There's a certain line of thinking that would tell you serious debates over homosexuality, or marriage equality, are a thing of the past. The fact that Living Waters, who made Audacity, have close ties to the current speaker of the US House will tell you otherwise.
I'm not going to act like I was extremely offended by this film. Of course I do not agree with the message itself (renounce homosexuality or burn in hell), but I've seen much more openly homophobic material not just in Christian films, but in mainstream works, and any day that I go on social media. The token gay characters are mostly sympathetic, with the least sympathetic (who is, as is the tradition with stereotypes, a white, effeminate male), being framed as being so defensive due to hostile treatment from Christians in the past. The very few Christian films that have gay characters often just paint them as damned, say they were either abused as children or abuse children themselves, but it's not quite that simple here. And frankly, I was just interested in seeing more Christian films with gay characters at all, having grown up just seeing them as sad stories on the 700 Club or Jack Van Impe.
There are a number of positives in the film. Peter manages to thread the line between the goofy comic relief and the uber-sincere conversion tracts, thanks to the work from Travis Owens. I have no idea if the people in the film agreed with the message or just wanted a check, but the acting is better than I often would expect from these types of productions.
One of the biggest issues, and I'm not trying to sit here asking for representation in Christian gay healing films, I promise, is that we do not actually get to see the gay characters from their own point of view. The most overt story in the film that is advertised as being about how to talk to gay people ends up cheating - when Peter preaches the Good Word to Robert (the more docile half of the gay couple), it's drowned out by some tedious emo rock song. A film about giving the Gospel to the gay or gay-friendly world should have given that moment. And as they part ways, you find yourself wondering if Robert will stay with his boyfriend, or choose celibacy, or try to "go straight." This path not shown ends up being more interesting than the end of the film.
Diana, the main female and quasi-love interest, is revealed as formerly being in a lesbian relationship at movie's end, but we don't get to go on that journey with her. They do have a scene at dinner together early in the movie, but little to nothing in her interaction with this other woman suggests they are or were a couple. And again, the film avoids a genuinely compelling issue they could have had - how would Peter have reacted to her being a lesbian or bisexual while he preaches to her and is clearly attracted to her? Would he see himself as being a sinner and preying on her doubts because of his own interest? As they don't address this (he never even knows she is into women), the message of the film ends up being if you have enough faith, you can turn a woman straight. Maybe they should have approached Ben Affleck for the part.
There are a number of twists in the film that are just confounding. Peter has a dream where his rushing for a delivery and refusing to be honest with a lesbian couple leads them to die in an elevator crash. That's one way to give motivation, I guess, but before that point, there is a scene where Diana berates him over being homophobic because she has a lesbian sister. After he wakes up, he goes to talk with her, and this all turns out to have been a dream as well. It's very confusing. Why not have Diana, in the dream, tell Peter that she is gay? Wouldn't that make more sense with her story arc?
We also hear about her sick brother, whose health leads her to leave her date with Peter at his friend's standup set. This coincides with Peter's big break, and undercuts the faith-based message of the film, as he doesn't seem all that bothered by a woman he cares about having to leave due to her dying brother. This sequence is especially odd because instead of seeing her with her dying brother, we get one last lesson that has little to do with the rest of the film - her car breaks down and a man she thinks is a thug breaks into her car and saves her from being hit by an oncoming car. We then have a friend of his blasting her in a news interview for being judgmental, which seems a bit much, given that she was alone at night, out of gas, going through a spiritual crisis, and preparing for her brother's death.
We don't even hear what happens to her brother. Maybe Peter visited him once.
The film, either as entertainment or propaganda, would have benefited with a much more streamlined script, and about ten minutes sliced off - namely, the generic standup from Peter's friend (although Ben Price is an amiable, charismatic presence), and in particular, the preaching-man-on-the-street segments from Ray Comfort. Clearly these were the main points of the film, but they come across as smug and overly simplistic (although Comfort is more gracious toward his interview subjects than the Jay Leno/Jimmy Kimmel versions of this used to be), and just leave you feeling a bit annoyed. I did like his interview with one woman who essentially takes the interview from him, surprising him with the reveal that he has been talking to a lesbian all along. You get the sense even he ended up respecting her.
