Movie Defense Force: Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

Baby Jesus died for our sins, and that's why Kirk Cameron needs to stop wanking.

Watch Video

Our Lord and Saviour Kirk Cameron who just as good as Jesus obviously.

They used to make us watch this in school. I hate it so soo much.

Here's my reaction to this review, and pretty much any movie with Kirk Cameron - "Jesus" Drink! "Jesus" Drink! ad infiniteum. Does the poor sod not know how to play in anything without a heavy-handed Christian message?

O,u.

My parents LOVE this movie.
Not surprising, given that they're r-wing; Fox News loving; Jesus was white; Xtians, but even THEN...

I mean, I've actually SEEN this movie.
It's bad.

The acting is WORSE than 'God's Not Dead'.
Do you know how HARD that is?

That's like, worse than SyFy original movies bad!

You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.

You didn't really defend this. Not that I think you should have

I miss the old style MDF, I miss Jim sincerely defending movies which were critically panned.
I know he's probably busy given this months heavy game load, but still.... come on Jim, thinly veiled sarcasm is less entertaining because I can get that pretty much everywhere else on the internet.
I didn't always agree with Jim but it was good to see a different viewpoint on some movies.

josh4president:
You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.

The lyric is actually "If you CAN'T laugh at bad films," so no. Not off message at all. Just a different way of telling it.

"I miss the old style MDF."

Like the one we had before this one?

Christ, you change the formula up now and then, and people think it's the end of days. There's nothing to miss, people. I just do these types of episodes to keep things interesting for me from time to time.

Jimothy Sterling:
Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

Baby Jesus died for our sins, and that's why Kirk Cameron needs to stop wanking.

Watch Video

White People Problems: The Movie, huh?

Now I kinda want that to be a real thing. Seriously. I'm picturing a Scary Movie-esque parody of these kinds of movies, blatantly self aware and ridiculous, but treated as super-cereal. It would be hilarious.

Somebody make it happen.

Wait, was this a defense or pure mockery of the movie?

Haha, so funny either way. Oh man, almost cracked at work.

That film was so Chrishun that it burned my Bolshevik hide at twenty paces.

You win again, Babby Jesis.

At first I thought it was particularly dumb to take a baseball bat to your old CRT and spread shards of glass all over your lawn.

That's it.

I've never seen Fireproof before, but from the MDF clip, I got that the movie was overly Christian and written for a strongly religious audience. So that's what makes the movie bad?

Jimothy Sterling:

josh4president:
You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.

The lyric is actually "If you CAN'T laugh at bad films," so no. Not off message at all. Just a different way of telling it.

Really?

I could have sworn you wrote this:

http://i.imgur.com/8kBylHs.png

But seriously, I can't help but feel you're in much better form when you're actually defending a neglected/maligned/hated film instead of just taking something terrible and turning sarcasm mode on. Even in your Mall Rats/'Michael Rooker's Ass episode you at least did mention a few things about the overall feature before descending into frame after frame of jiggly man-buttock.

At this rate you could very well do an episode 'defending' Attack of the Clones by gushing breathlessly about how brilliantly the romantic sub-plot is written and how it artistically elevates the series as a whole with 1950s-style space diners and children acting terribly with buckets on their head.

Do you really want to live in a world where you could actually make a Movie Defense Force of Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones?

Is that what you want, Jim?

I'm guessing, like Double Dragon, you're not actually trying to defend this one.

Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.

Ugh. So now we've gone the "No Right Answer" route of not knowing whether an episode is ironic or sincere until five jokes into it. It's the shark that never stops jumping itself! That said, this episode was pretty funny, just... have we *really* run out of actually legitimately underrated movies? All of them? Already? Or did some religious freak above you at The Escapist hold a gun against your head and order you to defend this movie or else lose your job?

Overall this episode is fine, I just wish I understood why you made it instead of making a Movie Defense Force.

WickedLordJasper:
So that's what makes the movie bad?

