INSIGHTS
ANGELS AND HOLLYWOOD
ANGELS IN THE BIBLE
GABRIEL
MICHAEL
SATAN HAS FALLEN

BULLETIN BOARD

FALLEN THEOLOGY
Subject: The theological inaccuracy of Hollywood films.
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000
From: Barry Shrapnel

Hi, I found your site yesterday, and I think it is wonderful. I have a keen interest in how Hollywood can use its own theology in films, but make it appear as if it was Bibical. There is a danger in this as the general public will not know what the Bible really says. A good example is "End of Days," starring Arnold Schwarzenegger. While very strong on the idea that one's salvation comes from faith in God, the film makes serious errors in the use of Revelation, especially in the filmmaker's use of the number of the beast, 666. (A priest says that, in dreams people see numbers upside down. He says John dreamed 666, so it is really 999 or 1999, and 1999 is the date for the 1000 years: "When the thousand years have ended, Satan will be loosed from his prison" (Rev 20:7). Of course, the writer has pulled this passage out of context and used it for the plot. As I said in my review of that film: "The premise of the film is based on a passage in Revelation which states, 'When the thousand years have ended, Satan will be released from his prison. . . ' (Rev 20:7).

The film has been called a theological disaster because two key elements of the plot do not relate to Christian theology. These are: first, that Satan will have to impregnate a female between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight on New Years Eve in order to bring about the apocalypse; and, secondly, that if Satan doesn't get the girl during this time, he will go back to hell. Nowhere in Revelation or the Bible are these two ideas mentioned. Also, according to the Bible, the 2nd coming has to happen before Satan is released from his prison."

I have also written a long analysis of the film "Fallen," starring Denzel Wahington. I look at the Bibical background of the film and the sources of the philosophy and the demon in the film. I found some very interesting information on the identity of the demon, Azazel. I have enclosed an attachment which has excerpts of my review. As you know, the narrator of "Fallen" is the demon. I have analyzed the film from that viewpoint. My review is rather long, (3500) words, as I also discuss the themes in the film which deal with the nature of evil. Would you be interested in seeing the review, and/or having me edit it? The review for "Fallen"was first posted on the Hollywood Bitchslap movie review site, and they require that any of the reviews written for them, if appearing on another site, have a link to Hollywood Bitchslap. Thank you for looking at my submission, Barry Shrapnel

Response: Bad theology? I am glad for the public conversation and opportunity these films present. Both affirm the great cosmic battle now going on. Send what you will. I'll be happy to look it over. -David

COMMENTS TO NEWSDAY
Subject: Film Faith Affirming?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000
From: Michael

Dave, Here's the text of a letter I wrote to the editor of Newsday after their review of End of Days appeared. I think you can get the gist of the reviewer's bias and faux pas from what I wrote:

Film Faith Affirming? I have not seen "End of Days" yet, so I won't critique Jan Stuart's review (11/24/99) on artistic grounds. Keeping in mind that the subject took dramatic license, I did find the review to be than a little disrespectful, and short on sound theology. According to strong tradition, the Book of Revelation (sans "s") was written by the Apostle John, in exile on the island of Patmos; most likely written on parchment rather than a "sheepskin notepad." If anything is clear from the events prophesied in that book, it is that the end of days will be marked by an increase in evil (demonic and otherwise), and that many who go through those times will refuse to repent of that evil. Indeed they will eagerly embrace the Antichrist as a saviour, as portrayed in films like "The Omen" trilogy and the recent "Omega Code."

The reviewer also found fault with Schwarzenegger's conversion experience in the final sequence. Granted, he is not the world's greatest living actor, and so may not be able to carry it off with conviction, but to compare such a moment with "an alcoholic chasing a 20-year bender with a thimble of soya milk" is really missing the point. Many times true faith, and thus true victory, in God comes in a moment, perhaps after a lifetime of trying to do things your own way. And often we have left as destructive a path, emotionally and spiritually, in our wake as Arnold ever could on screen.

[P.S. I've still not seen the film, but plan on getting it soon. Thanks for your excellent work on this site.]
Michael You may post this if you wish.

