrontation. No pay-off. Just the main character finally realising the truth of what the viewer noticed hours ago.

I've certainly seen worse movies, of course, but if you happen to see a copy of this on the store shelves, even at weekly prices... you would do best to simply let it remain Left Behind.

---

42 out of 57 people found the following comment useful :-
Fire the screenplay writers, 24 April 2005

Author: rpzowie (rpzowie@yahoo.com) from USA

I'm a Christian who generally believes in the theology taught in Left Behind. That being said, I think Left Behind is one of the worst films I've seen in some time.

To have a good movie, you need to have a well-written screenplay. Left Behind fell woefully short on this. For one thing, it radically deviates from the book. Sometimes this is done to condense a 400-page novel down to a two-hour film, but in this film I saw changes that made no sense whatsoever.

Another thing, there is zero character development. When characters in the story get saved (I won't say who), the book makes it clear that it's a long, soul-searching process. In the film it's quick and artificial. The book is written decently enough where people like Rayford Steele, Buck Williams and Hattie Durham seem real, but in the movie scenarios are consistently given the quick treatment without anything substantial. In another scene where one character gets angry about being left behind (again, I won't say who), it seems artificial.

I realize as a Christian it's unedifying for me to say I disliked this film, but I can't in a good conscience recommend a film that I feel was horribly done. Perhaps it would've been better to make the first book into 2-3 films. Either way, Christians need to realize that to be taken seriously as filmmakers, we need to start by putting together a film in a quality way. I realize a lot of effort probably went into Left Behind, but that's the way I see it.

---

23 out of 31 people found the following comment useful :-
Had to see it...have to bash it!, 25 July 2007

Author: jballauer from Euless, TX

It's been a while since seeing this the first time, so I watched it again with the second movie in the series. While I realize there is a 3rd movie out that I haven't seen yet, I'll review under the original title...

Just from the standpoint of production value, screen writing, and movie making, this movie fails on many levels, though it succeeds on a few as well. What can you expect from a low-budget, "B" movie? Not much, and it works from the standpoint of production. However, the writing is certainly disjointed, with little in the way of character development...exactly what I'd expect when there is an agenda to a film. I didn't have a problem with the acting...the cast is solid; however, the screenplay in both movies gives the actors little opportunity to really stretch themselves. Because the film is "Christian," this is predictable, as you can't very well portray violent chaos of the "end times" without also breaking some of the ethics which are normally associated with Christianity. In other words, the mistake comes in making this into a G-rated film when the content, even in the most conservative of Bible interpretations, would be R-rated by any measure. So, if the purpose of the movie is to scare people into Christian faith, then the movie should be somewhat scary, right? However, you can't comment on a film adaptation from a book without commenting on the book, or in this case, series of books. There are certainly plenty of Christian materials worthy enough to be made into movies...but not the "Left Behind" series...and these movies ultimately fail because, while being best-sellers, they are poorly written novels based on bad theology.

As a Southern Baptist minister, I confess that the books were a guilty pleasure for me, though I have yet to finish the last two books of the series. I have described them as decent fiction, and if the books would take the point of view that this is one "possibility" or interpretation of the subject of biblical eschatology (study of the "end times), then I could live with that. However, this series is divisive in Christian circles because it promotes the "literalist" interpretation of all Scripture above a more proper hermeneutic. Inevitably, this leads to the "pre-trib, pre-millenial" dispensation point of view, which confines an all-powerful God far too by humanity's world. In other words, as I've always said, God shouldn't need our helicopters and bombs to do his ultimate work. But because many people, particularly unstudied Christians, can't think beyond their own world-views, we are left with a pro-conservative, fundamentalist stance with regard to Bible interpretation, and attempts to push it through as the "only" interpretation.

Thus, the books carry with them an agenda, not so much to get the "lost" to understand their need for Christ, but to state that the fundamentalist point of view is the only valid way to understand the Bible. I recall very clearly reading (several years ago) in the second novel a scene where the characters reference a person who was "left behind" BECAUSE of his non-adherence to this point of view; as if "real" christians worthy to be "raptured" couldn't possibly hold to another eschatology. This is disturbing for several reasons, the least of which is because a "rapture" is only briefly mentioned in Scripture and it's connection to real, end-time prophecy is tenuous at best.

