SPOILERS ALERT Good acting but bad script. They really stretch the limits of logic in this well acted but poorly written fundamentalist hallucination. The "poor me" fundamentalist martyr that has done no wrong and committed no crime is being persecuted by all the non-believers who have suddenly been cured of all illness and now have telekinetic powers. Not exactly true to life. I didn't see any "believer" references to blowing up abortion clinics, lying, cheating, treating the poor badly, war mongering, putting money over people, racism, sexism, and hatred of immigrants , or of blindly following Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and FoxNews (The real modern deceivers in my opinion). Of course those people must have been raptured up to heaven before the real conflict starts.
Scientists are portrayed as deep religious believers in someone claiming to be God (Lucifer) without any question or usual scientific analysis. The judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney all take their queues from the devil and the injustice just builds and builds for the true believers as everything is stacked against the defendant. In my humble opinion they laid it on as thick as honey. The "proof" that the defense offers asks the audience - Is two plus two four no matter how many people think it is five? They would have been better in comparing MSNBC to FoxNews where Fox says it must have a monopoly on the truth because their ratings are higher. For the English majors out there it's called "argumentum ad populum" meaning it must be true because its popular.
It's a good rental and moves along at a good pace, but if they wanted to defend God they did it in a really insulting way. God gave us brains and we should use them. There is a difference between enlightened faith and blind faith. Sadly, the movie takes the later approach.
Scientists are portrayed as deep religious believers in someone claiming to be God (Lucifer) without any question or usual scientific analysis. The judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney all take their queues from the devil and the injustice just builds and builds for the true believers as everything is stacked against the defendant. In my humble opinion they laid it on as thick as honey. The "proof" that the defense offers asks the audience - Is two plus two four no matter how many people think it is five? They would have been better in comparing MSNBC to FoxNews where Fox says it must have a monopoly on the truth because their ratings are higher. For the English majors out there it's called "argumentum ad populum" meaning it must be true because its popular.
It's a good rental and moves along at a good pace, but if they wanted to defend God they did it in a really insulting way. God gave us brains and we should use them. There is a difference between enlightened faith and blind faith. Sadly, the movie takes the later approach.