DOES THE GOOD GUY ALWAYS HAVE TO WIN?
Subject: Why?
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000
From: Meghan

I don't want to upset anyone but,Why does the good guy always have to win? Other then that i am Gabriel Byrne's #1 Fan,Ithought for once the bad guy was going to win that's partly why i went to go see this movie in the first place.Don't get me wroung this was a very good moive but i think it would have been alot better it Gabriel,Satan,had won. If you have any problem or agree with me e-mail me at meghorse1@hotmail.com

END OF DAYS
Subject: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000
From: Jenni Cady

I stumbled across your site last fall when I was looking for music from Blues Brothers 2000. I really enjoyed your review of that movie!!! My dad had made my husband and I watch that movie and we loved it. Of course, the revival scene was my favorite. To be born-again as a Blues Brother, let alone just being born again! Anyways, I have loved checking out your site periodically. I haven't been to the movies much lately, but we happened to go to End of Days on New Years Day and we were completely disgusted. It wasn't all that I hoped it would be, but that's life. However, I loved The Devil's Advocate, and I thought your review of that movie was completely on target with what we saw. I was wondering if you would consider renting the Rock Opera "Tommy" and doing a review of it? I got interested in that movie when I was in around 8th grade and went on a road trip with my stepdad & mom, and we listened to the soundtrack from Washington state to California. So they rented it for me, and I loved it and then they bought it for me. I remembered thinking that it somehow had to do with the story of Jesus, but I really didn't understand how. I had my dad & stepmom watch it with me, and it stirred up lots of interesting conversations. I tried to get some of my high school friends to watch it then and they didn't really understand where I was coming from. This last year, I've been trying to find reviews on it to see if anyone else felt the way I did. It's a long movie that needs all attention paid to it, and with three children I hadn't been able to watch it for about 5 years. Since I have only been saved about three years, I have wondered if I would still feel the same about it. On Saturday of this weekend I finally got to watch it, and I was still really intrigued by it. I would really love it if you might watch it and review it? It definitely has some spiritual significance to it and I would love to hear your take on it.
Thank You, Jennifer Cady

GABRIEL BYRNE IS FANTASTIC SATAN
Subject: Gabriel Byrne
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999
From: Mercedes

Patty
I think that Gabriel byrne is fantastic as Satan , Gabriel is waooo! I don´t understand the people who say: this film is patetic. and I answer them is an thriller-action film isn´t a horror-thriller film.
bye.

GOOD ACTION FLICK WITH BAD PLOT
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999
From: T. J.

As a Christian, I was looking forward to the portrayal of Revelation in the movie End of Days. I am also a Schwarzenegger fan, so I was looking forward to getting a good action flick, too. It turned out to be a good action flick, but for the plot, I'm hard pressed to find another movie that twists the truth and blasphemes Christ more than this one. I mean, get real. This movie wasn't even close to being intended to portray scripture. First off, let's examine the crucial scripture involved with this movie, Revelation 20:7. "When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison..." BUT WAIT!!! The sentence doesn't end there! (verse 8) "...and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth-Gog and Magog-to gather them for battle." (emphasis mine). Hmmm. In this movie, Satan is as subtle as a Mack truck, and isn't doing any gathering. By the time the thousand years has occurred, the anti-christ has already come, like Scripture says (Rev. chapter 13), so this 'thousand years' and satans release is after all the events that supposedly happen in the movie. According to scripture, the thousand years has nothing to do with the coming of the Anti-Christ. It actually has to do with God letting satan out and allowing him to deceive the earth one more time before he gets slaughtered at Armageddon, but we'll touch on that later. Also, this garbage about '666' being '999' borders on calling God a liar, as well as being logically inaccurate. For one, if we can't take '666' as it is, how can we take anything in scripture as it is? In a dream or not, God had it put into the canon, and I think we'd do well to take God at His Word. Anywayz, it doesn't click with the description of it in scripture, as '666' is "...the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name..." (Rev. 13:17b) and is necessary to "...buy or sell..." (Rev. 13:17a). This means that '666' has to do with financial transactions, and it is the number of the fallen, the number of man (Rev. 13:18, as man is fallen without hope of redemption apart from Christ), the number of the beast. It has nothing to do with a year, or anything else, and it wouldn't make sense if it was. Besides, John says that this number "...calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast..." (Rev. 13:18a, emphasis mine.) So this means that he didn't just see the number '666', that it was some sort of logical mathematical derivative of the mark, possibly three columns with six numbers in each, that gives everyone a unique code, while still being '666'. Whatever it is, it definitely does not deal with a year on a calendar. Ok, now down to the heart of why this movie is screwed up. Acts 2:20-21 "The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. And everyone who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (emphasis mine). As Christians, we know who wins in the end. God will let Satan loose in the end for a time to punk us all he wants, but in the end, if we call Christ Savior, WE WIN! Read the rest of the story after Revelation 20. Let's see, there's a giant battle called Armageddon, for which the devil was gathering forces in Rev. 20:8, and GOD WINS!!! Hmmm, then there's this whole judgment thing, and God takes those who accepted Christ to Heaven, and the disobedient burn in hell. Does this sound like the devil has much of a chance? The score is already known. The End of Days ends with God winning, no problem. Oh, and did you notice that no where does it say that God needs man to help Him win? In the movie, the fat priest says that 'God will not save us, it is up to us' and that if the Anti-Christ is born, 'our souls are lost'. Geez, so this means that unless we can stop satan from beating up God, our souls are lost? What kind of screwed up logic is this? For one, God does not need our help to keep His throne, and second, satan does not have the power to nullify our salvation. What is our faith if Christ doesn't reign supreme, and His Blood doesn't cover our sins? BTW, in the movie, they keep saying 'have faith' and 'we must keep faith'. FAITH IN WHAT?!! In the dumb blind impotent version of God they believe in? Faith is not valid unless the object of the faith is valid. And my faith is in my DAD, my eternal Father, who can whoop satan's butt without having to think about it (He created satan, making satan about as powerful against Him as we are), and Who loves me enough to die for me, and nothing can make my soul lost after He has saved me. 'Nuff said. I could go on forever about the end times and this movie, pointing out logical fallacies and the way God says things will go, but I don't have time. Suffice to say, this movie was awful, and gave Hollywood an excuse to blaspheme God (those lines that satan was saying to Jericho about the Bible, and how satan in Jericho at the end blasphemed the image of Christ in that Church, which in my opinion was an attack by the director on God). Those lines need not be uttered to make a point. That is just putting crap in the minds of the audience. After all, if you are saved by saying with your mouth 'Jesus is Lord', and if you believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you must be in trouble for saying blasphemies with your mouth, especially when the express purpose is not to give a Biblically accurate account of Revelation. BTW, the gratutious sex scenes were just plain stupid, and had no bearing on anything. Really, if the devil wanted to inpregnate a woman, do you think he'd give her dreams about who he is, and would he be a sex maniac? Get real, sexual temptation is used on humans by satan because it tweaks our biological nature to procreate. The devil does not have this 'temptation', and would only want sex to make the anti-christ. So he would deceive the woman and get his kid without her even knowing, as he is 'the deceiver'. Yeah anywayz, if you read all of this, hope you see where I'm coming from, God bless, and have a good one.
TJ

