Left Behind II: Tribulation Force (2002) User Reviews

Thank God it was good

[Winds_of_Destination · 6/10 · 10 August 2007]

Aside from movies based upon the life of Jesus Christ, there hasn't been one good Christian film. Until now.

Left Behind II is based on the events right after Left Behind, throwing us deeper into the slowly changing ruled by mastermind Nicolae Carpathia, who is quick to gain power.

The performances are better in the film; its nothing special, sadly, but is not so cheesy. It has its clichés, but in the end, you've forgotten them. My favorite was Gordon Currie, who has so perfectly become the Antichrist in the book series that it'd be difficult to see another in the role (aside from maybe Cillian Murphy).

But when it comes to sticking to the book, the movie does sidetrack a bit. The love story is shortened significantly and the entire ending of the book is left out, but it sticks much closer to the book than the first.

Some of the newer scenes were awesome, my personal favorite being Carpathia shaking the hand of Rayford Steele. The scene is so creepy and thrilling, I'm glad they decided to add it in. The showdown is also nice, although I didn't like the whole angel subplot during it.

Overall, I am glad to say the movie is good. Certainly not great but it so much better than its predecessor or successor, and should've been released on the silver screen. 6.9/10.

can't understand why they don't accept their fate

[allsamimports · 4/10 · 15 July 2015]

I'm a believer in God and that's why I can't understand how anyone who believes in the bible would appreciate the way the movie portrays God's message. What really bothered me is the fact that this so-called tribulation force keeps referring to the chosen ones as missing and keeps feeling sorry they're not around. I mean, if I'm converted and I believe in the word of God, why should I feel sorry because my loved ones were taken back to heaven? I should be happy about them and pray that I have the same fate. Not keep trying to find a reason as to why they're not here, given I already know why. If the intention of the movie was to say we have to believe in God and accept he has something greater for us, this movies fails. What it keeps doing is reminding us and giving the idea that serving God should be painful.

Fairly based on Books 1 and 2

[grafkyl · 6/10 · 13 May 2015]

Given the fact that in Left Behind II the book Ray and Amanda get married, and so do Buck and Chloe the movie was alright. They forgot to include the weddings, and Ivy had no place in the books. Book 2 in the series also did not include Nicolae being asked to lead the UN/the world, that had already happened. This movie also depicted the two witnesses pretty well, and for that I give them a reasonable rating. Left Behind II also included Ray asking Hattie for the job of flying Nicolae's plane, which was not in the book. Tsion Ben Judah had to flee after his announcement Jesus was the Messiah with Buck in book 2, we do not see this in the movie. Lackluster, but OK. 6.0 out of 10 stars max

Do the best with what you have

[Grizjed460 · 30 December 2004]

The reason this movie does not meet many peoples' standards is simple...money. Movies that are so obviously Christian based will never bring in multi-millions of dollars. Because of this, people just interested in a monetary return would not be willing to risk their money. The people that do risk the money are generally those who feel so strongly about the message that they are willing to risk the money in order to voice the message to as many as possible. It is true, the goal of the producers, actors, etc, is to relay Jesus' own words. That He is the ONLY way to God. ANY other way is a dead end. The movie points out that each individual has a decision to make. We see that repeatedly throughout the film. We are also reminded that a 'not accept' is, by nature, a rejection. Although, the use of that word does seem rather unpalatable and final. It seems that if money is a concern, the movie makers have a choice...emphasize the message or the presentation of such.

Something Wicked This Way Comes

[wes-connors · 1/10 · 9 May 2010]

This story follows the rapturous "Left Behind" (2001). "A week after millions of people vanish into thin air, a desperate world turns to United Nations President Nicolae Carpathia (Gordon Currie). Basking in the new found adoration and trust of the people, Carpathia seems to have the entire planet at his command. But thousands of miles away, a small group, aware of Carpathia's true and sinister identity, is trying desperately to share their knowledge with anyone who will listen," according to the DVD sleeve description.

