Below is our original review of the film Jesus Revolution

Jesus Revolution is a 2023 faith-based historical film cataloguing the events of the “Jesus Movement” that began in 1969 and persisted through to the late 80’s.

I saw the film last night during a pre-screening at my local theatre, which is always enjoyable, and gave me some extra time to jot down my thoughts on the film. Going into the theatre, I figured the greatest hurdle this film faced outside of it’s historical accuracy would be the way in which it handled its ideological material, the intended message of the movie, and the quality of production overall. It’s too well known, especially in Christian circles, that Christian media tends to fall short in it’s premises and execution, with Dallas Jenkins’ The Chosen series standing out as the only competent product in recent years. Still, with Lionsgate distributing and experienced writer-director team “the Jons” (…I’m sorry, that is an awful nickname), Jon Erwin and Jon Gunn helming the project, I was at least cautiously optimistic going into it.

Several hours after writing this opening, and I can confidently say this film far exceeded my timid expectations.

Now, obviously the last thing I want to do is offset your expectations by presenting this feature as a flawless masterpiece–it isn’t, and I’ll preface this film with the same advice I always give to fellow moviegoers: Go in with no expectations. And I’m not saying this because the film deserves no expectations, but because I want you to feel as bewildered as I was by how wonderfully presented this feature is. This film is, without a doubt, one of the most meticulously structured and well-written religious historical dramas I’ve ever seen, nevermind one fronting the Christian message. Because greater than the message is the theme, central throughout every frame of this film and throughout Christianity as a religion: that being nobody is perfect. The best way I can describe this movie is human: its cast is so emotional, relatable, and flawed, and it conveys the vicissitudes of conversion and faith so realistically that it’s hard not to at least admire what the film is saying. I know a lot of my judgement comes from comparing this film to other Christian movies, but even separate from that crowd I think this film more than stands on its own.

Accuracy.

Like all great historical reenactments, this film doesn’t shy away from the realities of the events it covers. There are no kid gloves used to handle this weight. For a two-hour runtime, it manages to dissect itself through a number of perspectives, especially genuinely critical ones. Again, as a film about humanity, it holds true to itself in presenting every character with flaws as well as potential, and isn’t afraid to pull back the covers on some of the darker elements of the Jesus Movement, including those in authority making hasty, weak, and outright power-hungry decisions. It also doesn’t beat around the gravity of drugs and drug-use, an integral topic in the film’s message, timeframe, and several characters’ personal experiences. From what I can gather based on my research, just about every major plot point in the film occurred in real life, and the ending credits even outline the lasting impact of the movement.

I know a few critics have complained that this film sterilizes the darker aspects of the truth, especially regarding the portrayal of Lonnie Frisbee, but this film isn’t about him, it’s about the movement at large and the impact it has on younger members, like Greg Laurie, and I think a lot of people missed that fact. If you want a deep dive into the authoritarian communes and sexual degeneracy that emerged from the bad actors in this movement, you’ll have to look elsewhere, because this movie just isn’t about that. It doesn’t beat around the truth or hyper-fixate on it, and those disappointed by either of those facts are missing the forest for the trees in my opinion.

Ideology

Religion is one of those pesky little topics that most films avoid treading on, and those that take a stab at it often way overshoot the realistic consequences, utilization, and nature of religious orders and awakenings. Very few films nuanced enough to ask or answer genuine questions on the topic persist positively in the public eye. And, on the contrary, more than a few films have opted to distill religion into a one-dimensional dart board to lob pedantic objections at. Most of these simplistic representations boil down to “one religion good,” or “all religion bad,” instead of taking the time to wonder, as Jesus Revolution does, “maybe religion is necessary and it’s presentation and management is facilitated by flawed human beings.”

Amazing the roads we travel when we escape the binary.

I was, of course, most interested in seeing how this film presented and managed it’s central religion, Christianity. Most Christian films are well-known and often mocked –especially in Christian circles, mind you — for taking the simplistic “this religion good” stance without bothering to be introspective or even construct genuine or solid arguments against competing ideologies. Which is why this film surprised me as much as it did when it went from “drugs bad, Jesus good” to “this is a largely positive movement slowly being hijacked by hubris and ignorance, which will guarantee it’s destruction if not corrected by the love and good intentions that first fueled it.” This film turns Christianity on itself numerous times in numerous ways, sometimes obviously and sometimes subtly, all with the intent to dig within itself and figure out what everyone in 1970 was wondering: is this Jesus thing real?

