User Reviews

This is a descriptive story, one that tells of real events, although I am certain they are highly edited. Basically, a bunch of white guys living in Ecuador decide to "save" the local savage tribes still living in the stone age, killing each other for women and hunting grounds.

The missionaries are portrayed as real selfless people, with only a few scenes purporting to the religious aspect of their quest, which, in my opinion, was probably the main if not the only reason they were there in the first place.

Due to a misunderstanding, the missionaries are killed, but their wives and children end up living in the village of their killers, turning the other cheek, as it were, and breaking the endless cycle of violence... by bringing polio to the enemy tribe :)

Bottom line: it is a point of view breaker. By watching the movie, one gets to break out of their cozy view of the world and gather more insight into human nature. Understanding the amount of editing of the real story and the politics behind it brings more insight.

Growing up a Protestant kid in the 80's I tripped over the story of Nate Saint, Jim Elliot and the three other missionaries who were brutally murdered by the Waorani people in 1956. It is the tragic story that caused a sensation in the United States. Not because the men died in vain, but because the wives of these men reached out to these violent people and changed their lives forever. It's a story that captivated me. In fact when I was eleven I told many people that I one day wanted to make a movie about these very people. To my surprise THE END OF THE SPEAR came along and does just that.

SPEAR tells the tale from the vantage point of young Steve Saint (Chase Ellison), Nate Saints (Chad Allen) pre-teen son, and Mincayani (Louie Leonardo) the Waorani leader whom killed Nate Saint with his own spear. It begins as the Waorani people are on the verge of the extinction. Their violent society has the Ecuadoran government ready to go in and kill them all, and their warlike ways have made them unable to survive very long anyway. It's only when Saint's wife (Cara Stoner) and sister Rachel (Sara Kathryn Bakker) move into the tribe and attempt to reach out to the Waorani women that redemption begin to take hold.

I walked into SPEAR with very little expectation. You have to understand I have seen hundreds of horrible "Christian" films. Most are not worth the film they are printed on. But SPEAR works. Yes it's got some very clunky scenes, the dialogue is a tad bit simplistic, but it has a dramatic tension I wasn't quite expecting. I was actually moved by scenes. I rooted for characters and did not feel talked down to. SPEAR is not a movie about saving souls, it's a movie about characters. It is the kind of movie that if given a chance will spark debate and inspiration. It's motive seems innocent and not heavy handed.

The cinematography while simple by Hollywood's standard is effective. The score doesn't get in the way, and Director Jim Hannon fills his story with just enough detail that it's believable. He gets performances out of his actors that are simple and understated. It's not Oscar caliber, but that's not to be expected. The dialogue works, even if the Subtitles seem to rob the Waorani language of any real nuance, it's simple and get us from point A to point B as well as it can. There were moments I wanted to movie to explain the motives of it characters a little better. But for what it's worth SPEAR is still effective.

My qualms with the casting of Chase Ellison as Young Steve should also be noted. Some heavy scenes fall on this young boy and unfortunately he doesn't have the chops to hold it on his shoulders. A better child actor should have been sought. Casting children can be very hard. But the only scenes I didn't buy fell on this poor kid to vocalize and the poor material stuck out like a sore thumb.

I also hated the ending. It hurt the picture. There must have been a more powerful way of ending it. But unfortunately it pushed the story into the melodramatic range. It also introduced a supernatural twist that needed an explanation. We saw the scene earlier and these events didn't occur, why now? Hopefully this sour ending will not hurt the rest of the picture for most audiences. I for one was a little disappointed.

But all in all END OF THE SPEAR is not a bad film. It has its flaws. But at its heart it's the kind of movie that will inspire those whom let it. It will move those whom allow it to move and hopefully it will open a dialogue about International Missions. A job that has gotten a bad rap by people whom don't understand its importance in shaping the modern world. I'm glad that this story was told and that I had an opportunity to see it.

***1/2 (out of 5)

...than a 7, but I cannot in good conscience. The film is effectively poignant where it needs to be and is at best more engaging than its documentary counterpart "Beyond the Gates of Splendor," as well it should be. But at times the oversaturated hues of the jungle, melodramatic dialogue, and corny sentiment mar a promising story.