Well any movie built on the idea of ideological masturbation that isn't a documentary is destined to be awful. While documentaries can at least provide meaningful points, the movie approaches from a lense where you already assume that all these things are super awful merely for existing. Rather than portraying such things can be bad, we assume that they're bad, and that these things we're already supposed to hate prior to watching the movie is the real problem. The problem in the marriage isn't that they're so far apart that the husband had to go searching for porn online to experience sexual satisfaction, like it would be in the real world, its that porn is bad. The fact that the wife is seriously considering cheating on her husband isn't indicative of anything wrong with their relationship, because marriage is a perfect fairy tale, its rather the reason the relationship is failing in the first place. There's no genuine, real conflict, but rather the writer creates fake conflict using their personal boogeyman - basically its creating a strawman of sorts. Thats why these types of films are always awful - they're soulless propaganda with no cultural value or artistic merit made for profit thats pandering to its target audience by creating a strawman so that they can burn it down. Its kind of like how most Call of Duty games are basically "fuck yeah, 'murica! We are the most awesomest best people in the world and do no wrong!"

MarsAtlas:
Rather than portraying such things can be bad, we assume that they're bad, and that these things we're already supposed to hate prior to watching the movie is the real problem. The problem in the marriage isn't that they're so far apart that the husband had to go searching for porn online to experience sexual satisfaction, like it would be in the real world, its that porn is bad.

Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.

WickedLordJasper:
Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.

But they're not problems specific to Christians. Rather, they're something broadcasted as negative through a Christian lense. Its ideological, and actually religious in nature. Due to that, their reason for holding why its bad is... on faith. you don't reason as to why porn is a marriage-killer, its just assumed that because faith in what somebody else is telling me without them explaining why. Its not even "unreasonable", its a complete lack of reason entirely. Anybody who comes to the film with any perspective that is different than what is represented in the movie will never walk away from the movie thinking differently, and for those who already believe that, well, the movie didn't do anything but give emotional validation. Thats why I call it masturbatory - nobody walks away from it with anything of value. Nobody walks away as a better person, or even having watched a decent film as a timekiller (because they're never even halfway decent films).

MarsAtlas:
But they're not problems specific to Christians. Rather, they're something broadcasted as negative through a Christian lense. Its ideological, and actually religious in nature. Due to that, their reason for holding why its bad is... on faith. you don't reason as to why porn is a marriage-killer, its just assumed that because faith in what somebody else is telling me without them explaining why. Its not even "unreasonable", its a complete lack of reason entirely. Anybody who comes to the film with any perspective that is different than what is represented in the movie will never walk away from the movie thinking differently, and for those who already believe that, well, the movie didn't do anything but give emotional validation. Thats why I call it masturbatory - nobody walks away from it with anything of value. Nobody walks away as a better person, or even having watched a decent film as a timekiller (because they're never even halfway decent films).

If this film's intended audience is a certain subculture of Christianity, then the audience wouldn't need to have it explained why pornography is bad for marriage, any more than they'd need it explained why receiving Communion every week is good. You may not agree with those reasons, but that's just one reason why you're not the target audience.

Now, if the movie doesn't bother to pitch itself to Christians and instead presents itself as something that everyone should be able to empathize with, that's clearly a mistake. But Christian-specific entertainment, like Christian rock, tends to be made with the assumption that no one except Christians are ever going to bother to go see it.

And again, I haven't seen the movie, just the Movie Defense Force, so all this is just hypothesis.

Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.

bdcjacko:
Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.

Well excuse me if we came here to have an actual discussion on a forum that's dedicated to-- oh, wait, you meant the other kind of wanking.

SonOfVoorhees:
Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.

Are there even any? In this industry, it's rare for anyone but Yahtzee to dare to call a game that isn't horribly broken anything worse than "OK". If there's any kind of consensus as to a game being straight-up bad, there's a good chance it's objectively awful and the best "defense" you could possibly provide for it is that it's "so bad it's good", and even that is damn hard for a game to be given all the technical expertise required to make it halfway decent.

This it seems, is the sort of film that you need litres of liquor to enjoy.

bdcjacko:
Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.

The baby Jesus is giving me a handjob, that makes it different. I'm not going to hell, you are!

How dare you Jim, Kirk Cameron gave up his wank for your sins.

I just couldn't resist.