Quality

Now here I should be taking about this film’s message, but first we gotta dig into the filmmaking. Again, this movie, helmed by experienced filmmakers and based on a slew of historical source material with, by the looks of it, more than enough budget to boot, should be a slam dunk in terms of quality. There are no excuses to produce something abysmal, or — worse yet — boring. Still, this is another concern coming from other Christian films of the past. Josh Keefe created a wonderful video all about this particular issue, outlining the outdated, unengaging, and often immature filmmaking methods that those outside or on the fringes of mainstream media production have adhered to when producing Christian works. It’s often the reason you didn’t know as to why those movies –and often many others produced by amateur creators — tend to fall flat on the entertaining side. Intermediate, or even basic understanding of cinematography, direction, and editing can have huge effects on the way a project is produced, promoted, even pitched, and it can alter the viewing experience almost as much as the writing.

Luckily, Jesus Revolution is not like other films. From the opening scene to the credits, this film displays not only a competency but a deep understanding as to how film works, how it’s leveraged for emotional effect, how it silently conveys information, and especially in how it gets you to view the subject of this film from all the necessary perspectives. Is this feature a clear sign of cinematic mastery? Well no, not at all. The pacing is a little rushed in some scenes, and the beginning of the film especially plunges right into, well, everything, although that’s obviously better than taking the time to show us something insignificant for the sake of ramping up tension. I’ll admit, the film has a superior sense of confidence in the way it’s edited, and I really can’t complain about that. Still, a handful of scenes rush by too quickly for my personal taste and I could’ve done with a second or two between lines of dialogue just to help punctuate their emotional significance, but that’s really my only major critique of the film, and it’s one that the average moviegoer won’t consciously notice, so that’s saying something. Not to mention the writing.

The first thing I want to mention is that the central conflict present in the trailer for this film, that being the fundamentalist church body opposing the introduction of hippies into the church, is the bare bones beginning of this film. So if you’re expecting that to be the main conflict, you’ll have to expand your horizons. Sorry for the rude awakening. Also, I won’t be discussing specifics, but I am about to discuss the structure of this film, so if you want to remain completely in the dark about this movie…why did you click the video? You want to know if it’s good? Yes, watch it. Details to follow:

The film begins with two separate narratives, the first being that of Calvary Chapel Church and it’s hilarious shaking up of cultural and religious norms with the advent of the hippies, and the second being the personal adventures of a young Greg Laurie diving into the hippie movement in search of truth and as an escape. Both narratives quickly collide and serve as two sides of the same relevant story: the exploits of the church along with Pastor Chuck Smith and Lonnie Frisbee focus on the Jesus Movement at large, how it impacts those on a macro level in the community, while Laurie’s story is our clear emotional tether, the sympathetic reason to get invested in this affair, and both sides of this story are balanced and written with an air of authenticity that’s hard to ignore. Neither plot outshines the other, although Laurie does eventually move to center stage: as he should considering that as the emotional tether, we as the audience are most interested in his story anyway, which the filmmakers know and indulge us with.

Overall, between recurring motifs, mature filmmaking, fantastic performances, and solid arc structuring, this feature impresses on several fronts as one of the most tightly-written and well-produced films I’ve seen in a long time.

Message

By all accounts, this movie should fail on ambition alone. Tackling such a momentous topic from the angles it does should’ve left this film as a messy uncommitted commentary on events long since acted out. Somehow, though, it manages to not only balance all its aspects with equal parts reverence and realism, but sprinkle in just enough magic to keep you entranced, enraptured, and emotionally invested in the lives and efforts of people you didn’t realize you needed to know. And that’s what a great story is, isn’t it?

Beyond its relatability when it comes to human suffering, this film takes a brilliant stab at examining the delicacy of hope. Coming off the high of conversion, several characters struggle to keep their faith alive as loved ones leave, tragedy pounces, and the dream begins to fall apart. People make mistakes that majorly effect other people, often in ways we can hardly comprehend, and that pain is evident along with its battle with love and mercy and faith. This film would’ve been fine as a well-produced feel-good flick about converting to Christianity and getting your life on track. But what it dares to be instead, a retelling of human efforts to find meaning and love and endure loneliness, the struggle of working through your problems and realizing that there isn’t a simple solution to guarantee sunlight everyday, and how that’s okay: that elevates this film to something far more important and memorable than the likes of those around it.

I’ve honestly tried to analyze this film as objectively as possible, even being sure to write down my terms of success before going in to see it, but the truth is that this film swayed me so completely during my first watch that I can no longer claim objectivity in this review. Maybe I’ll watch it again and find a glaring problem I didn’t notice my first time around, but as someone who went in expecting this film to be nothing more than okay, I can’t say I’m anything less than astounded by what I saw in the theatre last night.