"Calling themselves the 'Tribulation Force', world-renowned television journalist Buck Williams (Kirk Cameron), Pastor Bruce Barnes (Clarence Gilyard), airline pilot Rayford Steele (Brad Johnson) and his 20-year-old daughter, Chloe (Janaya Stephens), embark on a dangerous mission to open the eyes of the world to the truth." Readers, this will be my last user review… may God strike me down if these "Left Behind" movies aren't pure trash… Really... This entry serves only to pooh-pooh its own Christian revelations.

* Tribulation Force (10/29/02) Bill Corcoran ~ Kirk Cameron, Brad Johnson, Janaya Stephens, Gordon Currie

Utterly bad movie...

[irquim · 1/10 · 22 December 2007]

First of all, I want to say that I did not watch the first one, and after seeing the movie, I couldn't understand how something like this was ever sold to the public in the first place. My first impression was that this had to be a cheap commercial for a Christian community or something.

The acting was awful, the script was really bad and the dialogue full of things only priests would try to say in public. This could've been a great film, because the story is there, but the film makers destroyed it.

I would only recommend this movie to religious people who love really bad commercials.

Effective low-budget rendition of the second book in the popular series

[Wuchakk · 7/10 · 14 November 2019]

After millions of people all over the earth mysteriously disappear, the world turns to a charismatic man to lead them, the new president of the U.N. (Gordon Currie). A small band of believers in Chicago recognize him as the Antichrist and work together as the "Tribulation Force" to save as many as they can. The group includes a renowned reporter (Kirk Cameron), a formidable pilot (Brad Johnson), his daughter (Janaya Stephens) and the pastor of their assembly (Clarence Gilyard Jr.).

Released in 2002, "Left Behind II: Tribulation Force" is the follow-up to "Left Behind" (2000) with the same cast, which was remade in 2014 with a bigger budget and truncated plot.

The story is based on prophetic accounts of end-time events from the Bible, e.g. the "Rapture" based on scriptures like 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and Luke 17:24,34-35. Of course the Left Behind series is a fictional story and you don't have to believe in the Bible whatsoever to enjoy the movie for what it is, a "What if the Rapture really happened" mystery/drama/thriller. I don't believe in powerful androids that time-travel from the future, but that doesn't prevent me from enjoying the Terminator flicks.

This sequel cost a little less than the 2000 film ($3.8 million) and is less busy story-wise. It has the confidence to take its time with convincing acting in challenging roles. I read the book and wondered how it could be made into a compelling movie because it's more dramatic than the first one; in other words, there's far less thrills until the last act, not to mention a considerable romantic subplot. The screenwriters did a great job of cutting out the fat and strategically adding some well-done evangelical bits, which aren't overdone. The apocalyptic ending of the book was obviously omitted because it would've added 20-30 minutes to the runtime and would've cost significantly more. The filmmakers did a good job of finding the right place to close.

Being shot in Toronto, I was wondering how they would pull off the Jerusalem sequences at the end, but they did a splendid job with the studio sets, particularly considering this is a low-budget flick.

The film runs 1 hour, 34 minutes. ADDITIONAL CAST includes Krista Bridges as the journalist's assistant and Chelsea Noble (Cameron's wife) as a flight attendant working for the Antichrist.

GRADE: B

You've gotta be joking!

[xshitz · 1/10 · 16 October 2005]

This film is not entertainment, but unabashed Christian propaganda. Actually, it's just a thin, endlessly hokey, unintentionally hilarious farce where a handful of white American Christians save the world.

Kirk Cameron is particularly loathsome during a scene where a skeptic leaves a church during a religious pep-talk given by a Cosby-Show-preacher. Cameron's character tries to convince the skeptic that he must be saved by quoting the Ten Commandments to him and showing the guy how he is but a gnat in the eyes of God because he's broken a few of the commandments. I'm sure Ralph Reed, and the rest of them, were lapping this stuff up, but it was as stilted and forced a moment as I've ever seen on screen.

Of course the anti-Christ is a foreign person -- no American could fit that bill -- who speaks with a comic Russian accent.

