Rating: 
Summary: A terrible movie
Review: As a non-Mormon viewer who has been a missionary for my own faith tradition, I came upon this movie because of recommendations from viewers of The Other Side of Heaven. My sense is that Mormon viewers might enjoy the story more, because they can fully relate to the characters--with great empathy. The inner struggles of the missionaries seem true and realistic. I was particularly intrigued that one of them left the field, and probably the church, after seriously contemplating the claims of critiques of the faith. The anti-Mormon books were presumably written by either ex-Mormons or fundamental Christians. The strongest aspect of God's Army was the the coming-of-age transformation that is naturally intensified by missionary experiences. Though different in tone, the young idealist-turned tentative skeptic-transformed to true and confident missionary parallels the experiences portrayed in The Other Side of Heaven. The weakest aspect of the film is the narrow audience focus. Unlike the Other Side of Heaven, which details experiences missionaries of any faith might experience, God's Army is strictly Mormon in flavor. Non-LDS viewers might garner mild interest in what drives those well-dressed teenagers that sometimes appear at our doors, but otherwise, the film seems meant for Mormon youth meetings as discussion material. Bottom-line: A well-acted and plausible story, but meant primarily for Mormon young people and those who care about them.
Rating:
Summary: A terrible movie
Review: Do not bother watching this movie. It is a waste of money, even a waste of a free library rental.
Rating: 
Summary: An encouraging story of growth and spirtual trumphant
Review: Elements I really liked
1. The moving words spoken by the Mission president, after Pop's death, were very appropriate. I was surprised at the Mission President's profoundness and wisdom. 2. Missionary work is a turning point in a young man's life. The mission combines tough and rigerous spiritual discipline and mental preparation. This is two years of total devotion to a cause. A Elder learns what commitment and hard work mean. The mission field is a battle field where the valiant distinquish themselve. 3. I liked how the director protrayed missionaries as caring servants. The blessing of the sick and spiritually deprived brought back many memories serving in Anaheim California. I empathized with the story line and found it interesting. 4. The friendship between Pops and Elder Allen seemed genuine. The story line created alot of respect between the two characters. 5. I liked the spiritual journey of Elder Allen, it demonstrated compassion, humility, and faith. Criticisms of the movie
1. Baptisms are done in an LDS chapels with a Bishop or counselor presiding 2. Blessings are sacred not secret. I personally was uncomfortable about these scenes dispite the directors accuracy. 3. As a missionary, who served under one of the greatest mission presidents, former Rick's football coach and MTC president; I doubt any new Elder would have been treated so poorly. Mission presidents build up their Elders and assign them with trustworthy and proven Elders for training. 4. There's a mixture of horseplay and seriousness in the mission field. I'll say it was the hardest but funnest work, I've every done. Missionaries must uphold the highest image and reputation for the Church they represent. 5. Not every missionary finds their future wife in the mission field. 6. An Elder would never flirt with the Mission President's wife. This idea was offensive. Because there's a tremendous respect for the Mission President's family.
Rating: 
Summary: God's Army is excellent portrayal of spiritual journey
Review: God's Army is a spiritual journey made rich by the universal human struggles and strivings of the young people on that journey. Their questions, missteps, and mistakes make their yearning for, and grasping of the sacred powerful, and real. Although Richard Dutcher made this movie for a Mormon audience, I, a non-Mormon, loved it, as did a Muslim friend. God's Army has, in fact proved somewhat controversial in Mormon circles. While it's been very popular in Utah, with many finding the portrayal of Mormon missionary experience very true to life-- there is a minority who feel it's not proper to portray anything other than a sanitized picture of Mormonism to the outside world. Richard Ductcher, who produced and directed the film (as well as playing the part of ''Pops'' the oldest missionary) is a active Mormon who wrote this movie out of his own life experience--at different times he experienced the faith, doubt, joy, despair, miracles, etc. portrayed fictionally by the different characters in this film.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty good, some things should have been more realistic
Review: I enjoyed this movie, though I knew a lot of the stuff was very unlikely and nearly funny, I thought the director over did it a bit. Though I still enjoyed it and cried. The other "Side" was a bit to much for a lot of viewers i imangine. I highly reccommend Single's Ward for every one! This was a big too Serious and single's ward fixed that. Keep in mind I know several of the hilarious actors. I would get singles ward and consider God's Army. Maybe see it once or twice
Rating: 
Summary: Only Flirts With Challenging the Mormon Party Line
Review: I need to preface my review by mentioning that I am an ex Mormon who was extremely disappointed by my two-year mission. This baggage both stains my opinion toward all things Mormon with a vitriolic bias while also allowing me to make first-hand trenchant observations as to the film's content. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the film begins with the only true to life depiction of the Mormon missionary experience. Most Mormon missionaries are young (the convention is to begin at the age of 19) and consequently full of youthful levity. This levity is diminished in the public's view of missionaries by the fact that the Mormon Church invests a lot of energy in inundating its members with images of the sacrosanct missionary. I remember internalizing this spoon-fed image early in my mission. Missionaries tend to live in a dual world, in pubic they behave according to proscribed behavioral norms leaving their truer personas for private. This results in a pervading conflict between the struggle to obediently (and often blindly) comport to the Church's constructed missionary identity and my 19 year old body and mind. Mr. Ditcher begins the film by acknowledging this central conflict that most young missionaries experience. In Mormon circles, this is actually extremely controversial. I particularly identified with the central character that couldn't quite decide whether to just pack his bags and go home. Mr. Ditcher’s challenge to the churches extremely sanitized image is one of the film's strong points. The remainder of the film is dedicated to events that are clearly meant for a believing Mormon audience. It quickly retreats back to the church's party line. This church party line consists of the absolute 'truth' of the religion regardless of any evidence to the contrary. The film does flirt with historical inaccuracies in the Book of Mormon and the fact that the church would not allow African-Americans to hold the priesthood but then somewhat incredulously solves these issues when the characters simply choose to leave them unexamined and ignored because, well hey, since the church is true, one doesn't need to go any deeper. The film also uses the typical Mormon trope of using campy emotional situations where the viewer is encouraged to conflate the emotional response as evidence for a spiritual manifestation of the absolute correctness of Mormon religious dogma.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent depiction of a Latter-day Saint mission.
