I was not expecting much going in to this, but still came away disappointed. This was my least favorite Halestorm production I have seen. I thought it was supposed to be a comedy, but I only snickered at 3 or 4 jokes. Is it really a funny gag to see a fat guy eating donuts and falling down over and over? What was up with the janitor in Heaven scene? Fred Willard has been hilarious with some of his Christopher Guest collaborations, but this did not work. They must have spent all the budget on getting "known" actors to appear in this because there was no lighting budget. It looked like it was filmed with a video camera and most scenes were very dark. Does it really take that much film to show someone actually shoot and make a basket, as opposed to cutting away and editing a ball swishing through a basket? I try not to be too critical of low budget comedies, but if you want to see something funny go to a real Church basketball game instead of this movie.
25 Reviews
Church Ball comes up short
yourenothomerightnow29 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I wanted to like this film, I really did. It's got some good actors but ultimately it falls flat. It tries too hard to be funny in some places (the daughters over zealous cooking attempts), over reaches in others (the scene where they clean up someone's yard, so he agrees to join the team) and has some scenes that, while mildly interesting, are really just filler (all the work scene's). And I didn't find the "villians" intimidating, or worth hating, so much as I found them to be childishly annoying.
I've met people like those in the film while playing church ball. And I will say the referee's are spot on, Still, in the end, I really didn't care all that much about the characters, or their quest for church ball glory. Maybe because they were all so one dimensional, which I might not have minded so much if the film were funnier or seemed to flow a little more smoothly overall.
Kurt Hale, and Halestorm entertainment, has made some good films, but this is not one of them.
I've met people like those in the film while playing church ball. And I will say the referee's are spot on, Still, in the end, I really didn't care all that much about the characters, or their quest for church ball glory. Maybe because they were all so one dimensional, which I might not have minded so much if the film were funnier or seemed to flow a little more smoothly overall.
Kurt Hale, and Halestorm entertainment, has made some good films, but this is not one of them.
Boy, what a letdown...
staleclam18 March 2006
I've never been a huge fan of Mormon films. Being a Mormon, I've always felt that the humor was too exclusive to the LDS community and made us seem like a bunch of obsessive wackos. I was hoping this would be the breath of fresh air, the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.
Boy, was I wrong.
I figured, since this had B-list talent like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, Andrew Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this would have to be at least a little funny. And besides, church basketball is ripe with potential for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I must say, throughout the entire movie, it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. Every joke fell flat, and every opportunity for a genuinely funny gag went ignored. The dialogue was bland, and the film had some of the worst character development I have ever seen. Every single character but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's hard to believe that after nine re-writes the film was still as mind-numbingly stale as the train wreck I witnessed. I can't put into words the rage I felt sitting through this. My friends and I were extras in the final game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. Kurt Hale, the director, was there, and I must say, I avoided all contact with him after the show. He waited at the door, seemingly ready for feedback. I couldn't bring myself to tell him that his film not only ripped away a good hour and a half of my life, but it left a nasty, painful scar that I will never forget.
Here are a few specific problems I had: There was a minor love story subplot between the janitor and the chubby piano player, but these two characters came out of nowhere, and were impossible to care about, so my friends and I were left constantly wondering why we were supposed to care about these two lame, uninteresting characters. There were many subplots that popped up every now and then, each promising the audience the chance for laughs, but each one came and went in a puff of smoke, ending before you could even start caring. This was pretty much how the whole movie felt.
This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the first REAL funny Mormon movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.
Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through
Boy, was I wrong.
I figured, since this had B-list talent like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, Andrew Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this would have to be at least a little funny. And besides, church basketball is ripe with potential for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I must say, throughout the entire movie, it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. Every joke fell flat, and every opportunity for a genuinely funny gag went ignored. The dialogue was bland, and the film had some of the worst character development I have ever seen. Every single character but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's hard to believe that after nine re-writes the film was still as mind-numbingly stale as the train wreck I witnessed. I can't put into words the rage I felt sitting through this. My friends and I were extras in the final game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. Kurt Hale, the director, was there, and I must say, I avoided all contact with him after the show. He waited at the door, seemingly ready for feedback. I couldn't bring myself to tell him that his film not only ripped away a good hour and a half of my life, but it left a nasty, painful scar that I will never forget.
Here are a few specific problems I had: There was a minor love story subplot between the janitor and the chubby piano player, but these two characters came out of nowhere, and were impossible to care about, so my friends and I were left constantly wondering why we were supposed to care about these two lame, uninteresting characters. There were many subplots that popped up every now and then, each promising the audience the chance for laughs, but each one came and went in a puff of smoke, ending before you could even start caring. This was pretty much how the whole movie felt.