LOVE OVER HATE
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999
From: ken shears

Another case of damned if you do and damned if you don't! The secular reviews uniformly pan this movie. Why? Is it because Satan is to close to home? Or that there are actual "followers" of Satan? Or maybe, for once the Pope - as a religious figure - is holy in his attitude of forgiveness and restraint, choosing to love rather than hate? Maybe it's because Arnold's character is rough and rude, but comes to a spiritual awakening, tossing aside his big gun (anathema for Arnold lovers) to instead choose the sword of God? Then we have the religious folks who hate the movie because it's not religious enough for them, not accurate enough, not sublime enough, not spiritual enough... So you have those who pull from the side of political correctness and those from the side of spiritual correctness. What do you have left? A more than serviceable movie that tries to depict the growing awareness on the part of an un-spiritual man of the spiritual forces at work in the world. Not a bad film really, nor a bad premise either! Like Dylan said "...you can't make all the people happy all the time...", at least I think he said that :)
Ken Shears
Derry NH

"God sets the lonely in families,.." Psalm 68:6
http://www.oe-pages.com/FAMILY/Moral/kenshears/

ARNOLD'S INITIALS ARE J.C.
Subject: End of Days
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999
From: Jeff

Dear David,

Let me start by telling you how much I appreciate your site. Your "prophetic" insights into the films you review are exceptional. I only wish that there were even more films catalogued on your site as I believe the Lord has gifted you with a tremendously discerning eye and ear to hear what His Spirit is saying. It is my belief that God is never left without a witness and your site proves that. I agree with the concept of taking what light DOES exist and letting it overcome the darkness that surrounds it. Another way of saying this would be to use the picture from the Matrix of Neo invading the agent of darkness and then the light exploding it from the inside. We Christians spend way too much time pointing out what is evil without ever acknowledging what is good. WWJD? I think we're on the right track when we realize that He did not spend His time berating the hurting and lost souls He placed Himself in the middle of. The words of condemnation Jesus used were always for those religious leaders of His day who had stopped reaching out and had placed themselves in the positions of moral authority.

Now on to the movie. I was pleasantly surprised at how much better this movie was than all the reviews I had read or heard. Here in Dallas our local film critic for the Dallas Morning News gave the film an "F". Can you believe it?