Good for a laugh, this film in its DVD form would also make a great drink coaster -- non-alcoholic, of course -- when you're done viewing it.

This is film-making at its most contrived and forgettable.

A incredibly worthy sequel!!!

[Robert_duder · 8/10 · 22 October 2005]

I know the Left Behind series (both books and movies) gain an enormous amount of criticism!! There is far too much close mindedness for people to be silent. I would love to cover all that right now but I am critiquing a film...a film and film series I love, and a series of books I am very passionate about (doesn't mean religiously just honest to goodness LOVED THEM!!) After seeing the very well attempted Left Behind, I anxiously awaited the follow up sequel. The first time I saw it I admit I was disappointed but after seeing it again...most recently immediately after the first film I realize how great a sequel it is. A new director in the form of Bill Corcoran flawlessly connects the two films. The entire cast from the original returns and I think they all perfected their roles.

Left Behind II is a much deeper, moralistic message. More "preachy" some might say. Nonetheless they keep the story and the characters in tact and you keep riveted. The sequel is far more drama than action making it more slow paced but also furthers the story a great deal. The second book was chalk full of events and they tried to apply as much of that as they could in the second film. The performances are far more emotional and dramatic, and it will really tug your heart strings. You'll feel the emotion and that's awesome!! Once again they are working with a similarly small budget but do a decent job nonetheless. There is nothing less mainstream than a Christian film but they do their best to make it interesting for anyone and I think they succeed wonderfully. There is a such a great story here and the actors are all good enough to watch. Kirk Cameron is much better in the sequel as Cameron "Buck" Williams. His romance and relationship with Chloe Steele, played once again very nicely by Janaya Stephens is well thought out and really one of the focus' of the film. They have great chemistry although I think it's quite a bit held back because of Cameron's real life marriage to Chelsea Noble who plays Hattie Durham in the film. She also does a good job...some will say she is annoying, and campy and needy but for those of us who have read the book Hattie Durham is exactly that!!! Therefore she's perfect!! Brad Johnson continues to impress playing Rayford Steele and Clarence Gilyard Jr. as their spiritual "leader" Pastor Bruce Barnes is good as well although a little monotone at times.

Despite the drama and emotion they still do pull off some great action scenes and some great locations from around the world. The story is not quite as complex as it was in the original but if you watch these two films together you'll enjoy them both a great deal. So far this is a great series of films and certainly some of the best independent film making I've ever seen. It's not for everyone and you will get intense critics decided on how people should or would react when millions disappear. Funny how anyone would know that?? I guess if the Christians are right about all this we'll find out won't we?? The films are intriguing and both of them are brilliant, I love them...for myself...for anyone else I just don't know but for me they are amazing!!! 8.5/10

Its a good movie

[retroonetwo · 7/10 · 8 February 2006]

It wasn't as good as many anticipated it to be, but I actually enjoyed watching the film. Recommended film. Kirk Cameron and Clarence Gilyard Jr. both do a good job in this film. If you have seen the first film, then I don't know how much you expect. But if I were to rate the movie as the sequel to the first one, I felt that it was a fairly well scripted movie. The production was not the best out there, but like I said, when compared to the first movie, I felt that it did a good job finishing the series. If you haven't seen the first movie then I suggest you do before you take a look at this film. This is one of those sequels, where if you don't watch the first one, then you will have no idea as to what is going on. Once again, a recommended film, but I wasn;t expected much going into the movie.

Pseudo Science Fiction Laced With Unctuous Christianity

[drdos43 · 2/10 · 26 December 2002]

When are the makers of Christian films going to wake up to their lack of talent! They may be enlightened, but I am beginning to wonder by whom. With such great subject matter and even decent acting, they have still managed to produce dribble exceeded only by the artistic endeavor of an afternoon soap opera. After having watched this film, any desire for a second "leap of faith" was manifested in a desire to leap off a tall building. What a waste...but as long as they have a captive audience, why bother producing something significant.