The second act is the real meat of the story and it works marvelously. If the others were as strong, this would be a real winner through-and-through. 20 minutes into the film, we're still waiting and wondering if it's not too late to catch another feature. But then we begin to learn about the Waorani cycle of violence and the consequences for its people. This is where the film comes alive and redeems itself, because it knows how to handle its characters, even if they seem a bit too "Hollywood" at times (you'll see what I mean at the end.)

In all, I wasn't disappointed, and if you miss it in the theatre you shouldn't be either. Just be sure to rent it.

I don't expect film media to provide an adequate standalone vehicle for the Gospel. I was, however, disappointed with EotS's presentation of the martyrs, and particularly incensed at the treatment of Jim Elliot.

Did I think the Gospel was absent from the movie? I thought it was introduced tardily (as in, late in the movie), partially, and blurrily. I would not say it was absent entirely, but it was absent in its pure form.

Did I mind this presentation of the Gospel? The movie did not really promote "another gospel," either. There were only snippets of the truth communicated, and I think there are valid reasons for that.

1. Communicating the Gospel in its entirety was not the purpose of the movie. I admire adherence to truth, and I think that the Gospel should be evident and glorified in all we do, but film is not the written or preached Word and needn't be judged according to all the standards by which we judge the value of preaching and teaching in the context of the Church. The written and preached Word is God's primary ordained medium for the Gospel.

2. The film genre is simply not conducive to a full Gospel presentation, since it is a primarily audiovisual, fast-paced, entertainment venue. A script adaptation (even a faithful one), emotional soundtrack, evocative lighting, and poignant camera angles are not God's ordained formula for conveying the Gospel in its entirety. He chose the Word, spoken and written, to be the primary vehicle of truth.

3. Presenting what happened to the Waodani as a change effected by their salvation en masse would not have been a faithful representation of what truly happened, and would, in fact, have undermined the very definition of the Gospel had it been presented as such.

4. The focal character during the moments that the Gospel was being communicated was Mincayani, clearly an unbeliever at that point in the story. His and his friends' perceptions of the differences they were seeing were filtered through their presuppositions and prejudices. It is only natural (and therefore a fairly faithful representation) that the Gospel would be all Greek to them. The movie has us viewing the Gospel through their unbelieving eyes at that point.

What bothered me most about End of the Spear? Aside from the false hopes and unrealistic expectations that evangelicals apply to the movie--since those are not the movie's fault, per se--I was particularly incensed the portrayal of Jim Elliot as a self-absorbed clown. As lighthearted (and occasionally reckless) as he may have been or seemed, he was also deeply burdened, highly intelligent, and certainly sober when appropriate. I do not kid myself that Elisabeth Elliot's presentation of his legacy was entirely without some natural bias. But to bereave the movie of a rounder treatment of Jim was a disservice, I think--a disservice to the truth, to the families, and to the audience. That Jim's gravity and earnest depth and calculated plans and sensitivity to the Holy Spirit (as evidenced extensively in his journals alone) was omitted completely, as though he was the chain's weakest link, is profoundly aggravating, to say the least.

The movie's bias leans toward the portrayal of a very competent and passionate Nate Saint, and justly so. The most attention Roger Youderian receives in the movie is the Waodanis' presumption that he is just a very tall woman with a singing voice like a canary. Ed McCulley gets to dance with his wife and introduce himself on the beach. Pete Fleming (off-camera) can't find his Waodani language notes when they need them, although he does get some screen time as the last man standing in the river, quite obviously petrified and mute.

All of these men have been idealized, and are larger-than-life heroes. Fifty years is a long time for those left behind to process real memories or erect imagined improvements. Does knocking the idealized Jim Elliot down a peg or ten serve any real purpose? These men had different strengths and weaknesses, and I think that the families would admit that they had disagreements and differing viewpoints at times. To be human is to differ from one another, and to differ graciously and without harm to ministry endeavors is to be exhibits of God's sufficient GRACE. They were all part of the team. They were all committed men, growing in grace, and they all risked their lives--both deliberately and joyfully. How is it, then, that every single shot of Jim in this movie portrays him as a thoughtless buffoon? The last line of the movie even alludes strongly to Jim Elliot's own famous words ("He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"), and yet the quote is modified and read by Allen, as Saint's character.