Kind of cool that Arnold's characters initials were "J.C.". And yet another film with crucifixion/resurrection scenes. The mob violence done to Jericho reminded me of Jesus being beaten by the soldiers. I thought that the temptation scene was brilliant. I also liked the fact that Kevin Pollak's character ultimately chose the path of love and relationship. Great ending. Brought tears to my eyes as well. Wish the theology had been more accurate and I agree that they could have made this PG-13 with some clean-up work. But I guess we can't have everything. At least not until the people who spend large sums of money making sub-par "hardcore" Christian films start spending their money wisely and hiring the very best writers, directors, actors, etc.

Just as a sidebar, have you ever seen the "Matthew" series of videotapes? (also known as "The Laughing Jesus" series). Was curious to know if you've ever reviewed that on this site. Unfortunately it wasn't consistently great, but I feel it deserves praise and recognition for the times that it got "it" really right.

Thanks again. May God richly bless you, your family, and your ministry.
Jeff Rockwall, TX

P.S. Please do NOT publish my e-mail address.

MIXED EMOTIONS
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999
From: s.hardzog

I have mixed emotions about the film. Namely, because I am a huge Gabriel Bryne fan and he was portraying the ole "Prince of Stinch". Other than that it was well done. Very raunchy but what do you expect of satan? That's how I looked at it. I also found it interesting that satan's followers were done in by satan himself. Dance with the devil you're gonna get burned. The film is not your "church group" type movie but, strong enough for the hard core action buffs. I would recommend it but, I would certainly caution them.

I love it when God wins!!!
s.hardzog

THEOLOGICALLY RIDICULOUS
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999
From: Violet

I don't quite agree with the people who say that End of Days is a great apocalyptic action movie. To illustrate this point, let me remind you of the tongueless priest named Thomas Aquinas. Recall the scene in which Cane walks into a church and demands of a group of priests, "Do you know Thomas Aquinas?" (I roared with laughter.) Thomas Aquinas, reknowned 13th-century Dominican scholar and Doctor of the Church? Yes, I think a bunch of Catholic priests are gonna have some inkling who that is.
I actually enjoyed End of Days. Not because it was a good film, but because the theology was ridiculous, the script was hilarious, and I don't care what anybody else thinks, the sidekick was funny. There were some interesting points in there, but since the filmmakers almost certainly didn't know what they were doing from a theological standpoint, they might well be coincidence. Not to ignore these points, but End of Days is easily the greatest bad movie of the year.
My question is, when are we going to see some flicks which accurately reflect faith and belief in God in everyday life? Why does it take the threat of the end of the world to make filmmakers refer to God, are we really that shallow? And why doesn't anybody make a movie about the real message of the Bible, instead of waving around all this window dressing?
Also, when is a nun going to save the world?
Sincerely,
Violet

CHRISTIAN FILMMAKER'S TAKE ON END OF DAYS
Subject: Filmmaker with some thoughts...
Date: Fri., 26 Nov. 1999
From: Jeremy

I guess I shouldn't say filmmaker quite yet. ASPIRING filmmaker.
I just saw End of Days. And being a believer in Christ and an aspiring Christian filmmaker I saw a lot of things that made me laugh. The initial idea connecting the Revelation with the year 2000, or any end-of-the-year celebration caused a smirk in itself. But, all in all, this movie did what many Christian films are not doing. It got the message to the people. There were a lot of things I definitely did not like. I would not have dropped the F-bomb so many times for one thing (what good is a film with a Christ-based message when kids won't be able to see it?). And for another, a lot of the nudity and sex could have been implied. I hold the human body up as one of the most beautiful forms in existence, but when used for purposes of lust or "turning the audience on" it cheapens and/or confuses the message. ANYWAY...
The main idea of the film was this, as I interpreted it. Here's a guy, Jericho who has denied God ever since his family was slaughtered. Surely a relatable idea to many. And throughout the film, even as he defends Christine and actually is doing the work of God he still does not accept his call. he still denies God. And God uses him still. And at the end of the film when he prepares to face Satan in the cathedral he finally sees the truth, that he has to have complete faith in God giving him strength, thus the dropping of the gun. And as we see, he finally has to fall on the sword to keep his weak flesh from being ill-used by Satan. Jericho succeeds, and as he dies he sees a vision of his wife and child waiting for him. This is the point at which the tears came for me. This is the point.
Regardless of all the crap Jericho had done, his drinking, depression, denial of God altogether, when the time came for him to make a choice and choose Christ or Evil, he made the right one. And this is the point about Jesus. There is no atonement. There is no amount of things or works that can be done to make up for our lives full of sin. The gift of salvation is right there, and can be accepted at the beginning of a life...or at the end of one, as in this case.
This film had its flaws, and was required to instate a certain amount of swearing and sex to not make it stick out too much from the rest of the films currently being made. BUT as I said I feel this film took the message of salvation, Christ's message, to those who would otherwise never hear it. Whether or not that is what the filmmakers had intended, well...Arnold didn't realize that he was doing God's work either.