Not what I expected

[aaroncrawford316 · 8/10 · 15 November 2002]

My roomate and I waited for the particular release date of this movie (him to purchase the new Tori Amos record) and when this day came to past, we were a little let down due to not what we were expecting from what we got. Although I liked the movie from the acting, the characters, the plot, and even the special effect, I was let down from the preview that I had saw prior to the release date. I expected it to be like the previous cloud ten movies (Apocalypse 1-4) from the preview. I give them credit in the fact that even though it still flawed in giving us what was according to the book (for those who watched Left Behind, but didn't read the book I urge you to read the book) especially at the end, the script writers did a better job this time of portraying the book's view rather than just writing around the book. I also think that everybody looked a little more upbeat and lighter this movie (except for Carpathia who portrayed almost a russian type antichrist) but I think Chloe played an even happier character than the previous movie. All in all, I think people who haven't read the books to like it much better than the first film.

Departing from the books makes it a better movie...

[J-Dogg · 7/10 · 31 October 2002]

I saw Left Behind before I started reading the books, and at that time I thought it was a pretty good movie. Now that I pretty much know the workings of the books inside and out, I had become pretty much disappointed with Left Behind. At the time I thought it was because they didn't follow the book close enough. I had become so disappointed with the movie I hadn't planned on seeing Trib Force.

Fast forward to tonight, and I went and rented it anyway. At first I was very lost because the opening of Trib Force the movie didn't even come close to the opening of the book, and the pattern followed. You know what? It has actually made it a better movie! The problem with trying to turn a 400 page book into a 2 hour movie is that you can't cover all the details, and when that happens (like it did in Left Behind), you run into problems. I think they fixed this problem in Trib Force by making it stand on its own, giving it its own story line, changing things around. They also cut out the end of the book, presumably to be shown in Left Behind 3. But I think now that the movies have become a work of their own, it works much better. I think Trib Force has actually made Left Behind become a better movie, and I may start collecting the movies as "religiously ;)" as I have the book series.

Ordinarily I would have probably given this a 6, but with the way Trib Force set the tone for the rest of the series and actually made Left Behind a better movie, I give it a 7

Insulting and Unintentionally funny

[arouet · 23 November 2002]

This movie fails on a number of levels. As it can be viewed on strictly religious terms or as an action thriller, I will address both.

First, let's just talk about it terms of an thriller film. It fails in this regard because it simply makes no sense. People don't act in any sort of real manner. It's simply not how people would act if this were a real situation of millions of people vanishing. You would think the Bible is some book that was only known to the people who vanished and no one else. Everyone else seems to be completely in the dark and don't even make the connection this might be the "Rapture," yet, millions of Christians vanish overnight as Christians have been saying they will. I don't know about you, but if that happens in real life, me and most of the planet would be rushing to Church the next morning. It seems implausible no one would. Also, everyone goes about their business as if some mugging happened in the neighborhood. The most ridiculous thing is that most people accept the disappearance as some sort of nuclear radiation when that is the most insane excuse that could be even offered. This film is incredibly outdated, a complete fabrication of how and what the U.N. is and how it works. Acting and dialogue are unintentionally hilarious, setting off streams and fits of laughter. In one Church scene, there is a bulletin board and six pictures of people on it with the caption, "OUR MISSING" A Church and there is only six missing people? How funny is that? What was it, The Church of Satan? There's no surprises and no tension, especially among the people who are not saved and whom you know will be calling out for Jesus by the end of the picture. There's a lot of talk about the "Wailing Wall," yet what is supposed to be the wailing wall, I guess, looks nothing like the real "wailing wall," as if producers have no clue about the "wailing wall" or don't think it's important enough to make a reasonable close simulation of it. The whole movie treats it's audience as simple-minded, uneducated couch potatoes.

