User reviews

And coming from an atheist, that's saying something.

The first "God's Not Dead" was a two sided ego match between the good Christian student and his evil atheist strawman of a professor. It wasn't deep, it was actually rather hateful against anybody who was non-Christian. But like most Christian movies it wasn't made with the intention to change hearts or minds but instead to preach to the already converted.

It also made a lot of money so damn right they'd make a sequel.

And in some ways the sequel was even worse because it focused around a total non-issue. A history professor mentions Jesus in class and for this she's sanctioned, put on leave and needs to go to court to defend her rights. Meanwhile the evil ACLU, who have actually defended the rights of Christians to pray in the real world, are portrayed as hating Christianity for no good reason. I mean they cast Ray Wise as the lead prosecutor and had him play it as demonically as possible. I'm not kidding. They really wanted to make it seem like he was the actual devil.

It also made a lot of money so of course they'd made a sequel.

But somewhere between the making of the second and the third something changed. We actually got a real movie with a message but one that didn't paint atheists as being the bad guys. In fact Reverend Dave, played by David A.R. White, is seen as being a much more understanding and caring individual than he has in the previous movies.

The end result is a surprisingly decent movie with a Christian message. What was even more surprising was how so many Christians seemingly didn't go see this movie for whatever reasons they had, Maybe this only goes to show that they're not interested in a movie that changes hearts and minds but only repeats to them what they already have in their own minds.

And quite honestly, I think that's really sad.

Compared with the first two movies this one is way better in terms of story, acting and overall tone. Instead of having overtly atheist two-dimensional straw men as in the first two films, all of the characters both religious and non are drawn with some depth. And instead of the religious characters being unambiguously good and everyone being evil, both character types are given to actions both good and bad.

I can't say that this is a "good movie" in comparison to big budget titles, but within it's trilogy and within the genre it's a cut above the rest.

Full transparency; I am an atheist, but not a fallen Christian. I watch these movies to get a sense of what this segment of the Christian community is saying about people like me. And where in the first two movies I was laughing at the naive portrayals, this one was much more balanced.

In summary, It's pretty much a Hallmark movie, but with more overt religiousity. If you're into that, give it a go.

Okay, to all of my fellow Christians out there reading this, it is OK to not like Christian movies. Yes, their message is good, but it doesn't mean its presented well. God taught us to be loving, accepting, and forgiving...

But I'm sorry, these movies are atrocious. The setups are unreal, over the top, and in all honesty made to scare christians. They show that everyone hates our religion and is actively trying to destoy it, which there are some that do believe that, but chances are you're not gonna have to encounter that. So much money is put to a franchise that builds off of propaganda that makes every little thing in someones life extremely important and dramatic. A lot of pureflix films are as cheesy as Blumhouse horror films at times. Really look at the way its shot, take away the stilted acting, the way it's directed shows how terrible they are. Shots where we're supposed to feel emotional makes us laugh because they're so over the top and cringey. I know the actors are trying their best, and the younger actors aren't too terrible, but these movies aren't low rated because of everyone hating on Christianity. They're hated because they're actually poorly and cheaply made films.

Despite all the odds, this film actually came out decent. Of course it is still heavy-handed with its ideas that the country disproportionately hates Christians and Christianity, there is still an underlying message of "We as a nation are not talking to each other as we should. We are screaming and not listening to other peoples' views". The movie does undercut its own message by featuring news pundits who espouse the typical "Liberals don't listen to Christians" but this is supplemented by several scenes where actual conversations, however brief, are had between these so-called liberals (read: atheists) and Christians. What the film does best is open itself up to be called out for hypocrisy with its typical "Christians are being persecuted" and, instead of chanting the mantra to itself throughout the film, actually turns to face the accusations and defend its stance. The Lawyer (played by David Corbett) and Reverend Dave (played by David A.R. White) are the main example of this phenomenon, and David A.R. White's earnest convictions are matched by Corbett's charming, needling lawyer character. This is the first time that the film series ever actually takes the time to establish a dialogue between these two forces that the film itself claims are tearing this country apart, and that sort of self-awareness in a film genre that seems eager to play the victim card can not be understated.

I would not recommend this film as anything but for the curious, and I would dissuade everyone from watching this until they've seen the first two in order to truly appreciate the level of growth that this series experienced in its writing and storytelling.

Michael Manson did a great job as a 1st time director.

The first few movies in the "God's Not Dead" franchise were so corny. The antagonists in the first few movies were stereotype atheists and borderline cartoon characters. GND3 actually seemingly had real characters that had real relatable issues and doubts about their faith. It actually tackles the problems with Christian victimology without being too heavy handed. v

The problem with this movie is the that it has too many unnecessary scenes. There are boring stretches of time that could have been cut out.

Even though it has some serious slow parts I give it points for attempting to tackle a different point of view than the originals.

I love the 1st GND movie and like the 2nd, but this entry in the series tops them all. Many people discourage the previous movies since atheists are seen as bad guys and the Christians are good.