LOVED END OF DAYS
Date: Thu, 25 Nov. 1999
From: The Diva

I loved it.

QUESTIONS END OF DAYS
Subject: end of days, may be end of innocence for Arnold
Date: Thu, 25 Nov. 1999
From: Rojas

It's sad to me that even though this movie gets an R rating, yet because we've grown up accustomed to equating Arnold with action, we see kids being drawn to this muck-fest, that is chuck full of incoherent mumble jumble theology, with heavy sexual content thrown in the batch. Seems like everyone is jumping on the new millennium bandwagon, who cares what it promotes and to whom it may cater it's just entertainment, We are so numbed with explosions we need something new to push the stimulation button, so let's see how far we can go with the "formerly good guy role playing hero fighting against evil with maybe a little excess in the process but all forgivable, because it's Arnold", I can see the new action figures now, "Stigmata dolls crucified on ceilings" or maybe the devil doll that has sex with mothers and daughters simultaneously. Arnold has come a long way from Austria as he's learned how to say the "F" word without hardly a trace of an accent, and of course now living the American motto, "anything for money" or should I say as one of those who watched it, though I finally did leave about half hour before it ended, "anything for entertainment". Thank God for great Role models like Arnold, "I'll be right back," dad can say to his 12 year old "I'm going to go get some popcorn, tell me what I missed." Well if you missed this one, you didn't miss much, but I bet you one thing, I bet Arnold doesn't have his
kids in the theater watching the garbage that he has learned to give out in America, but what the hay let's make him a millionaire (billionaire), and let him and Hollywood know how much we love this new garbage so he can give us some more next year. "Hey coman lighten up some would say, you can always find something good," well how bout finding something holy. But when we become so desensitized that we can sit through it and see nothing wrong with it, maybe it's time for God to begin to judge His house, before He judges Arnold's Hollywood.
My response: Actually with a little work this could have been a PG-13 film and opened to a larger audience, I think. As good as the ending is, I don't see organized youth groups going to this film, for the very reasons you give. Never the less, the film makes an important statement at the end about life through death.

I JUST SAW END OF DAYS
August 20, 1999.
From HJ visitor

I was lucky enough to get chosen to view a showing of "End of Days". Very good action movie, LOTS of action. pretty dark and twisted though, based around Satan having to mate with the 'chosen one' (Robin Tunney) so his spawn may take over the world. shortly after the beginning of the film you watch a Satanic ritual centering around an unwashed newborn girl covered in vaginal lubricant and uterine material being forced to drink the blood of a freshly killed rattlesnake. after that, the movie becomes strange. it is very violent, a scene with people beating Arnold with bats and pipes in dark alleyways and then when he has been beaten unconscious, crucifying him. a few times Schwarzenegger is firing machine guns into crowds of people just mowing a path for himself to run through. these people have of course been possessed by Satan or whatever making it acceptable. Another strange scene involves a moaning elderly woman strapped to a table experiencing stigmata. A few nice gratuitous breast shots, a strange really detached one (scene, that is) in a restaurant immediately before it explodes, a tiny peek at Robin's before a shower and an especially good one of a young girl whose father is watching her, along with her mother, have sex with Satan while NIN's "Closer" song blares in the background. definitely not a family film, yet at the same time... Anyway, I would definitely recommend seeing it, "it's like The Exorcist meets Terminator 2." the effects were not complete at the viewing but they still seemed pretty cool. Satan, when he is not occupying Gabriel Byrnes body is a transparent shape akin to Predator but much more fluid. He also appears at the end in the familiar demon shape with the huge wings (this part was very rough/low resolution at this viewing but still looked cool). Not your typical Schwarzenegger flick, he is a suicidal alcoholic drug addict depressed about the murder of his family by gang members (which i might add we must watch his wife and 5 year old daughter (fresh from the bathtub) be murdered with single shots to the back of the head) he had testified against. He gets his ass kicked a few times. A really bad scene he is hanging out a window and he must horridly cut his hand on the glass to keep his grip. Overall the movie is quite dark and gruesome, based solely around Violence, Satan and Sex. But it also has a lot of action and excellent effects. I would definitely recommend seeing it (if you are stable, that is).
By the way it's Christine York, not Christine Bethlehem (as formerly planned). They mistake the message carved into a mans stomach crucified from the ceiling as "Christ in New York" instead of "Christine York"