Love 101: Freshman Class (Movie Review)

Love 101: Freshman Class – Defender of Truth

Plot Summary

Based on complicated relationship webs from the book of Genesis, a collection of high school students is forced decide what they truly believe about love. As they navigate the complex landscape before them, the choices they make will impact them for the rest of their lives.

Production Quality (.5 point)

This production has a lot of terrible aspects to it, such as the loud soundtrack that often overpowers audio and the weird aspect ratios. Camera work is often shaky, and video quality is sometimes blurry. The sets, locations, and props are mostly cheap, and some unnecessarily tight shots cut things off. Outside scenes are too bright at times, and flashbacks have weird sepia tone quality to them. Very slight improvement as the film progresses is the only thing keeping this section from zero, but it’s not enough to bring the movie out of its nosedive.

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

Love 101: Freshman Class continues the worn-out trope of modernly repurposed Bible stories and makes things especially awkward by throwing them into a high school setting and mixing them all up. Besides the weak premise, however, the plot relies on unlikely and random things occurring just to suit its means, which creates unclear direction and purpose. Otherwise, characters stand around in scenes to stiffly recite lines and participate in empty conversations. Mindless dialogue leads to aimless characters, including perfect characters who constantly spout Scripture and talk down to all the “bad” people, trying to force them to act right in their own strength. Some characters are magically fixed after well-timed sermons that contain a lot of in-your-face, things-are-much-worse-these-days messaging. Events in the narrative move very quickly to rush toward a desired conclusion and even present a laughable portrayal of criminal procedure that only exists in play acting. In the end, the bizarre ending has the audacity to suggest that more of these awful movies could be made, which we hope never happens.

Acting Quality (0 points)

It’s evident that this cast was poorly coached as most performances are robotic. Line delivery is quite unsure, and emotions are awkwardly forced. There’s also a lot of squinting in outside scenes, and the makeup work is low quality. Thus, this rounds out another terrible effort in the Christian entertainment world.


It seems like one has to try really hard to make a film this bad. Aside from the obvious budget problems, the central message of this screenplay is that a Christian teenager just needs to try harder to act right and that those who “act bad” just don’t listen to enough sermons. This is legalism at is core and isn’t something we need to see in Christian movies. Therefore, we hope that the advent of these types of offerings has come and gone.

Final Rating: .5 out of 10 points


Where is Good? (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

Hannah Bailey has always wanted a child.  She and her husband, who is a pastor, have prayed and always supported pro-life causes, but they can never have one of their own.  Carla Owens is a detective determined to bring an elusive yet serial rapist to justice, all while battling unforeseen medical problems.  Then, the unthinkable happens that brings these two women together with a common goal.  Yet in the midst of it all, where is God when He says all things will work together for good?


Production Quality (1.5 points)

For the most part, the production of Where is Good? is fairly professional, but there are some issues that keep it average.  Video quality and camera work are on standard.  However, there is too much blank audio quality and dead air, as well as an inconsistent soundtrack.  Sets, locations, and props are realistic and are utilized well.  However, the editing is somewhat amateurish as scenes either cut back and forth too quickly, chop off at awkward points, or lag too long.  These errors make for a confusing experience and drag down the overall quality.  Thus, this production must be rated as average.

Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)

From the beginning on, Where is Good? appears to be trying to push a very clear point, and this is accomplished by using juvenile, obvious, and sometimes grasping dialogue.  Unfortunately, though there is a lot of it, the dialogue does nothing to help the characters feel accessible or realistic.  Some very interesting issues are raised and explored throughout this plot, but they are portrayed in a very simplistic manner that causes the story to seem unrealistic and contrived.  There are too many disjointed subplots that cause the storyline to lack focus, even though the purpose is clear.  Too many flat, dry sequences cause the runtime to extend too far and overstay its welcome.  However, even though things are all over the place for almost two hours of this film and the presentation of these issues is amateurish, for roughly the last ten minutes of the film, an interesting twist materializes that casts the entire story in a new light.  Unfortunately, it’s too little too late and this idea is mostly wasted.  It would be interesting to see this plot rewritten, because there is some potential here that it mostly left on the proverbial field.

Acting Quality (1.5 points)

While there are some bright spots among this mostly amateur cast, there are quite a few issues that reflect poor acting coaching.  Sometimes line delivery is too forceful and dramatic, while other times it is too breathy.  Emotions are inconsistent, and there is far too much yelling.  In the end, it just comes out as average.


Where is Good? joins the growing list of Christian films that desperately need a remake because of the innovative and creative ideas they carry in damaged packaging.  There are many unique concepts locked inside of seemingly incomplete films that need to be either partially tweaked or completely refurbished so that they can have full impact on the entertainment field.  One day, perhaps some of them will be remade, but at the very least, future film makers can learn from the their mistakes and not repeat them.


Final Rating: 3.5 out of 10 points