A Light In Darkness just so happens to remedy this, and show that Christians sometimes to be unloving as well. My cousin told me to look up James 1:26-27 once when it comes to this:

"Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."

Many movies like Carrie, Misery, and even Disney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame, show how those who call themselves religious can still show much hate against others.

We are called to love, but sometimes we forget to do this. GND 3 demonstrates this beautifully. Even if you don't give this a 10, I'm sure you'll agree that this is the best God's Not Dead movie thus far! Please see this movie, even if you have some doubts about it.

With a new director the series now walks in a better new path. While the first two movie had stereotypical characters, especially regarding the government and atheists are abandoned. This time there are no "good or bad" sides since everyone had an argument to present. This film attempts to deal with the extent of faith which could mean that the studio itself could be apologizing for the first two movies. But the movie can still be shortened by removing a few aspects that drag on and it still cherry picks legal events to present its thesis. The movie is rough around the edges but it stands above its predecessors and thus worth to watch.

This is easily the worst of the series, but I still loved it! Part 3 didn't have as much unintentional comedy as the first two, but it was still damn near a laugh-a-minute escapade of truly incompetent filmmaking.

Much like the previous entries in this series, Light in a Darkness is a self-congratulatory celebration of the victimhood of christian persecution at the hands of evil secular societies. I imagine that evangelicals across the nation pleasure themselves without guilt while watching this and pretending that the premise is even remotely plausible. I get the feeling that they're unable to appreciate this film the way Zeus intended: as a movie so bad that it's good.

I'd recommend this to pretty much anyone who enjoys bad films. If you liked The Room, you'll love the GND movies!

Poorly directed. The actors seem fine, maybe a little stiff, but the director seemed very confused.

Odd subplots that don't need to be in there. Scenes and characters that don't add anything. Boring and pointless conversations that don't lead anywhere.

If the goal was to be as religiously vague as possible then...well done.

They were trying to be as inclusive as possible to not scare off potential non-Christian viewers and I guess the way that happens is they decide to take all genuine conflict out of the story and you end up with a boring lump that's equivalent to opening a random page in the Bible and trying to find some masterful meaning out of an incomplete thought.

Whatever. And the ending is atrocious

What a load of pony. Laughed all the way through. And the bloke from Northern Exposure turned up.

All I'm going to say is that it seems that the people who praised the first two installments, gave it 8 and 10 star ratings and seem to be the most critical of this installment are the ones who disliked this one the most of the three! That's pretty telling about the state of the country we live in now! I think people are absolutely fed up with this Administration and how much damage a Businessman who says God sent him to fix the country, yet we're in a pandemic that was avoidable and he's the most corrupt person ever to be President is now showing his own hatred! He has destroyed everything in his path and broken any laws he wishes to get his way! No man is above the law! The only reason why I even watched this installment of this series was because we had family members who we're visiting and they saw this and wanted to see it! Based on the second installment, I clinched my teeth and endured this one!

It's the most tolerable of the series, but that's not saying much either! Hearing the Aunt who I loved as a child chastise this movie and say that it wasn't as good as the previous ones was absolutely heartbreaking! It's gotten to where I can not even talk to my Right Wing Friends or relatives now! It's truly a shame as they have never had any issue with my husband and the fact I am gay and We're now married, but they seemed very cold to him this visit and it's actually his house! It's ours now, but he was the one who helped us get the money to pay for it and was the one who manipulated the mortgage that has allowed us to pay it off! I briefly spoke to them when they left, but haven't heard from them since then!

Thia is a wonderful film that is definitely worth a watch wither or not you are a follower of Jesus or a non believer of Jesus . This is a awesome film that portrays the negative outcome of Not being selfless and gracious to others as we all should be. It really shows how unprofitable and destructive it can be to our world and those around us when all we care about is really only our own agenda and what we feel is right or wrong. When we don't stop and truly listen and genuinely care about what others are going through we just become self absorbed and show a lack of love and selflessness. We must all remember that Love truly is the greatest thing that we can give to each other and Everyone needs more Love.

A great watch 4sure

This movie, the 3rd in the series, was a major improvement on the earlier offerings. A believable scenario with believable characters and no caricatures of "evil atheists". However, if you've been on another planet for a while and can't accept the stridency of some of the anti-Christian sentiments expressed, just google "Christian news" and follow some sites, both news items and trolls in comment sections will bring you up to speed on this. Well done to the producers on this one. I feel they have listened to previous criticisms and come up with a winner this time. I do wonder if some of those voting "1"s have actually watched the movie.

I liked the 1st and 2nd one better. Too much drama in this one and everything just dragged on.