Credible film-making and allegiance to truth go hand-in-hand. I wasn't counting on this movie to preach the Gospel. I wasn't counting on this movie to comprise an all-believing cast with no personal agendas to promote. I wasn't even counting on this movie to be a flawless, unbiased account of what really happened. I wasn't. But I do feel sorry that this movie did not make more of an effort to tell the whole truth. I am glad that more of the "big scope" picture was brought to light. I am glad that more of the Waodanis' history was explained. I am glad that the less tangible elements (timing and providence) were highlighted. I just think that more could have been done to flesh out and honor the memory of these men, all five of them.

I wanted to meet them. I, who have grown up in their grandchildren's generation, wanted to be introduced to them. I wanted a posthumous chance to know them. I wanted to have been there with them. Perhaps those, too, are unreasonable demands for any film. I think they may have been.

I was lucky enough to be able to see a prescreening of this movie. I was not disappointed by both the acting and cinematography in this movie, but the message contained deep within its bowels turned me away. The message in this movie is not that of what the preview tells you. From what you watch in the preview you see that this is a movie about bringing peace to a waring tribe. But in all truth the movie tells more of a story of Christians coming to save the damned souls of the tribe. Unfortunately this story holds in it a disheartening message that for non-Christians will most likely disgust them. When you first realize the true nature of the story is when the main character Nate Saint says to his son after asking if they will kill the waodoni he calmly replies that they cannot because they are not ready to die, and by the end of the movie if you didn't realize it then you will realize that he is referring to them not being saved. If this undertone had not been there throughout the movie it would have been a much better piece, and would be on my A-list. All story elements aside this movie is worth seeing for the great acting, and great direction.

This outstanding movie tells the story of five missionaries who were speared to death by the Waodani tribe of Ecuador in 1956. It is based on the book "Through Gates of Splendor" by Elisabeth Elliot and the story featured in "LIFE" magazine after the incident occurred.

The movie traces the event from two perspectives - the Waodani tribe itself, and Steve Saint (orphaned son of jungle pilot Nate Saint who first made contact). This creates amazing tension as the pain and humanity of the incident is seen through the eyes of people directly affected on both sides of the slaying.

One of the most striking features of this film is the participation of indigenous actors. The actual location in Ecuador was too remote for a film crew, so the producers were able to locate a remote tribe in Panama that agreed to play the part of the Waodani. Although these people had never even seen a movie before, they understood the concept of the incident, and were willing to help bring the amazing story to a wider audience.

This is the first time the Waodani were willing to tell the story. They were told about Columbine and other incidents of violence. The Waodani leaders apparently said that if the men were willing to come 50 years ago to help them learn not to kill one another, that they would do the film in hopes that it would help others learn not to kill. They then became consultants for the film.

The cinematography is very good, with some striking scenes in the jungle. The actor who portrays the Waodani warrior-chief, Mincayani, is outstanding. The scene where Nate and Steve Saint say goodbye is incredibly moving, as both recognize that the father may not return. Steve chasing his dad's plane down the makeshift runway is a serious tear-jerker.

There are some intense scenes of violence that are probably too strong for younger children, although I believe the producers took the high road on showing the actual spearing.

The love demonstrated by the women who were willing to go and live with the tribe is simply amazing. They chose to live among the very men who murdered their loved ones (in part to prevent the government from going in and wiping the Waodani out)and to care for the sick and dying of both the Waodani and their rivals. This showed the tribe that the cycle of revenge-based violence they had been living under for centuries did nothing but decimate the tribe itself, and that there was a better way.

Over the next two years, the tribal leaders began to accept that they could live and prosper without murdering one another, and be at peace with their rivals. It is said that the murder rate dropped by 90%.

We were fortunate enough to see this film at a screening, and greatly look forward to seeing it again. It garnered two rounds of applause from the audience. Stick around during the credits to see the actual footage from when the real Mincayani came to the US with Steve Saint. Highly recommended.

If not for all the wonderful scenery and melodious usage of the native languages I would have gagged at the start of the movie! The fact they they said, "... we can't shoot them, they're not ready to go to heaven." ! This was ridiculous!!!! You go and suppress the people's culture and act as if you are right thing they they have been missing in their life! The hubris of it all! The audacity! I mean, isn't this the reason why the world has and had religious problems with oppressing other cultures; three of which i belong to?! I cannot believe it that they think they did these people a favor, period! I dare someone to approach me and tell me religion will truly save me from my own self and my entire culture! Disgusting hubris!!