I'm not going to act like I was extremely offended by this film. Of course I do not agree with the message itself (renounce homosexuality or burn in hell), but I've seen much more openly homophobic material not just in Christian films, but in mainstream works, and any day that I go on social media. The token gay characters are mostly sympathetic, with the least sympathetic (who is, as is the tradition with stereotypes, a white, effeminate male), being framed as being so defensive due to hostile treatment from Christians in the past. The very few Christian films that have gay characters often just paint them as damned, say they were either abused as children or abuse children themselves, but it's not quite that simple here. And frankly, I was just interested in seeing more Christian films with gay characters at all, having grown up just seeing them as sad stories on the 700 Club or Jack Van Impe.
There are a number of positives in the film. Peter manages to thread the line between the goofy comic relief and the uber-sincere conversion tracts, thanks to the work from Travis Owens. I have no idea if the people in the film agreed with the message or just wanted a check, but the acting is better than I often would expect from these types of productions.
One of the biggest issues, and I'm not trying to sit here asking for representation in Christian gay healing films, I promise, is that we do not actually get to see the gay characters from their own point of view. The most overt story in the film that is advertised as being about how to talk to gay people ends up cheating - when Peter preaches the Good Word to Robert (the more docile half of the gay couple), it's drowned out by some tedious emo rock song. A film about giving the Gospel to the gay or gay-friendly world should have given that moment. And as they part ways, you find yourself wondering if Robert will stay with his boyfriend, or choose celibacy, or try to "go straight." This path not shown ends up being more interesting than the end of the film.
Diana, the main female and quasi-love interest, is revealed as formerly being in a lesbian relationship at movie's end, but we don't get to go on that journey with her. They do have a scene at dinner together early in the movie, but little to nothing in her interaction with this other woman suggests they are or were a couple. And again, the film avoids a genuinely compelling issue they could have had - how would Peter have reacted to her being a lesbian or bisexual while he preaches to her and is clearly attracted to her? Would he see himself as being a sinner and preying on her doubts because of his own interest? As they don't address this (he never even knows she is into women), the message of the film ends up being if you have enough faith, you can turn a woman straight. Maybe they should have approached Ben Affleck for the part.
There are a number of twists in the film that are just confounding. Peter has a dream where his rushing for a delivery and refusing to be honest with a lesbian couple leads them to die in an elevator crash. That's one way to give motivation, I guess, but before that point, there is a scene where Diana berates him over being homophobic because she has a lesbian sister. After he wakes up, he goes to talk with her, and this all turns out to have been a dream as well. It's very confusing. Why not have Diana, in the dream, tell Peter that she is gay? Wouldn't that make more sense with her story arc?
We also hear about her sick brother, whose health leads her to leave her date with Peter at his friend's standup set. This coincides with Peter's big break, and undercuts the faith-based message of the film, as he doesn't seem all that bothered by a woman he cares about having to leave due to her dying brother. This sequence is especially odd because instead of seeing her with her dying brother, we get one last lesson that has little to do with the rest of the film - her car breaks down and a man she thinks is a thug breaks into her car and saves her from being hit by an oncoming car. We then have a friend of his blasting her in a news interview for being judgmental, which seems a bit much, given that she was alone at night, out of gas, going through a spiritual crisis, and preparing for her brother's death.
We don't even hear what happens to her brother. Maybe Peter visited him once.
The film, either as entertainment or propaganda, would have benefited with a much more streamlined script, and about ten minutes sliced off - namely, the generic standup from Peter's friend (although Ben Price is an amiable, charismatic presence), and in particular, the preaching-man-on-the-street segments from Ray Comfort. Clearly these were the main points of the film, but they come across as smug and overly simplistic (although Comfort is more gracious toward his interview subjects than the Jay Leno/Jimmy Kimmel versions of this used to be), and just leave you feeling a bit annoyed. I did like his interview with one woman who essentially takes the interview from him, surprising him with the reveal that he has been talking to a lesbian all along. You get the sense even he ended up respecting her.