I was happy to see the movie the night before the release! I can honestly say that it was better than the two previous movies. I can assume that atheists will come in an trash on the movie, but that's ok. I'm not writing the review to bash any atheists or people, I'd hate to do that. I simply want to share this. Now getting on with the review... The previous two movies have been about compelling Christians to stand out for Christ, but this movie was about Living for Christ, being a light in the darkness. This movie did a fantastic job at being compelling, convicting, and so much more! If you're looking for a Christian movie presenting previous times featuring protesting, freedom rights, modern day church persecution, dealing with a loss of a life, and teaching you how you can still be a light in the darkness. This is my review, have a blessed day!

Don't watch the critics they are just afraid of the truth because it is base biblical, it is mainly highlight the fact about persecution which most christians in the western region are not familiar with. Thus it is harshing critized.

The third chapter of Pure Flix' "checkmate atheists" saga has sent its blessing. Rejoice as it delivers even more accidental farce in the form of wanting to propound a serious message while insisting to remain obtuse about atheism, society, and science - or otherwise believe demonstrably incorrect things (or "knowing the truth" as PF would say, mainly to themselves if they've been sleeping poorly).

God's Not Dead 3 is here and this time he REALLY isn't dead, nor an ancient product of make-believe just as likely to exist as the thousands of other deities that feature in religions both modern and defunct. This time, the marginalization of religious groups in Trump's America is the focus, the victims of which are, naturally, white conservative Christians. Again, they're big on "the truth", these guys.

Most unfortunate about Pure Flix is the fact that their movies are technically getting better and better. The lighting and cinematography are improving, and the characters are starting to vaguely resemble real human beings - as opposed to mouth-pieces of The Enlightened versus caricatures of the Bad People; the ones who take history, archaeology and astronomy more seriously than the "talking animal" book about an omniscient sky entity who loves all except third world countr... Oops, sorry, I mean DA BOOK OF TROOF DAT IS TRUE BECAUZ GOD, THE REAL ONE, WRITED IT!!!! (I'd say we're even now, Pure Flix)

All that being said, it looks as if the company is running out of actors dumb enough to say yes to this stuff. One of the main stars of God's Not Dead 3, or God's Not Dead: A Light in Darkness to be precise, is Pure Flix co-founder David A.R. White (who featured in the last film). Actors like Jennifer Taylor don't seem to have too much to their name (as far as I can tell) but they did manage to get John Corbett and the world's youngest Oscar-winner Tatum O'Neal. The character of Josh Wheaton (Shane Harper) also reappears, possibly for the final time.

I'm sure you guys could have gotten James Woods too, is all I'm saying. Poor sap could use the illusion of a "gotcha" after Call Me By Your Name won Best Adapted Screenplay.

As for White, he plays the reverend whose church is vandalized and, like the faith of the locals, needs to be restored. Much like Veronica, this film is surely based on true events, as is the upcoming fourth film where the Christians are deported, forcefully stripped of their niqabs, and blamed for "running the banks". I am joking, obviously; I don't think there is a sequel.

I often try to separate the art from its message, since a film can very well still be great even if it espouses something you disagree with. There is, however, a limit. When the film is propaganda and the message is so obviously wrong and rooted in misconceptions so remedial it seems like self-parody, you actually do wind up with a damaged movie. Hint: people who think that dinosaur fossils are faked yet believe in unicorns tend to fall into this trap curiously often. This particular movie is, admittedly, not quite as guilty of this as A Matter of Faith or even the first two God's Not Dead films, so I suppose that's a plus.

That's part of the problem, though. This movie may not be as tolerable as A Case for Christ but it isn't as unintentionally laughable and delightfully oblivious as, say, A Matter of Faith, Heaven is for Real, or God's Not Dead 2. I want people who believe the things that Christians believe to tell me that it is somehow atheism that's rooted in zero evidence, while substituting their own "evidence" with sanctimonious preaching and sappy music to show that they're totes the good guys. Serviceable filmmaking is boring as Hell. Which exists.

But whatever. For the fans, this would be a success even if it had been as bad as Birdemic. These are the people who piss themselves crying when the "traditional family" is threatened, because people who choose to do even the SLIGHTEST thing different from you in life has to be in on a conspiracy to destroy the future. You know what? Fine. That can be true if you want. And I only say this because I don't want you to start throwing your dinner plate around and vomit all over your bib while whining that it is lefties who are spoon-fed opinions and can't operate freely (and also whine too much). Just take your nap already.

The biggest reason this movie falls apart is because it is not based in reality and there are likely no cases that even touch this situation. While it does have some nuance and tries to be self-aware, it also throws that out of the window because they are so black and white, this or that.

The main plot is whether or not Pastor Dave's church should be on a public university campus after it's burned down. As the conflict escalates, Pastor David tells a Black Pastor he's tired of being passive and the Black Pastor says "Who do you think you're talking to? I'm a Black Pastor in the Deep South, I can build a whole church with the bricks that have been thrown through my windows." There are sideplots and callbacks that go nowhere and even Newsboys have wore out their welcome by this installment

All in all, it feels like a hollow movie with good bits in there. It iis an improvement over the first two films in some areas like production and limited nuance but overall, it still is a bad film.

I say take it with a grain of salt, it is a GND film after all.