38
Philadelphia Inquirer by Desmond Ryan
Piously acted, stiffly directed, and infused with a view of world politics that might charitably be described as delusional.
What are people saying?
What are critics saying?
10
Washington Post by Desson Thomson
A blundering cringefest, thanks to unintentionally laughable dialogue, hackneyed writing and uninspired direction.
50
New York Daily News by Elizabeth Weitzman
With an appealing lead in Cameron, and a nicely brisk pace, there's a decent, midlevel Apocalypse movie here. But be aware that you will have to peel away several pages of the Bible to get to it.
50
Might be extremely effective while preaching to the converted, but it's no great shakes as secular entertainment.
40
Chicago Reader by Jonathan Rosenbaum
Seems perfectly timed to coincide with the ascension to office of George W. Bush. It's a clunky effort Bush could have written and directed.
0
Charlotte Observer by Lawrence Toppman
It's well-shot and well-edited by Hollywood standards, though special effects don't reach the top Hollywood level. The stars have their hearts in their work: Cameron and Johnson don't have great depth but give their all. Currie makes a subtle villain.
40
TV Guide Magazine by Maitland McDonagh
This picture's b-movie values probably play better on video than in theaters.
0
Austin Chronicle by Marjorie Baumgarten
The loosely scripted story is further burdened with clunky dialogue and performances, shoddy continuity.
30
The New York Times by Stephen Holden
For all its intimations of fire and brimstone, the film isn't remotely frightening, and the high-school-level acting doesn't help.
20
Watching Left Behind's plodding screen adaptation may make you feel the Deity has already abandoned us to a shockingly dull post-apocalypse.