Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Film / GodsNotDead

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Voodoo Shark is about explanations for plot holes that don't make sense.


* VoodooShark: [[spoiler:Radisson's death via hit-and-run]] seems like a bizarrely pointless and cruel way of shoehorning in a deathbed conversion scene, especially when the film sets up what would be a much more logical scenario: [[spoiler:have Amy's cancer eventually kill her, but not before she's persuaded to accept Jesus]]. Or for Radisson, have him reconcile with his girlfriend and God at the same time.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Misplaced, moving to the correct tab


* BrokenAesop:
** The whole reason that Josh is debating Radisson is because his preacher told him if he was to write "God is Dead" he would be turning his back on God, and God will forsake him for all eternity if he did that. [[spoiler:However at the end when "God" kills Radisson, the same preacher tells Radisson if he converts now after having already turned his back on him he will be saved, a complete 180 from what he told Josh. So that means there was absolutely no reason for Josh to do the debate in the first place]].
** [[spoiler: The death itself was supposed to convey the "there are no atheists in foxholes" cliché, showing how an atheist will turn to God in the face of death. This "aesop" is broken because it was already made very clear that Radisson was '''not''' an atheist, but rather a NayTheist.]]
** It seems that the whole message as to why an atheist should believe in God is solely because of tragedy, as no atheist becomes a Christian in this film because of facts, logic, reason or even anything good, thus practically telling Christians to hope that an atheist suffers a terrible loss just so they can see the good of God. Which is also broken in the sequel because it portrays the atheist parents as completely uncaring to the fact that their son died.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
General clarification on work content; people can know both Cantonese and Mandarin languages


* ArtisticLicenseLinguistics: In the scene where the Chinese student calls his father, Chinese viewers might notice that they're speaking two different languages: one is speaking Mandarin, the other is speaking Cantonese. Setting aside the fact that a father and son shouldn't be speaking different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese speakers can't understand each other in RealLife.

to:

* ArtisticLicenseLinguistics: In the scene where the Chinese student calls his father, Chinese viewers might notice that they're speaking two different languages: one is speaking Mandarin, the other is speaking Cantonese. Setting aside the fact that a father and son shouldn't be speaking different languages, but unless they are multilingual, Mandarin and Cantonese speakers can't understand each other in RealLife.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


A sequel titled ''Film/GodsNotDead2'' was released in April 2016 (the trailer can be found [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxz-Y-c2UUc here]]) followed by ''Film/GodsNotDeadALightInDarkness'' in March 2018 and ''Film/GodsNotDeadWeThePeople'' in October 2021.

to:

A sequel titled ''Film/GodsNotDead2'' was released in April 2016 (the trailer can be found [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxz-Y-c2UUc here]]) followed by ''Film/GodsNotDeadALightInDarkness'' in March 2018 and ''Film/GodsNotDeadWeThePeople'' ''[[Film/GodsNotDeadWeThePeople God's Not Dead: We The People]]'' in October 2021.

Added: 398

Changed: 360

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* LongList: To drive its agenda home, it ends with a scrolling list of about two dozen court cases involving people successfully suing colleges for religious discrimination, followed by a message encouraging viewers to do the same thing.[[note]]However, most of these were the result of discrimination ''by'' the people suing to begin with (usually against LGBT students).[[/note]]

to:

* LongList: To drive its agenda home, it The movie ends with a scrolling list of about two dozen over twenty real-life court cases involving people successfully suing colleges for religious discrimination, followed by a message encouraging viewers to do the same thing.[[note]]However, most of these which they [[RippedFromTheHeadlines claim]] were analogous to the result of discrimination ''by'' events depicted in the people suing to begin with (usually against LGBT students).[[/note]]movie.


Added DiffLines:

* NotMakingThisUpDisclaimer: To drive its agenda home, it ends with a scrolling list of about two dozen court cases involving people successfully suing colleges for religious discrimination, followed by a message encouraging viewers to do the same thing.[[note]]However, most of these were the result of discrimination ''by'' the people suing to begin with (usually against LGBT students).[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
A Downer Ending is an ending that's intended to be uniformly sad. While plenty of the characters suffer depressing fates, the protagonist still triumphs in his conflict with the primary antagonist and gets publicly hailed as a hero, and the antagonist comes to regret his past actions enough to convert to Christianity in his last moments before death (which is presented as a good thing). That's a Bittersweet Ending at worst.


* DownerEnding: Even the fundamentalist Christian protagonist gets one. [[spoiler:Sure, Josh gets some people to believe in God, but by the end of this film, Josh lost his girlfriend of six years, Radisson is killed, Mina doesn't realize that Radisson was killed coming to apologize to her, Martin probably put his entire family at risk because of his newfound belief, Amy is likely to die a painful death from cancer very soon, Ayisha has been disowned and is now homeless, and [[ArsonMurderAndJaywalking Dave and Jude never got to go to Disney World]].]] If it wasn't for the upbeat music, one would realize that because of Josh everyone is a lot worse off.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Regardless of how you might feel about Josh, he's still clearly intended to be the protagonist, and Professor Radisson is the only character in the film who could be accurately described as a Big Bad in terms of their role in the story.