But the real issue with these books is comes in the way they divide the Christian community and how they portray "true" Christian behavior. Ultimately, I feel they harden more people to an otherwise legitimate faith/religion instead of win people towards it. It turns all Christians into caricatures, equally disdained and laughed at by the world despite the fact that there is theological room for a wide diversity of believes within Christian thought and practice. As a Christian body, on the whole, we've done enough of that kind of damage to society over 2000 years of history...and we certainly don't need to promote it by film to thousands, maybe millions of others.

Thus, the "Left Behind" movies fail because the "Left Behind" books aren't worthy to be interpreted into movies.

---

22 out of 31 people found the following comment useful :-
The End is Near...and there are no Kennels in Heaven, 30 December 2005

Author: RocketB52 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Okay, now, I know there are millions of Americans who believe in The Rapture: that moment when all people born again in Christ will be raptured up to meet God and all the rest of humanity will be left on earth to perish in plagues and fire and the heartbreak of psoriasis as the Antichrist battles it out with Jesus (in an uncharacteristically warlike mode). And I know the books were best sellers. . .among believers, anyway. And I mean no disrespect to all that.

But I have to say, they stuffed this movie into a sack and beat it with the Suck Stick.

I'm sure the books are much better. Really.

The plot needs no reprising. If you've watched this movie, chances are you read the book. I may be one of the only people on earth who actually watched this just for the sheer bad-moving-making experience, and I wasn't disappointed. Especially not by Kirk Cameron, the creepy little "Growing Pains" gremlin, who came of age on that show, found Christ, and decided that the SHOW should reflect his Christian values. Well, Kirk, your career has gone to the dogs, but now you can be happy that you're spreading the word of God in movies so bad, they never even make it to theatrical release. Well, that's not strictly true: I guess this was the only movie ever made that went to DVD FIRST, with a voucher for a free viewing of the movie when it was briefly released in theaters! I still have the voucher! How many people do you suppose showed up? I don't know about you, but it never came to my town. Of course, I live in NYC, where we Godless liberals sit around tearing pages out of the bible and use them to roll joints. So there you go. In fact, I'll bet out of three million people on Manhattan Island, not one would be raptured.

Check out the supplementary materials on the DVD, where you'll learn the creepy behind the scenes details of these movies. . .the CAST and CREW all must be of the same religious mindset. They don't come right out and say this, but listen closely to what the filmmakers say. It's like a bunch of Pod People got together to make a Pod movie. How creepazoid is that? Honestly, this stuff just preaches to the converted, doesn't it? Can you imagine anyone who DOESN'T subscribe to the whole apocalypse thing watching this, slapping his forehead and saying, "HOLY HOOVER DAM! I better get saved PRONTO!" Anyhow, I'm hooked. I gotta see the rest of these Christian fiasco movies, especially the one with Gary Busey, which I think is TRIBULATIONS. At least Busey has an excuse for taking the part.. . .he cracked his head on some pavement when he crashed his motorcycle.

Oy.

Oh, and one more thing. What's with all the shots of poor,innocent dogs whimpering, their leashes dragging uselessly along the ground, because their owners have been called to heaven? What's up with that? Are we supposed to feel badly for the dogs, and if we do, what are we to make of God? Doesn't it IRK people that there's no room in heaven for man's best friend? Foo.

This is one more reason I'm agnostic. Good night and good luck.

---

22 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :-
1st 15 minutes great! Last 15 minutes great! The inbetween too slow moving., 31 May 2004
Author: Trivguy from Spartanburg, SC

It was an entertaining movie, well worth viewing. The Biblical parts didn't exactly correspond with my Bible, but the movie does make one think about the end of time. I enjoyed the first 15 minutes and the last 15 minutes. The inbetween stuff just didn't cut it movie-wise. I'm hard on all movies. The anti-christ character (actor) at the end was riveting. Kirk Cameron did a great job of acting. He was a believable character. The end of the movie was not an end. I like movies to have a finish. This one didn't. It leaves a lot to be imagined, but the directors should have ended it better. Seems they were doing or planning the sequel. I wish they would have told me that before I invested my time. All in all, a good movie.

---

15 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
a Disappointment, considering the book series, 26 May 2004
Author: vwolak from Green Bay, WI

Great concept, fantastic book series, the movie could have been a LOT better.

Now, I realize that when a movie attempts to capture the essence of a book, there have to be some sacrifices as far as details. I have read the book several times, and the movie somehow does not capture much of what the book conveys. Maybe it is time constraints that come with making a movie within, say, 90 minutes to 2 hours. But this movie seems rushed somehow. It did not let certain plotlines develop. In the book, Rayford only lusted after the stewardess, where in the movie, it seemed like it went a bit beyond that. Also, early in the movie, it seemed that Buck Williams already had a relationship with the Steele Family before the Rapture where it did not germinate until towards the end of the Left Behind book.