Seeing this as a religious film, it is incredibly insulting. This lies the main offense. It's not powerful enough to convert anyone and not realistic enough to make anyone want to know more. It's most heinous crime, though, is how it uses the Jews. If the Jews made a big-budget multi-million dollar film and a huge media campaign about how the Pope came to his senses and announces to the world how he has come to the conclusion that Jesus Christ was not GOD after all and everyone should know that and see the truth, there would be an UPROAR in the Christian community. But they seem to have no problem committing that perfidious insult onto the Jews. Rabbi Ben Judah, the most learned and respected scholar in the world, announces to the planet that Jesus Christ is indeed God and he has been wrong and now knows the truth. This is terrible, terrible injustice to the Jewish faith. Besides the fact that it is simply ludicrous to think that a Rabbi could sit on a podium in Israel and the entire world of different religions is going to sit back and take his word for it just because he thinks so and these other religions be converted (What planet is this film on? Certainly not Earth), but to put words like that in the mouth of the head of another religion and have them say how wrong they were, well, it's just hateful and disrespectful, that's all. It's also disturbing that the whole conspiracy of trying to take over the world comes from INTERNATIONAL BANKERS, which has always been another word for Jews when it is in this context. It's just another example of the total disregard for the integrity of the Jews. It feigns respect for them while denigrating their beliefs. Coupled with a preposterous plot and representation, this film fails as both an action thriller and as a religious film.

Realistic picture of zealot Christian mind

[the_wolf_imdb · 1/10 · 14 May 2010]

This movie basically consists of two parts: Praying and endless talks. I think only "the Flanders" types will enjoy this movie greatly as it displays their views perfectly: No fun, no action, just talks, talks, talks, some tears, good messages, conversions etc. It will bore you to death - you may as well go to the free evangelizing propaganda "education", no need to pay rental, it is free! It is compiled middle-America bigotry movie: OSN is tool of Antichrist, the unified money is tool of Antichrist, religious tolerance is tool of Antichrist etc etc. And, of course, the lead and "fuhrer" of OSN of course the Antichrist itself. And the biggest announcement of the leading Rabbi, after endless study of the same, only and single book is... tada tada! The Messiah... was the Christ, sorry for the error, Rabbi stops being Judaist and becomes Christian. This is the super explosive message that is supposed to shake all the world at one! This movie is like Omen series, but without any fun or horror - only 100% pure Christian boredom!

A bunch of drivel about the Antichrist...

[nickhomer · 1/10 · 6 December 2002]

My friend rented this after seeing the first one. There was very little character development, and they are all very shallow, especially Kirk Cameron. I lost interest after about 5 minutes, and I REALLY wanted to fall asleep after about 15. Worst movie I've seen since The Thin Red Line.

A bit dated

[henrys-88548 · 7/10 · 30 October 2021]

CNN on the side of evil, just like today lol. The movie got that part right. But I think the anti christ would be far more likely to come from the West than Russia. Overall I enjoyed it.

What was that?

[Ginny98 · 2/10 · 6 November 2002]

I thought that the first movie deviated from the storyline a little bit, but it was tolerable. I was so frustrated by this movie that I almost turned it off. I do not recommend this to any die hard fans of the Left Behind series. I was very disappointed. I give it a 3, but only because Kirk the acting was decent.

Even Better Than the Original

[Uriah43 · 8/10 · 24 November 2013]

This sequel takes up one week after its predecessor "Left Behind" ended with the anti-Christ, "Nicholae Carpathia" (Gordon Currie) moving fast to consolidate his power. Realizing from Biblical prophecy what must happen, a small group of Christians band together to spread the gospel with what little time they have remaining. On that same note, Nicholae Carpathia also has only a limited time as well and he wants to prevent everything that doesn't further his agenda from taking root. Anyway, rather than reveal the details and possibly ruin the movie for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this film is even better than the original in that it has more drama and suspense. I do think, however, that a person should see the first movie before watching this one so that they will be able to fully understand what is going on. Likewise, as I have said before, it isn't necessary to believe or agree with all of the issues raised by films like these. All that is necessary to enjoy it is to have a capacity to respect the beliefs of others even if their beliefs are different than yours. In any case, I think this movie is definitely above average and I have rated it accordingly.