Review: I thought this was a great movie. It depicts many of the kinds of things that really happen on a Latter-day Saint mission, both the good and the bad. One person mentioned that the movie only shows missionaries building relationships with each other and not doing much work. It would be a pretty boring movie if it showed missionaries going from door to door getting doors slammed in their face for two hours. I think one has to assume that is happening as well.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent depiction of a Latter-day Saint mission.
Review: I thought this was a great movie. It depicts many of the kinds of things that really happen on a Latter-day Saint mission, both the good and the bad. One person mentioned that the movie only shows missionaries building relationships with each other and not doing much work. It would be a pretty boring movie if it showed missionaries going from door to door getting doors slammed in their face for two hours. I think one has to assume that is happening as well.
Rating:
Summary: First effort but not a very good one
Review: I will try to rate this movie as unbiased as I can. It should be known that I am not a Mormon so I hoped folks out there don't think I am bit prejudice against the film based on faith.
Having wrote that, I would say that this movie proves to be very clumsily made. Its clear that a novice director is at work here, the editing isn't very strong and scenes seem to be cut piece parts that seem to be string together to make a whole. Its tell the story but it looked bit cheap.
The strong point of the movie proves to be the acting although I thought Richard Dutcher's role seem to be the weakest, maybe the director/actor isn't used to playing both roles yet. Scenes without him seem to be stronger then the scenes with him. Ironically, the movie centered around Dutcher's character and the effects he had on Matthew Brown's character who was losing his faith.
The movie also suffered from bad script, which also seem to be cut pieces string along to make a story. At times, it seem to skip a scene or two although I am not sure, it sure felt that way. The end scene where Brown' character met up and married the girl he met on the mission is a classical example of "make a wish" script writing. The entire sequence would have more meaning and impact if there was some sort of mutual chemisty and feeling between the two characters during their time in Los Angles but most of the movie shown them no more then just casual friends.
Obviously, this is a type of movie that can only pleased one narrow audience, the members of the LDS and even some of them it seem from the reviews, were not pleased. Non-members would probably find this movie bit overblown, preachy and bit one dimensional in nature. You might say that this movie is basically a LDS movie for the LDS members. Pretty sad that it is that, I really enjoyed Two Best Years which is another LDS movie about missionaries that had a broader appeal and a superior film.
Rating: 
Summary: Can't Please All the People All the Time
Review: I'm not quite sure what to say about this film. I would have given it two and a half stars, but that's not possible. Writer/Director Richard Dutcher's project obviously faces some difficult constraints. After all, how do you present an experience--seriously, but without sanctimony--that is deeply personal and sacred for some, and seems like propaganda to others? Dutcher's film attempts to express the difficulty of faith and inner conflict involved in missionary service, without trivializing or sugar-coating it. I'm inclined to say that he succeeds to a degree. Unfortunately, he tries to cram a mission worth of experience and growth into what seems like a couple weeks. The story's investigation of the main character's spiritual journey is too simplistic, but is far more real--tension-filled and conflict-ridden--than any Mormon church-sponsored production. Having served a mission myself, I can say that the tomfoolery depicted actually does exist, despite what many more serious types would say. And I can defend his relative lack of conventional missionary content (knocking doors all day, constant rejection, meetings and lessons, etc) by simply pointing out that Dutcher's character, Pops, is obviously not a conventional missionary. Even with its obvious shortcomings, I applaud Dutcher for his attempt to give voice to the joy, despair, hope, and trials of faith that, in turn, plague and buoy young Mormon missionaries. However, it seems that many others, on both sides, would disagree. Many Mormons I know feel that it makes light of sacred things, and take exception to its loose portrayal of missionary life. Many non-Mormons take issue with the perceived frankness of its account and the implicit claims to truth. To the former I would say, my experience (and apparently Dutcher's) seems to differ from yours; try to be more open-minded. As for the latter, I'm not sure what they would be expecting. The movie clearly advertises its Mormon content. I would hope by now that people in the world would be working toward a modicum of flexibility in trying to at least understand, if not appreciate, worldviews that differ from theirs. I'm pretty sure Dutcher's film was not meant to shove Mormonism in your face. Must an affirmation of one man's faith necessarily threaten that of the audience? In the end, I'm not sure if this type of attempt to present Mormon missionary experience to a mainstream audience could ever be truly successful, in terms of popular reception. A mission is such a profoundly personal experience, most of it gets lost in translation. Music and well-intentioned melodrama are poor media for expressing such feelings. But I'm glad people like Dutcher are at least making the attempt, however flawed. There are far too few movies that actually take religion seriously, on its own terms.
|