I was fully expecting to write this review and admit something along the lines of “Yeah, it was a 6 out of 10, you should probably support it;” but honestly, this film is a nine, or at least an eight. I highly recommend it. I’ve rarely seen a film willing to show the ugly side of a movement it similarly lifted up, even if the best is somewhat exaggerated and the worst is somewhat sterilized. It’s worth your time as a competent and mature piece of media, and even if it doesn’t shock or amaze you like it did for me, that’s all right. This film means a lot to me, more than I expected it would, and if it ends up on my movie shelf alone, that’s still okay.

But it’d be a lot cooler if you liked it too.

I’m just saying, it’s better than Cocaine Bear.

Okay, so! Here I should quit and let this review stay where it is, but I did some additional digging through other reviews to find out why critics on Rotten Tomatoes only gave the movie a %58 (audience score is %100, by the way), and I’ve discovered some…let’s call them issues, with other critique.

James Berardinelli says “Their search for spiritual fulfillment is shown only through the lens of those who comprised the group of so-called “Jesus freaks” – completely ignoring larger segments of the hippie population who followed the tenets of various other religions.” That’s because this movie is called Jesus Revolution. The film is clearly only cataloguing the Jesus Movement, so that’s where the focus is. And, by the way, other religions are showcased in this film. They aren’t pit against Christianity on an ideological level, but the movie doesn’t pretend they don’t exist.

My buddy Todd Jorgenson says “The proselytizing” — new word, by the way: thank you for introducing me to that one — “The proselytizing is too heavy-handed for secular moviegoers,” — Show me a Christian film besides Passion of the Christ that isn’t called preachy by default and I’ll pretend this isn’t just a cop out complaint — “although this faith-based period piece unspools a mildly intriguing true-life example of open-mindedness within organized religion.” The rest of this critique is fair. Movie isn’t for everybody, but at least it’s not boring. Although Todd does cite this movie as PG, not PG-13, so I don’t know if I can trust him.

Let’s search for a third critique to round this out. Oh. Bold claims, Jared, let’s see what you’ve got. “There is something undeniably beautiful about faith and the power it has to change lives for the better.” Off to a good start. He recounts Lonnie Frisbee’s growing hubris, saying “We’re watching as the drug that is God takes hold. How it consumes him and alters his consciousness from sheep to butcher. I won’t lie and say I wasn’t excited for a second act portraying a monumental downfall. How could I not when Lonnie’s theatrics and ego start to push away his biggest champion (Smith) and most devoted pupil[?]…Sadly, that’s not the case.” …Yeah Lonnie’s downfall wasn’t monumental with loads of bad press, but neither was it in real life. Frisbee and Smith parted ways over theological differences, as portrayed in the film, and Frisbee as a character clearly slots into the guardian archetype as a mentor to protagonist Greg Laurie. And the effect Frisbee’s departure has on Laurie is an emotional upheaval in the film, its not downplayed at all, so I don’t know what you were expecting except for exactly what we got. Jared continues “They’re seeing the path to implosion and learning the game that must be played to prosper. Because whether or not an Evangelical started his/her congregation with good intent, looking at pictures of Laurie’s Harvest events… only reveals profit to my eyes. And this film, regardless of those few moments of skepticism, becomes an advertisement towards raising revenue.” Ah, the “this film regardless of its quality is clearly an advertisement” angle. I can’t fault a cynic for seeing it this way, but I’m guessing you also see the MCU as a commercial for toys and comic books, don’t you?

“It hits all the right beats with Smith finding the room to change his heart and see that his purpose was about more than preaching to an aging congregation that had learned to shut its doors to those in real need. It goes hard on God saving addicts and leaves ample room to allow their transformations to be about the willingness of the person to latch-on rather than a divine power wiping the slate clean. And how can you not enjoy a love story between a rebel from the affluent establishment and a poor dreamer with counter-culture passions? If it wasn’t all in service of public relations, I might even say it’s good. ” — Then say it’s good instead of weighing a film’s quality solely on its application to the outside world — “But we currently live in an era where government officials proclaim that America should be a Christian nation. Where bigots and racists hide behind religion to persecute, control, and kill.

Good propaganda might be well-made, but it’s still propaganda.”

…

5/10

Well that went sideways, didn’t it? I don’t, uh…congrats on picking at Christianity as a concept and not grading a film based on internal logic or merit. You’re about as objective as I am.

Anyway, that concludes what I have to say. Honestly don’t think I could find another critique to top that last one. Let me know what you think about the film. Especially after looking through these reviews I’m really interested in what other’s perceptions are. Honestly I kinda hope you have a different opinion than I do or see something I missed, because discourse is how we evolve, it’s how we make better movies and write better stories. And personally, I’m always in favor of that.

Thank you so much for listening to this rave: I hope it proved useful or beneficial to you in some way.

Until next time, I’ve been Jir0, you’ve been amazing, and I wish you only the best.

God bless