Even as a Christian I find these sorts of movies insufferable. It's made to be the sort of thing "Christians" want to see, and while apparently that works for some, what gets me really compelled is the stuff I DON'T want to hear. I want tough analyses of the Bible that look at the plausibility of things, and the stories in the context of their time. I've read the works of people like John Spong, whose extremely historical and scholarly approach to the Bible shows that that Mary wasn't called a virgin until the later gospels and Joseph didn't exist until those same later gospels (because of Mary is a virgin you need some kind of a father figure to make sure Jesus isn't dismissed as a bastard, which is exactly how he is addressed in the early gospels), and that the prophecy from Isaiah which Matthew references to demonstrate that the messiah was predicted to come from a virgin was actually a Greek mistranslation which took the word Hebrew "almah" which is simply a young woman of childbearing years (marital status unspecified) and translated it as "parthenos" which does mean "virgin."

So yeah, after seeing some extremely hard to fight reasons for Mary to not have been a virgin, stuff like this comes off at best as rather soft. And at worst it's self-gratifying, self-righteous, and downright masturbatory. Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades. This stuff doesn't challenge or compel anybody looking for a challenge to their faith or a compelling reason to consider Christianity, it's a way for Christians who want to maintain their status quo and not think about new things to feel secure in their beliefs. By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."

He really cast his own wife to play in the movie so he wouldnt have to kiss an actress?

SonOfVoorhees:
Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.

You know, I actually made a thread about it awhile but was told that games are somehow different. I forget what reasons they gave but I remember I didn't agree with it.

EDIT: Ah yes, here's the thread.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.400868-Why-Isnt-There-A-GAME-Defense-Force

Wow that was funny. Now I have to actually watch that movie. Damn you Jim Sterlingggggggggg!!!

daxterx2005:
He really cast his own wife to play in the movie so he wouldnt have to kiss an actress?

That does sound like something Kirk Cameron would do.

Lilani:
Even as a Christian I find these sorts of movies insufferable. It's made to be the sort of thing "Christians" want to see, and while apparently that works for some, what gets me really compelled is the stuff I DON'T want to hear. I want tough analyses of the Bible that look at the plausibility of things, and the stories in the context of their time. I've read the works of people like John Spong, whose extremely historical and scholarly approach to the Bible shows that that Mary wasn't called a virgin until the later gospels and Joseph didn't exist until those same later gospels (because of Mary is a virgin you need some kind of a father figure to make sure Jesus isn't dismissed as a bastard, which is exactly how he is addressed in the early gospels), and that the prophecy from Isaiah which Matthew references to demonstrate that the messiah was predicted to come from a virgin was actually a Greek mistranslation which took the word Hebrew "almah" which is simply a young woman of childbearing years (marital status unspecified) and translated it as "parthenos" which does mean "virgin."

So yeah, after seeing some extremely hard to fight reasons for Mary to not have been a virgin, stuff like this comes off at best as rather soft. And at worst it's self-gratifying, self-righteous, and downright masturbatory. Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades. This stuff doesn't challenge or compel anybody looking for a challenge to their faith or a compelling reason to consider Christianity, it's a way for Christians who want to maintain their status quo and not think about new things to feel secure in their beliefs. By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."

I want to frame this post.

Seriously, so much truth :O

OT: This movie looks like ass-balls.

I thought the point of this show was to defend terrible movies. I think you really had enough material to backhandedly insult this one, instead of going straight at it for the first time ever.

Also, if god didn't want us to touch ourselves he/she/it would have made it impossible. Building people a certain way and telling them not to act on their urges would be cruel and petty. Or maybe he/she/it just doesn't exist, which is the simplest solution.

WickedLordJasper:
Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.

I'm not quite sure you two understand each other. Fireproof's problem is that the movie is about Churchianity, not Christianity if that makes any sense.

Anyways, I'm going to echo quite a few people here and say I was quite disappointed with this week's MDF. I hadn't tuned in recently, and when I saw it today I was expecting an interesting and off-beat opinion of a relatively tired subject. Way to let me down, Jim.

Flunk:
Also, if god didn't want us to touch ourselves he/she/it would have made it impossible. Building people a certain way and telling them not to act on their urges would be cruel and petty.

You're completely missing the point. The simplest premise of Christianity is that God doesn't want people to be assholes and instead wants them to be nice to each other, but forcing someone to be nice by giving them no other option is a fallacy. You can't force someone to not be an asshole, because being an asshole requires a conscious choice. Similarly, there is no point in doing good if you are unable to do evil.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here