yjudith Propaganda? This as other faith-based films are, a Christian movie. Most movies are promoting some kind of thought or belief. You are exercising your right to watch or not. To watch solely so you can yell to the rafters about it force-feeding viewers Christianity is ludicrous. That would be like me watching a pornographic movie and complaining about the sexual content. I am a Christian who loves Christian movies and that's who this movie was made for. Or perhaps that person who is on the fence. As far as the argument that Josh couldnt possibly convert the entire class of 80 students; who said all 80 of them werent Christian? I figured that those students who believed were too afraid to say they were Christian in light of their professor's attitude. Now to the movie itself. Over the top corny, but that's the nature of faith based movies. They are also known for low budgets and bad acting; this movie doesnt fail on either one of these. But still I like it. They're like B movies, which not everyone liked and after watching a few decided they werent for them. I liked the stories; it's a lot to take because there were so many different stories within the one story and sometimes I wish they would be more realistic and decide that not every non-believer is going to convert by the end. But Im willing to overlook it because I want to see true and strong faith being shared. That's why I watch.

adonis98-743-186503 Josh Wheaton attends philosophy class, where the Professor Radisson requires all students to submit a signed statement that the "God is dead" and never existed. When Josh refuses due to his own Christian beliefs, the Professor challenges him to defend his position leading to a series of confrontational presentations between him and the professor, with the class as jury. God's Not Dead is no different than the sequels plus Kevin Sorbo is not a good actor so i'm not suprised but Dean Cain? he deserved better than this. I'm sorry but this movies are bad.

rupowujosu This movie is first, hate speech, and second, just propaganda.Aside from being bad acted, having a bad plot, and being boring just in general, the movie, on a childish way, depicts anybody not christian as an evil and inferior being, and that's the point of the movie: Nazi style, 1930, hate speech.

MovieManChuck 0/4 BOMBI'm a movie buff who was originally interested in this movie to see a debate between God and science. Let me start by saying, I walked in knowing the sub-par standards of Christian movies. I also walked in knowing that it had the potential to be a very enjoyable movie. This was not the case. I hated every second of it. This was not a debate in fact, it was dogma. I have many issues with this movie, which are listed in depth below.1-Film Content ) The film is blatant propaganda. There is no way around it. That in itself is not a bad thing, but God's Not Dead takes such an overwhelmingly aggressive and negative tone. It becomes little more than an attack on all other world views. All atheists are portrayed as "inferior", and on top of that, the arguments the protagonist presents are brash and illogical. The makers of this movie have challenged everyone from physicists like Stephen Hawking to the great philosophers of old. Sitting through God's Not Dead would have been more enjoyable had the arguments been backed by actual logic, but at the same time, far less memorable.2-Character Developments/Portrayals ) The protagonist is my least favorite character in the entire movie. That's something I have only been able to say 4 or 5 times. He was arrogant in his arguments and he was childish in his demeanor. He thought he knew everything, and apparently so did the cast. He (and the avid atheist) based his argument on emotion rather than reason. After 85 or so minutes of waiting for a climax, he decides to shame the emotionally crippled atheist in front of an audience, ultimately forcing him to yield. It was an interesting sequence of events as far as a cinema standpoint (the atheist dies 5 minutes later because he was hit by a car), but as for the boy "evangelizing" both the on-screen and real life audience... not so much. In addition, the atheist felt molded to represent the many people who aren't Christian: an angry, lifeless bad person. This doesn't much contradict the lead role who feels molded to represent the masses who are: an angry, lifeless good person. I feel like it does it's own religion a disservice, it paints a very bland, colorless picture of Christianity, probably a little less likable than atheism. All people are so much more than their worldview, and this movie does nothing to provide you a relatable character or the human condition. It's either a flawless zealot or a broken atheist. 3-Acting/Cinematography ) With everything else going on, I don't expect everyone to have picked up on this one. The camera was very choppy, especially in the classroom and at the concert. The acting really is fairly good, but the main characters too dominant, and the side roles are not allowed to facet their abilities and contribute to the story. (the lady with terminal cancer is a perfect example)4-The Way It Resonated ) I would imagine that God's Not Dead has reached a few people, but only by giving them an ultimatum. The atheist who gets hit by the car has "one last chance to make it to heaven", the lady who has terminal cancer "better hurt up and accept Him". It almost made the impression that evangelism is all about scaring people with the possibility of hell. Of course, one can't complain, since the movie failed on the other front of trying to present a series of valid arguments.This movie should not be representative of Christian movies. It should be characterized by movies which delve deeper into self-struggle and the thirst for spiritual knowledge, two things evidently lacking in God's Not Dead. Anyone who isn't a Christian will be guaranteed to hate this to hell. I sure did!