Unstoppable was a bad movie and evangelical philosophy is to blame

Update: Since I grilled this movie for failing to address why bad things happen, I wrote an article where I offer my take on it here.

        I'm writing this the day after I saw Kirk Cameron's Unstoppable and I'm still in shock at how bad the movie was. I'm mostly familiar with Kirk through way of the master and living waters. He and Ray Comfort put out some pretty top notch evangelism training material, so I had a lot of respect for the guy. I liked Fireproof quite a bit as well. So when I heard Kirk was putting together his own little movie project, it grabbed my attention. I knew little about the movie other than it was supposed to focus on the question 'why do bad things happen to good people?' If you haven't realized it already, this question is very much relevant to the gospel, so much so that it's actually hard to answer that question without preaching the gospel. Surely Kirk is going to knock this one out of the park...right? I wish.
        For the first half of the movie, I was laughing at how ridiculous everything was. Outside of Kirk telling a story of a friend for a few minutes there was very little content, and what was presented wasn't really in line with the topic. I didn't keep track of time, but I'd estimate about 30-45 minutes of the movie was spent telling the story of Genesis chapters 1-6 in a rock music video format. Kirk would read/talk about a little bit, then subject you to headache-inducing music alongside “I'm trying way too hard to be artistic” imagery.
        As the movie drags on, Kirk briefly skims what was supposed to be the topic of the movie. In short, his main message seems to be: yeah, bad stuff happens but God works it out for good. Of course that's true, but it's also woefully inadequate to anyone seriously asking this question. Kirk also failed to present the gospel in the movie. Sure, the facts were there – Jesus died for your sins and rose again – but that was about it. No call to repentance, not even a mention of salvation through faith. Unless I missed something, Kirk didn't make any effort in this movie to tell sinners what they should do so they can be born again. I know Kirk can do better. I've seen/heard him witnessing to people and he does a pretty good job. I think it's fair to say that in terms of answering big questions and reaching out to people with the gospel, the movie was a flop.
        So what does this have to do with evangelical philosophy? Everything. Somehow a guy who 5 years ago had a lot of zeal for the gospel just put out a movie on the 'big questions' which had a lot of flashy imagery, but said almost nothing. There's a bit of a mystery here, and while we don't have perfect knowledge, it's easy enough to put the pieces together and see how this happened. I suggest that two major problems caused the changes in Kirk as evidenced by this movie:

• A desire to mimic the culture. 

        This movie had it in spades. Edgy music, edgy imagery, edgy standards. There's nothing wrong with a good-looking modern movie with up to date cinematography, but do we have to also imitate Hollywood's content? Sure, those scences with Adam and Eve didn't show the worst possible angles, but let's just say that if I had a daughter, I would never let her play the role of Eve in this movie. How about that multi-minute fight scene between Cain and Abel that ended with a blood-spattered Cain standing over Abel's broken body? It's just an attempt to make the movie 'cool and relevant' to today's generation of carnal churchgoers.
        One might say, “but those things are in the Bible!” Yeah, and there are some things better left in text. There are certainly some 'gritty' things in the Bible, but they are never presented in a 'just for fun' way, but as a important part of the narrative or for emphasis. In contrast, the nakedness of Adam and Eve, and the fight between Cain and Abel had absolutely nothing to do with this movie. It had no narrative purpose, but merely an entertainment purpose. In other words, it was put in there just to try to be cool. Pointless sensuality and violence in a movie? Sounds like Hollywood to me. What a shame that such things are found in this film.

• A philosophy of “let's get everyone together” that emphasizes unity to the exclusion of much important doctrine. 

        This was another huge problem in the film and the live intro. Unity of the brethren is important, and something we should strive for, but we can only ever have unity with those obedient to Scripture and the gospel. Unity without truth can only be achieved by compromise and this movie was a perfect example. I would almost guarantee that Kirk's compromise in this movie was mainly with regard to calvinism. I don't know if Kirk is calvinist or not. I imagine that, much like Comfort, he isn't a calvinist, but is friendly toward that camp. Either way, you see this come out a bit in the intro where Kirk had one guest that said some very non-calvinistic things, and another who used the word sovereign in every other sentence. These little glimpses may not be convincing, but there's another big problem to take into consideration.
        When it comes to the question of why bad things happen to good people, calvinists and non-calvinists give very different answers. If Kirk goes on the movie and says what I'm certain he at least used to believe: “First off, there are no truly good people, but we all willfully sin each day. You chose to sin at some point in your life, chose to jump on the bandwagon with the sin-cursed world, now you reap the consequences for your choices. Death, sickness, and disease is the way of the world because of our choices.” Well, if Kirk said that, he'd get all kinds of flak from MacArthur, Piper, White, and all the other calvinists. He surely doesn't want to upset them, that would harm their 'unity'. Perhaps he should just put out a movie that gives the calvinist answer, “It pleases and glorifies God to destroy your young child with cancer, to kill your baby in the womb, etc. Be comforted, because God causes all these things to happen.” Well, that'd make the calvinists happy, but everyone else would be horrified.
        So, Kirk has his hands tied. No matter what answer he gives, many will be offended. Ah, but there's a third option. Make a music video, talk a little about mostly irrelevant things, then dodge the issue by simply saying, “Well, God works everything out for good.” I imagine this same concept causes Kirk to dodge the gospel application in this movie. Well, we can all agree on the facts of the gospel, but there's different opinions on how to apply it. According to the calvinist, don't worry too much about it. God chooses to save you or not and there's nothing you can do about it. If you're elect, God will fill you with irresistable grace and you're set. So, Kirk couldn't say, “Christ died for every man and offers you forgiveness if you'll repent of your sin.” Again, if you value unity above all things, you can't take a position, but must dodge the issue and in the process, neglect to preach the gospel.
        In conclusion, Christian unity is important and something worth striving for, but if you try to compromise truth for unity, you end up with neither. The road of compromise leads to a shallow, powerless religion which is toxic to real Christian living. As Christians, we must heed the Lord's admonitions to be separate from the world and theological error (Rom. 16:17, 1 John 2:15-17, James 4:4, Jude). To obey Scripture in these things is an unpopular stance to take, but a necessary one if you intend to make your like useful in the Lord's service.