|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 20, 2022 17:00:54 GMT
I agree and that isn't my main issue with the movie. northern just ignores the other major issues I have with the movie, such as it just not being a very well told or well-made movie. I realize people disagree with me and that is fine. The movie mostly just had me rolling my eyes. I was unable to take the movie seriously. I in no way said it was a terrible movie either, which is why I give it an average rating of 5.5/10. There are certainly some good things about the movie. Of course I have bias as I am a strong atheist, but as I pointed out I am a big fan of many Christian movies. This movie however is amateur hour. My bias against religion is countered by my admiration for art, which is why I am able to love a movie like The Passion of the Christ, The Ten Commandments, Hacksaw Ridge or The Song of Bernadet and all the other high quality Christian movies. Father Stu is not high quality, it is slightly above the quality of a TV movie of the week imo. I didn't think the acting was anything special either, even Mel Gibson. He could have played the role in his sleep and I also didn't think he was given enough good material to work with. The best acting in the movie is by Wahlberg in the final 30 minutes of the movie, but otherwise I found his acting inconsistent. I am not sure why it matters that you are liberal. Most liberals are theists/Christians, considering the majority of the world are theists and the majority of theists are Christians. Thank you for sharing your opinion of Father Stu moviemouth, I strongly disagree with you about Mel Gibson's performance. He plays a hard drinking deadbeat dad who comes through for his kid in the end, and he plays it well. It's certainly the most subtle performance in the flick. My mentioning I am relatively liberal was in response to something northern said in his post. Good quality faith based movies are few and far between, but my favorite is All Saints (2017) - because I prefer the practical over the supernatural. Thanks for the recommendation, but probably won't watch it. I didn't mean that Mel Gibson isn't good in the movie, but he could have been better. I just wasn't entirely convinced by his performance.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 20, 2022 17:05:26 GMT
I didn't think the acting was anything special either, even Mel Gibson. He could have played the role in his sleep and I also didn't think he was given enough good material to work with. The best acting in the movie is by Wahlberg in the final 30 minutes of the movie, but otherwise I found his acting inconsistent. I think the acting was hampered mostly by the writing. Some of the scenes were so oddly written, I'm not sure how even the best actor could make them work. Also, knowing how much they altered the real life story of Father Stu for dramatic purposes really bothers me. For example, Stu's parents weren't really anti-religious arhiests as portrayed in the film. Making them that way just serves to make the movie feel more like propaganda and less like a good story, IMO. It also allowed Mel Gibson to pretty much just act like himself for the whole movie. Yup, that is definitely what it seemed like to me.
|
|
|
Post by stryker on Sept 20, 2022 18:41:03 GMT
Thank you for sharing your opinion of Father Stu moviemouth, I strongly disagree with you about Mel Gibson's performance. He plays a hard drinking deadbeat dad who comes through for his kid in the end, and he plays it well. It's certainly the most subtle performance in the flick. My mentioning I am relatively liberal was in response to something northern said in his post. Good quality faith based movies are few and far between, but my favorite is All Saints (2017) - because I prefer the practical over the supernatural. Thanks for the recommendation, but probably won't watch it.LOL, I wasn't recommending ALL SAINTS to you moviemouth, I was merely saying it was the best of the handful of fairly good faith based movies I have seen. Why on earth would I recommend it to you, you don't seem like the target audience? I didn't mean that Mel Gibson isn't good in the movie, but he could have been better.How could he have been better? He convincing played an important supporting character who undergoes an arc of redemption because he is inspired by a son he has never been a good father too. His blue collar character is a supporting character for a reason, and that reason is certainly not to pull the focus away from the story of the film's titular character by going over-the-top or stealing scenes. I felt Gibson was hugely invested in the character of Bill Long because he believes in the film's message.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 2, 2022 21:19:18 GMT
They're re-releasing it in a PG13 format.
|
|