Maybe it was because of the low budget and time constraints. I remember when Kirk Cameron was fired up about doing the movie after reading the book. The funny thing is that this movie was produced without paying any attention to the details that made this book such a best seller. The basic idea behind the novel held true to the movie, but many key elements in the book were ignored.

My advice: Read the novel series, see the movie if you must for comparison's sake, not as a viable substitute to the novel.

---

15 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
view it as a social/cultural document, 8 January 2001

Author: M J

If you are wondering where many of the conspiracy theories and paranoid ideas about the the UN, Israel, and international affairs come from, look no further.

This isn't a supernatural Hollywood film loosely based on some biblical passage. Instead, this movie was made by a company (Cloud Ten Pictures) with a political and religious agenda. As a movie, the end result at times more looks like clips out of a televangelism program (complete with family prayers and light breaking through church windows while harps are playing).

For mainstream viewers, it may be hard to believe, but many people believe in this stuff literally, as presented in the movie. And that, perhaps, makes the movie important. You probably won't find a more concise exposition of the bizarre views of a significant number of your fellow citizens. So, if you view it, view it as a social/cultural document. If you are at all media savvy, you don't need to be warned about the unsubtle attempts at propaganda and manipulation in the movie.

---

19 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :-
SPOON FEEDING the audience, 29 May 2006

Author: undrgroundthug from United States

I am a Christian... and I feel this movie is awful.

Nobody but hard-core, Bible-belt Christians are going to like this movie. The message is just too in your face. If you want to touch a wider audience, you have to be way more subtle. You can't have the dad waving the bible around and carrying it with him in EVERY scene. RIDICULOUS!

Poor direction. The reveal of people missing should have been terrifying, but it was laughable. They leave their clothes on the ground? It reminded me of old Ed Wood movies: "Oh my God! People are missing!" That scene in the plane is just stupid. Think about it: if you found your relative's clothes next to you, you wouldn't just scream "oh my god. they disappeared! they're missing!" and start crying and yelling. You would first be in denial... you just wouldn't jump to that conclusion. Watch Jodie Foster in FLIGHTPLAN. My favorite shot is the dog sitting out on the lawn with a pile of clothes and boots sitting next to him. I about fell off the couch I was laughing so hard.

The music was so bad and so distracting. It was as if the composer was in his own world scoring his own movies. "here's my chance to do a thriller", "here's my chance to do action!" STOP TELLING ME HOW TO FEEL JAMES COVELL! A good score supports what's happening on the screen... this movie needed more of an UNDER score, but instead it was as much in your face as the message was.

The writing was bland. So was Captain Christian Kirk Cameron. Chelsea was the worse: "you don't understand! People are missing!". Brad Johnson was laughable. The two stand out performances came from the Anti-Christ and the older guy (sorry, can't remember their names) In watching the "making of" (to answer my question of "what were they thinking???"), the producers and filmmakers and actors are just deluding themselves... saying "we're gonna reach wide audiences" and "brad Johnson is amazing" and "this is just like a Hollywood movie". I came to the conclusion that they just don't know what the "heck" they are doing.

I commend the effort. Getting the message to a wide audience is a fantastic idea. Film is the best medium possible to do that. Look at movies like WIDE AWAKE, SIGNS, CONTACT, PASSION OF Christ, even O'BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU? The bottom line is that the film needed to be made by people who have talent and vision. Unfortunately, it was not.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Read Book After Watching Movie., 7 January 2001
Author: thegusman90 from IL.

The movie is good and well produced. However, it will be a disappointment to those who read the book first. There were a lot of things that were cut out of the movie that made more sense in the book. Dont get me wrong... see the movie or show the movie to your friends but then read the book.

---

4 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
a couple of hours will never get back!, 10 December 2003

Author: snucker

*review may contain spoilers*

predictable, campy, bad special effects. it has a TV-movie feeling to it. the idea of the UN as being taken over by Satan is an interesting twist to the end of the world according to the bible. the premise is interesting, but its excution falls waaaay short. if you want to convert people to Christianity with a film like this, at least make it a quality one! i was seriously checking my watch while watching this piece of dreck. can't say much else about this film since i saw it over a year ago, and there isn't really much to say about this film other than.....skip it!

---

---

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history