A bad movie with a disturbing undertone

[bbbl67 · 3/10 · 31 May 2003]

Okay, the acting was bad, the writing was horrendous. That's just the good news. The bad news is that this movie fundamentally may be hate propaganda, cloaked as entertainment.

When renting this movie, I was thinking it would be something like The Omen. Not even close. They are both about the coming of the anti-christ, but that's where the similarities end.

The disturbing part of this movie is that it seems to espouse a belief that ridding the world of religious differences and wars is evil. Also they try to make the point that Christianity is the only religion, and to make the point perfectly clear, they get a Jewish rabbi to come out and say it. Talk about going out on a limb. They didn't even mention Muslims in here. This despite the fact that Jews, Christians and Muslims are all believers of the same god (allah is just the arabic word for god, nothing else). We won't even get into Hindus, Buddhists, etc. that would just take too long.

Good movie and character development!

[Melissa Alice · 8/10 · 5 November 2002]

In many ways I liked it better than Left Behind...The acting seemed better, the characters seemed to have more development time, and the message was good. It was also a tense and interesting storyline. I've mostly forgotten what happens in the books, so I can't compare it to that very well, but I really like the movies! If they can get enough money for really good special effects, I think the series will just keep getting better! I wish they would have widescreen versions of their movies and make them at least two hours long. An hour and a half is not very much time to make a great movie. But this one was good and I'll be watching it again many times, no doubt.

A couple of the quibbles I have with this movie are the "angelic woman" and the few times that the Christians lie. I know no one's perfect, but I think they should have at the very least shown that they were wrong to lie.

Good movie overall...and the special features on the DVD are neat!

Oh dear.....

[rocknrelics · 2/10 · 21 August 2020]

The first one was OK, so I was looking forward to seeing this, but oh dear.......

I can't recall having seen such a dull film, pretty much nothing happens until the 70 minute mark, up to then it's just a load of talking.

The subject matter is fascinating, so it really must have taken some effort to make such a dull movie.

I'm hoping the third and final film is an improvement.

You don't have to be profane to be realistic

[HobbitHole · 16 June 2005]

I'm amazed that someone would be so naive as to think that a movie trying to present the good news of the gospel to a world that is already saturated with the polluted wells of mass profanity, immorality and violence for violence's sake would criticize a film for NOT having these features in it.

In case the reviewer is interested, the Bible presents many accounts of people who sinned for our learning and instruction so that we wouldn't repeat the same errors without giving pornographic or explicit depictions that do more to encourage people to seek drinks from polluted wells of ignorance than direct them to the water of life, found only in Jesus Christ, who stated that once a person truly drank of the water of eternal life He gives will never thirst again.

I agree that not all the acting in these films is "A list Hollywood acting". Much of what is in Oscar winning movies these days is not "A list Hollywood acting" either.

People are entitled to their opinion that perhaps these filmmakers are relying too much on the message and not on the acting. I think many films rely too much on filthy language, big effects, and sensuality with much less plot and storyline than is shown in the "Left Behind" movies.

So if you want more raunchy supposedly 'realistic' language and sin depicted, there are plenty of other movies out there to choose from. There is less and less originality in film today and more and more depending on moving the emotions or visceral than on reaching the mind of someone.

I also wish the movies had stuck more to the original story. The same as I wished that the Lord of the Rings stuck more to the story and Oscar winners such as Chariots of Fire and Ghandi which also deviated from the stories. None of John Gresham's novels transferred to film stick to the story either. (Runaway Jury changed cigarette industry into the gun industry for example).

Show me a film that is entirely sticking to the story and I'll show you an author that wrote a screenplay and not a book. :-) They are two different mediums and very rarely is the screenplay also written by the book's author.

I rated this highly for what it attempted to do. I think the first part did not do very well in the first half and improved in the second half. This movie wasn't perfectly even either, but it did attempt to get a message that was in the book out in a way that was entertaining. Apparently even to those who thought it was funny.

For the one that found it funny: did you equally laugh and find funny Tom Hanks in "Castaway" for performing the longest known commercial for FedEx in it's history?

