Well, again: Why do you feel compelled to defend it, then? Are you personally involved with the making of this film in some way? Because if you're not religious and you haven't seen it, I can't think of another reason.

Eh, I've heard stories that Sean Astin is kind of a huge, entitled dick (and he did grow up in the entertainment industry, so it makes sense).

So you haven't seen the movie, you're not religious, but you still feel compelled to defend it?

As soon as you said "this was a movie the whole family can see." I wouldn't take my kids to see a cheap, badly made movie that tries to indoctrinate them with Christianity.

Which chapter in the Bible says "Resort to stereotypes to dismiss thine enemies, lest ye be tempted to think about their words?" I don't remember that one.

My mistake. After seeing the Christian trolls have already come out in force I assumed he was talking about the reviewer.

My apologies! I was mistaken.

We get it, you only like entertainment that panders to your beliefs, everything else is a stereotype from the "culture wars" of the 1980s.

We get it, you're a religious zealot and Christian conservative who thinks people who don't share your view are monsters. Which is exactly what Jesus would want you to do.

Yeah, me neither. Even as a kid I was too inquisitive and knew I shouldn't take things at face value if they didn't make sense. I also couldn't help but notice growing up that the people who were loudest and most dogmatic in their beliefs often tended to be the ones who were unhappiest and treated other people the…

I think it's different. I just Googled it and here's the first article I found:

I've seen studies that suggest parts of certain people's brains actually shut off when listening to a "charismatic speaker." I more or less concluded that belief is for people wired to seek someone to tell them what to do and think.

[Ctrl+F] "Cher"
Not found

Boy, that is intensive and obscure, to the point where part of me is impressed and part of me is reminded that Archer really bugs me when it seems like the writers just drop obscure references to make the viewers who get them feel smart.

"Problematic" is a word I find people use to mean "I think someone could/should be offended by this, but I don't exactly know why." Depicting issues of race or gender on screen at all is "problematic" to some people. I get the sense that that's what going on here with the reviewer, and I hope/wish she has or will read…

Even just having Fey/Minor trying, but failing, to nail the Reverend would have been okay, I think. But having them not even doing their job as prosecutors and just winding out the clock until they can go on vacation wasn't funny. And O.J. trial references aren't funny in and of themselves 20 years later, either.

Hamm's performance was really good, but it seemed like Fey/Carlock were concerned first and foremost with letting us know how stupid and mean they think people in small Midwest towns are, well before either the comedy or the drama of that story.

Ha, now I can picture the reviewer turning off The Jerk after 30 seconds saying "That's one role that could have gone to a comedian of color."

We didn't marathon it and it felt the same way. In fact, I rushed through 13 because 12 left such a bad taste in my mouth.

I don't know why THAT was a little too stupid. It was in line with the way everyone else in that town acted.