* BigBadEnsemble: [[EvilVsEvil Professor Radisson and Josh Wheaton combined]]. They both believe that God does exist, but selfishly want the philosophy class to take their own side (misotheism or Christianity) on whether God is all-loving or negligent/cruel and uncaring. The two are quite corrupt, as they are reduced to using fanatic tactics such as attacking each other's credibility and flaws rather than arguing why their own side is so much stronger. [[ProtagonistCenteredMorality Unfortunately, we're meant to see Josh as the hero.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Not the trope. Asshole Victim is for an instance where an unfortunate fate befalls a character whom the audience isn't intended to sympathize with, making their fate seem more entertaining than tragic; Professor Radisson is the only one who suffers a noticeably unfortunate fate. And while he's the villain, he still redeems himself (by the film's definition) by converting to Christianity before he dies—and the audience is clearly meant to sympathize with him in his final moments.


* AssholeVictim: In the sense that both Josh and Radisson are out to defeat the other during the debate, and they're both a pair of assholes. Sadly, only Radisson gets killed off at the end.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ArtisticLicenseLinguistics: When the Chinese student calls his father, Chinese viewers might notice that they're speaking in two different languages: one is speaking Mandarin, the other is speaking Cantonese. Setting aside the fact that a father and son shouldn't be speaking different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese speakers can't understand each other in RealLife.

to:

* ArtisticLicenseLinguistics: When In the scene where the Chinese student calls his father, Chinese viewers might notice that they're speaking in two different languages: one is speaking Mandarin, the other is speaking Cantonese. Setting aside the fact that a father and son shouldn't be speaking different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese speakers can't understand each other in RealLife.



** In several scenes, Aisha can be seen wearing a ''niqab'' to obscure her face...along with a top that leaves most of her bare arms exposed, and clearly shows her ''cleavage''. While it's true that some conservative sects of Islam teach that women should keep their faces hidden in public, the entire point of Islamic restrictions on women's dress is to '''preserve a woman's modesty'''. No Muslim woman would ever leave her arms and cleavage exposed while wearing a ''niqab''.

to:

** In several scenes, Aisha Ayisha can be seen wearing a ''niqab'' to obscure her face...along with a top that leaves most of her bare arms exposed, and clearly shows her ''cleavage''. While it's true that some conservative sects of Islam teach that women should keep their faces hidden in public, the entire point of Islamic restrictions on women's dress clothing is to '''preserve a woman's modesty'''. No Muslim woman would ever leave her arms and cleavage exposed while wearing a ''niqab''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
This seems more like a Plot Hole than a factual error.


** The idea that {{Satan}} can influence the outcome of a person's life to reward them for sinning is based on a ''very'' questionable interpretation of actual Scripture. Almost all of Scripture portrays Satan as merely a figure of ''temptation'' who's entirely subordinate to {{God}}. While he might promise people worldly wealth in exchange for renouncing God (as he does to Jesus during his ordeal in the desert), that isn't the same thing as altering the course of their life to cause worldly wealth to befall them by apparent coincidence. Even ignoring that, it still doesn't make sense; one of the reasons Satan is reviled is that he often portrayed lying to the people he tempts and [[DealWithTheDevil making deals that are heavily in his favor]] in fiction.

to:

** The idea that {{Satan}} can influence the outcome of a person's life to reward them for sinning is based on a ''very'' questionable interpretation of actual Scripture. Almost all of Scripture portrays Satan as merely a figure of ''temptation'' who's entirely subordinate to {{God}}. While he might promise people worldly wealth in exchange for renouncing God (as he does to Jesus during his ordeal in the desert), that isn't the same thing as altering the course of their life to cause worldly wealth to befall them by apparent coincidence. Even ignoring that, it still doesn't make sense; one of the reasons Satan is reviled is that he often portrayed lying to the people he tempts and [[DealWithTheDevil making deals that are heavily in his favor]] in fiction.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** While more conservative Muslims do think women should cover their faces, there is no way that Aisha would then wear a top that shows her bare arms and ''cleavage''. That defeats the purpose, keeping them covered.

to:

** While more conservative Muslims do think women should cover their faces, there is no way that In several scenes, Aisha would then wear can be seen wearing a ''niqab'' to obscure her face...along with a top that shows leaves most of her bare arms exposed, and clearly shows her ''cleavage''. That defeats While it's true that some conservative sects of Islam teach that women should keep their faces hidden in public, the purpose, keeping them covered.entire point of Islamic restrictions on women's dress is to '''preserve a woman's modesty'''. No Muslim woman would ever leave her arms and cleavage exposed while wearing a ''niqab''.

Top