From: brnt@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: The Rapture ** SPOILER ** (but you won't want to see this movie)
Date: 28 Jul 92 11:24:45 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1992Jul28.134847.11320@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, cb366@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark B. Bendiksen) writes:
> 
> eiscoop3@bmerh52.bnr.ca (Robert McAulay) writes               
>>What the hell was this?  Some gratuitous sex at the start to attract
>>the viewers and then some disconnected, badly acted and
>>horribly frustrating scenes to finish.  I remember that the idea
>>interested me at first, the imminent return of God and the fact
>>that only a select group of people knew about it, but then it
>>deteriorated into... I don't know what.  
>                                     
>>Any comments out there?  Did anyone like this movie?  Did
>>anyone get a coherent message out of it?  I'd like to know what
>>Ebert saw in it.
>                                                   
>>Mike. 
> 
> I haven't yet seen the film, but as I recall Ebert really
> admired the film on account of Mimi Rogers' performance more
> than anything else. He kept rambling on about how Ms. Rogers
> really took a risk by taking such a role that no other actress
> in Hollywood wanted, etc. In fact, I don't remember him saying
> anything substantial about the film itself.

	I saw the movie a few weeks ago, mainly because of a glowing review in
r.a.m.r, and I have to say that my initial reaction was rather less than
favorable.  It seemed to me that it was Hollywood taking pot-shots at its
favorite target once again.  "All non-liberal Christians are extremist
fruit loops who wouldn't think twice about shooting their own children in the
back of the head if it will assure them a place in heaven."  It was even more
tripified (def: for something to reveal itself as utter tripe) in my mind by
the fact that it (as Hollywood is also wont to do) attributed many ridiculous
and unbelievable theological views to Christianity, that it has never held.
	Upon retrospect, however, it did have good points.  It does deal with
the extremism that SOME religious people are prone to (although this is hardly
an new theme in Hollywood movies).  It also takes to task some rather difficult
theological questions, but does so in a two-dimensional and rather childish
fashion.  Mainly, I liked treatment of the Mimi Rogers character when she was 
working as an Information Operator.  I was suddenly struck by the 
oppressiveness that these people must endure.
	The acting was unremarkable, typical for Hollywood's "deep" movies with
religious themes.  The director probably said "OK, Mimi, you're in a spiritual
frenzy, look vacuous, more, MORE, Perfect!" about a million times.  The
Characters where especially trite: The ex-swinger turned dutiful husband, the
concerned friend who offers to loan her gun for "an emergency" (really, it
happens), the mysterious and overly wise child prophet, the slimy
boyfriend/pimp who perfers to "watch", and especially the neurotic alcoholic
employee who goes on a shooting spree.
	My advice, if you want to see a thought-provoking and unsettling movie
about values, rent Akira Kurosawa's "Dreams"
-- 
       .    _  .     _____________ 
       |\_|/__/|    /             \ 
      / / \/ \  \  / Happy! Happy! \      
     /__|O||O|__ \ \   Joy! Joy!   / 
    |/_ \_/\_/ _\ | \  ___________/      
    | | (____) | ||  |/                       
    \/\___/\__/  // _/
    (_/         ||   
     |          ||\   
      \        //_/   Brent E. Dyer
       \______//      Administrative Assistant
      __|| __||       University of Kansas Computing Services
     (____(____)      BRNT@UKANVAX		BRNT@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU