The Accidental Missionary (Movie Review)

Watch The Accidental Missionary | Prime Video

Plot Summary

DJ Miller is a spoiled movie actor who just wants to do as little as possible while still making as much money as possible. However, when DJ gets negative publicity for something he does, his agent suggests he take a vacation to let the bad press blow over. Nonetheless, on the way out of town, a bizarre mix-up forces DJ to go on a mission trip to Africa and take the place of a missionary who was supposed to be there. Will DJ be able to change his ways while he’s stuck in the wilderness?

Production Quality (0 points)

A common shortcoming of nearly every Rossetti film is low quality production, and The Accidental Missionary is no exception. From inconsistent lighting to cheap sets, locations, and props that don’t adequately represent what they’re supposed to portray, there’s little to no positive to note here. Camera angles are quite unusual, there are background echoes, and cringeworthy sound effects annoy the viewers. The soundtrack is too random to fit the mood, and there’s often stock footage included that doesn’t fit the mood. Further, the editing contains poor cuts and transitions as well as several continuity errors. Thus, no points can be awarded for this section.

Plot and Storyline Quality (-2 points)

Besides the fact that this plot’s premise is unrealistically contrived, the very obvious dialogue creates simplistic, one-dimensional characters. The narrative is based on stupid coincidences, such as the most ridiculous reason for why two people got mixed up in an airport. There’s no way anyone involved would realistically believe what happens in this story. What’s more, silly and off-putting conversations between the characters patronizes local African cultures and comes close to making fun of them. It’s all wrapped up in a save-the-mission-camp agenda and packaged with a forced romance that nobody can take seriously. Further, there seems to be a tendency to purposely create bizarre situations between some of the characters, including unnecessary levels of weirdness. Capping it off with wild character swings that lack realistic explanations, this section of the movie receives negative points for its offensive elements.

Acting Quality (1 point)

Surprisingly, the acting is the “best” aspect of The Accidental Missionary inasmuch as it’s not zero or less. This is due to somewhat average acting even though much of it seems overly practiced. Emotions tend to be wooden and too earnest. The lead actress posts the strongest performances of anyone, but other cast members don’t match the culture being portrayed. Costuming is also cheesy, and accents aren’t always correct. Further, painfully bad injury acting caps off this mediocre section.


Of all the past Rossetti offerings that are just bad, this one is awful. Tone deaf portrayals of cultures that obviously aren’t properly understood by the creators will almost always warrant negative points. There’s also really nothing to redeem The Accidental Missionary from this pitfall. Everything was all wrong from the get-go, so this idea was doomed from the start.

Final Rating: -1 out of 10 points


A Golden Mind (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

When Seth’s father leaves under the guise of getting a new job, he never returns, which leaves the family in their financial straits.  Then Seth’s mother dies from selling her blood too much, which leaves Seth to take care of his little sister.  He decides that he needs to go to college and invest in gold so that he can become rich.  But he will have to decide what he thinks about his late mother’s faith in order to move forward.


Production Quality (1 point)

Though this film had a decent budget, it still does not have a good enough production.  Video quality and camera work are once again the only good elements.  Audio quality is quite poor and the soundtrack is very generic.  Sets, locations, and props are very cheap and limited.  There are a lot of montages and dead sequences, which reflect the terrible editing work.  Basically, we haven’t figured out where the Stronger Foundation team gets their money from, but they are squandering it at a rate only rivaled by Timothy Chey.

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

Unfortunately, it seems as though most of Strong Foundation’s plots are utterly pointless.  This so-called story is reminiscent of a FaithHouse creation due to its childish and empty characters and its extremely juvenile dialogue and premise.  The main character is very downtrodden and there is a lot of laughable and forced melodrama.  The Christian message is also, of course, extremely plastic and off-putting.  It feels like this story was written by a five-year-old as everything is fixed in the end and just generally has a juvenile feel to it.  It’s very difficult to understand how movies like this are made.

Acting Quality (0 points)

Josiah David Warren and his typical cast comrades are at it again in this film, with very unsure and sometimes whiny performances.  Emotions are either over the top or nonexistent and line delivery is stunted.  Basically, this cast is in need of some serious coaching.


We are interested to know who gives Strong Foundations Films a basic blank check to allow Sun Hui East and Josiah David Warren to do basically whatever they want.  The stories they come up with really seem like they came from a bunch of kids making up stories while playing with their toys, combined with a cheap Christian message.  We are greatly unsure as to what the ultimate goal with these movies is, but we hope to forget they even exist.


Final Rating: 1 out of 10 points


Homefront {The Things We Leave Behind} [2013] (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

When three American soldiers are taken captive by the enemy and trapped in a dungeon awaiting their fate, their minds wander back to the lives their left behind in their home country.  As they share stories and regrets, one of them tries to help the others come to Christ before it’s too late.  Will they be able to leave behind their regrets and embrace a new future with Jesus before time runs out for them?


Production Quality (0 points)

Unfortunately, throughout his film career, Chip Rossetti has struggled with production quality.  Homefront is no exception.  Camera work is stationary and video quality is grainy.  Lighting is terrible in a lot of the scenes.  Audio quality is also bad and the soundtrack is basically nonexistent.  Sets and locations are severely limited.  Furthermore, editing is not what it should be, although there are some efforts to make it that way.  In the end, it’s unfortunate that the production quality of this film is so low because it had some potential.

Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)

It is clear that this film was intended to be a big military epic, but it fell very short of expectations.  The story is very flat and boring, even though the dialogue has some potential.  Flashbacks barely keep the movie alive, but they need a lot more development, as do the characters.  There is a part of this film that is interesting and makes us want it to be better because we can see what Chip was trying to do here, but it just didn’t work.  As it is, Homefront does not have the stamina or powerful content to sustain a two-hour film.  Though it was intended to be an international suspense epic, this dream unfortunately did not come to fruition.  Thus, we are left wandering what could have been.

Acting Quality (1 point)

This cast, while they are not as bad as they could be, is very dry and cardboard in their emotions and in their line delivery.  Some lines are severely mumbled, yet sometimes they surprise you with a randomly good performance.  Since they were so underwhelming yet showed potential, they desperately needed some acting coaching.  With that, this section could have been improved.


Homefront is the bare bones skeleton of an idea that needs serious fleshing out and a huge production and casting upgrade.  It’s not like there’s not potential here—the potential is the one thing that keeps this film from being zero points.  But with a production this bad, a film can never succeed.  With a plot this understated and under-developed, there is no way a movie can make a difference.  Furthermore, when your cast does not reach its full potential, you are in for disappointment.  The good thing is that Chip Rossetti is making strides to improve his brand, and is having some success at this (see 94 Feet).  This is all we ask from Christian film makers.


Final Rating: 1.5 out of 10 points


94 Feet (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

The coal town of St. Michaels is falling apart.  The mill has already closed and now the coal mine is downsizing.  The town is shrinking and people are leaving to find better times elsewhere.  But one tragic day, the mine collapses and traps all of the miners beneath the surface of the earth.  The entire town comes together to pray and rescue the miners from certain death before time runs out.  Will they all lose the men they love and their faith at same time?


Production Quality (2 points)

In the past, Chip Rossetti has had many rough moments when it comes to movie making, especially production elements (see Right to Believe and Fathers).  However, 94 Feet demonstrates a definite improvement in this department, including professional video quality, camera work, and audio quality.  The soundtrack is also intriguing.  Sets, locations, and props are very appropriate and realistic.  There are some minor issues in the special effects department, but this and some confusing editing are the only errors to highlight.  Overall, this film demonstrates that no matter how small you start, you can always improve in your movie career if you put your mind to it.

Plot and Storyline Quality (1 point)

Though the plot of 94 Feet is a definite improvement over past efforts, it still leaves something to be desired.  It’s great to use a real life story to base your movie on, but the premise if this film is still somewhat shallow as the characters and their dialogue need better development.  There are too many very dry attempts at comedy and too much wasted time.  The beginning of the plot is too slow and not engaging enough and does not use time wisely to develop characters.  While we can appreciate their struggles, they still need more realism to deepen the experience.  As it is, this story is fine and will many audiences will enjoy it, we just can’t help but feel it could have gone a step further.

Acting Quality (2.5 points)

This section is also a major improvement over swing-and-miss casts of previous Rossetti films.  These cast members appear to actually know what they are doing and demonstrate honesty and realism.  Each cast member is cast appropriately.  Emotions and live delivery are on point; this cast only demonstrates minor errors, thus making it this film’s strongest portion.


Though improvement is sometimes slow and meager, any improvement is always good regardless.  Sometimes it takes time to hone film making skills, and it appears that Chip Rossetti and his team are on the right road.  Production and casting have greatly improved, so the final frontier for them will be plots.  With better characters and a more engaging storyline, the Rossetti team will be looking at a Hall of Fame film in no time, if they stay the course and don’t give up.


Final Rating: 5.5 out of 10 points


Right to Believe [2014] (Movie Review)

What a strange idea.......
What a strange idea…….

Plot Summary

Tony Morris, a reporter for a local newspaper, suddenly finds his faith tested when he is instructed by his maniacal boss to cover a local gay pride parade.  This assignment consists entirely of him interviewing a gay activist in a coffee shop to get that hard hitting piece done.  As they argue back and forth on a wide variety of topics and employ outdated textbook arguments, the audience is left breathless in wonder.  The plot twists and turns even more when Tony and his plastic wife discuss his occupational dilemma while sitting on the world’s most hideous couch (pictured above).  Suspense builds when a random gun-wielding man threatens the lives of the two debaters.  In the end, as the film’s original soundtrack asks us, will anyone have the right to believe?


Production Quality (0 points)

Being forced to sit through this docu-drama should be a crime.  With poor video quality and amateurish camera work, Right to Believe is a loser in every possible way.  The lighting is very inconsistent in the three sets that are used to film this wonder.  That’s right: there’s only three sets.  Audio quality is the pits, especially when you’re compelled to have the most obnoxious non-Hallmark soundtrack shoved into your ears, complete with the garage band original number that shares its title with this movie.  To round things off, prop usage is high school caliber.  In short, this is perhaps the cheapest looking production we have ever witnessed.

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

This is not a plot.  There is zero plot content and the entire film consists of two long-winded coffee shop debates on homosexuality, sin, Christianity, and other related topics.  Both sides of the issue use strawman arguments, like the Christian character saying that sin is worse in modern times because of technology.  The portrayal of the gay character is cringe-worthy.  Despite there only being three or four main characters, there is no development of any of them as we are forced to watch them stiffly converse in a coffee shop environment and lounge on the world’s most hideous couch.  They are talking points robots programmed to say stereotypical things.

No one will be converted based on the empty arguments offered by either side of the issue.  There’s really not much else to say here except for this film is a total embarrassment.

Acting Quality (0 points)

With literally eight cast members to work with, the acting should be flawless due to efficient acting coaching.  This is not the case (shocker).  More than half the time, spoken lines are indiscernible and mumbled.  There are no realistic emotions to speak of.  But after reviewing the other elements of this film, who’s really surprised?


At the end of this film, there is a black and white epilogue depicting the main character’s confession article as an internationally acclaimed piece, even appearing in Chinese and Russian (?) newspapers and books.  Are we really supposed to believe this is the case?  The writers were obviously bigger in their own heads.  If they really wanted to craft an unforgettable epic on the Christian response to homosexuality, they should have taken more time to actually listen to the other side rather than paint them as illegitimate and stupid.  There is no care or thought in this film as sensitive issues are clinically diagnosed and ‘fixed’ with empty arguments and rhetoric.  In some ways, Right to Believe is an example of the sad state of the American church: cold, unfeeling, entitled, and somewhat delusional.


Final Rating: 0 out of 10 points