How about "Million Dollar Baby" for it's showing a 32 year old woman who can't box a lick and then supposedly becomes a one round wonder only to be taken out by a dirty boxer and left as a vegetable who no longer has an ounce of fight in her? She has the guts to tell her no good family to take a flying leap and then has no guts to live?

These were hit movies, perhaps with better acting, but equally funny because the message outshone any script or plot and many people came away with the impression of "That Fed Ex movie" or "that Right to Die" flick.

I guess these "Left Behind" films aren't alone in being funny or having script and other errors that for some can overwhelm the message, eh?

A great movie to get rid of those unwanted guests

[The-Sarkologist · 3/10 · 4 January 2013]

Some people suggest that it is not our place to criticise Christian films, and while a film about the end times may be interesting, I think we can get to the point where we dwell so much on them that we fail to see the bigger picture. The book, written by so called End Times expert Tim Lehaye, is simply a piece of speculative fiction that would be entertaining if not for the scary fact that some people believe that these stories are true. Look, Christ actually warned us against attempting to predict the end times, even with vague ideas by suggesting that because something is happening then Christ must be coming soon. Well, the bible pretty much says that Christ has been coming soon ever since he ascended into heaven. Also, I am sure that the ancient Christians thought that the end of the world was upon them when Rome was sacked, and that the tribulation had began, yet 1500 years has now come and gone since that happened.

This movie is a little better than the first one though because at least it does give an outline of who Christ is and what he done, despite the fact that it still seems very contrived and forced. Okay, saying that somebody is in heaven is all well and good, and to some of that saying things like that is fine, but when we notice that theologically nobody actually goes to heaven, but rather inherits a place on the restored Earth then it can also come across as a little cheesy. Even then, some of the conversions are quite stomach turning (and this is all this movie seems to be, people becoming Christians), particularly with the guy named Chris (where did he come from). We have Ray sitting in his room telling Chris that he has a choice to either accept or reject Jesus, yet it is quite clear that Ray isn't going anywhere until he gets the answer he wants.

As for the character of Nicolae Carpathian, he was just pathetic. In fact the character, and especially the accent, were just plain annoying. It was not the uncomfortable cringe you get when you encounter a character you do not like, but rather that intense irritation you get when you are confronted with a character that is so shallow and pathetic that you simply cannot stand watching him, and almost want to run from the room whenever he appears. Also, as I have mentioned, I think it is also insulting to Eastern Europeans to suggest that the anti-Christ comes from Romania.

Oh, and then there is the so called climax of the film. First of all there are two witnesses at the 'wailing wall' who are being cordoned off and silenced. As it turns out these guys are actually Moses and Elijah (though why Moses since he was not taken up to heaving in a fiery chariot, he simply dies), but I wonder if this guys can go around torching people with fiery breath, and that they have an important message to tell, then why do they let themselves be imprisoned at the wailing wall. The second part of the climax (and this appears in the book as well) is when this super hardcore Jewish Rabbi comes to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah. Look, stranger things have happened, but I did find this to be somewhat insulting.

PLEASE Excuse These Zealots

[tvsterling · 3/10 · 19 December 2004]

All the rest has been said about the cheap budget, the off pacing & generally mediocre (not really bad) quality. Perhaps the books are more coherent I can't say because I haven't read them. As a reasonable Christian I have to say that I am both embarrassed by & ashamed of the forced confession of the 'Great Jewish Scholar'. Whether it was part of the books or not is beside the point. There is a big difference between a book & a movie; the former is much less public & accessible. The writings of St John(Revelations)are among the most ecstatic, dramatic & cryptic of any world religion. Every generation of Christians, especially those of certain unhealthy turns of thought, read them too well & too often. I offer this as a lame excuse to the many good Jewish people who have been offended by this film. Our religion is prone to encourage this type of zealotry. As a further clarification for Jews please bear in mind that we mourn the loss of our Messiah (no joyful anticipation of his coming) & we await the second coming in fear & awe. Again my profound apology. This is certainly a bad time for all the religions which worship the one true God.