This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the first REAL funny Mormon movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.
Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through
Cinematic tripe
brentito6 June 2006
Trot out every stereotype and misrepresentation you've heard about semi-devout Mormons, and you'll see they've all starred in this ridiculous excuse for a film. Finally Kurt Hale's fortunes have changed (thank goodness) and hopefully it will be a long while before we see any of his features in theaters.
The cinematography was amateurish (I think they used a camcorder for some of the basketball scenes). The plot was limp and very unfunny. You really didn't understand why anyone did anything. It was like I had sand in my eyes, and a 300-pound lady was sitting on my face, it was that painful.
The only reason I didn't give this movie a negative rating was because the scale won't let me.
The cinematography was amateurish (I think they used a camcorder for some of the basketball scenes). The plot was limp and very unfunny. You really didn't understand why anyone did anything. It was like I had sand in my eyes, and a 300-pound lady was sitting on my face, it was that painful.
The only reason I didn't give this movie a negative rating was because the scale won't let me.
Sad sad day for film
ihatetoregister-109 April 2006
The really sad thing is that this was supposedly the highest budget "Halestorm Entertainment" has had to work with. All involved should be fined for littering since all the celluloid they wasted is good for nothing more than filling the trash. Not only is the writing atrocious and the jokes awful, but the camera work and film quality are amateur at best. The soundtrack sounds like it was created on some guys laptop PC. The worst part of all is that I actually sat through the whole thing. I think just because I couldn't believe that I had actually paid to buy a ticket and that the theater I was watching it in had actually agreed to show the "film".
very disappointing
sistasaint13 October 2006
First of all, let me say the I am LDS or rather, I am a Mormon. So when I watched this film, I automatically gave it the benefit of the doubt. I can usually find something redeeming in every movie I watch. And this one was no exception. It does have its redeeming moments. But they are few and far between.
One of the first things I noticed that bothered me very greatly was that it seemed as though Halestorm was ashamed of our Church! In the LDS Church, congregations are called "wards" and the basketball court is in the "cultural hall". NEVER ONCE are either of these two names mentioned. The Church is never referred to by name and "the standards" is as far as it goes in mentioning what our Church believes.
It makes me wonder if the directors are really LDS or LDS wannabes? This film had so much potential! It could have really shown our Church in a positive light and helped the public to see not only what we have to offer, but also what we believe. Instead it was only mildly entertaining and left much to be desired. If I were not already LDS, I'd be left thinking Mormons are stupid, idiotic and ashamed of their beliefs.
It is NOT a film I will recommend to my nonLDS friends.
Sorry Halestorm. You can do better than this!
One of the first things I noticed that bothered me very greatly was that it seemed as though Halestorm was ashamed of our Church! In the LDS Church, congregations are called "wards" and the basketball court is in the "cultural hall". NEVER ONCE are either of these two names mentioned. The Church is never referred to by name and "the standards" is as far as it goes in mentioning what our Church believes.
It makes me wonder if the directors are really LDS or LDS wannabes? This film had so much potential! It could have really shown our Church in a positive light and helped the public to see not only what we have to offer, but also what we believe. Instead it was only mildly entertaining and left much to be desired. If I were not already LDS, I'd be left thinking Mormons are stupid, idiotic and ashamed of their beliefs.
It is NOT a film I will recommend to my nonLDS friends.
Sorry Halestorm. You can do better than this!
If i labor all my days. . . .
ericphil7 February 2007
Every once in a long while a movie will come along that will be so awful that I feel compelled to warn people. If I labor all my days and I can save but one soul from watching this movie, how great will be my joy.
Where to begin my discussion of pain. For starters, there was a musical montage every five minutes. There was no character development. Every character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy foreign guy, etc. The script felt as if it were being written as the movie was being shot. The production value was so incredibly low that it felt like I was watching a junior high video presentation. Have the directors, producers, etc. ever even seen a movie before? Halestorm is getting worse and worse with every new entry. The concept for this movie sounded so funny. How could you go wrong with Gary Coleman and a handful of somewhat legitimate actors. But trust me when I say this, things went wrong, VERY WRONG.
Where to begin my discussion of pain. For starters, there was a musical montage every five minutes. There was no character development. Every character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy foreign guy, etc. The script felt as if it were being written as the movie was being shot. The production value was so incredibly low that it felt like I was watching a junior high video presentation. Have the directors, producers, etc. ever even seen a movie before? Halestorm is getting worse and worse with every new entry. The concept for this movie sounded so funny. How could you go wrong with Gary Coleman and a handful of somewhat legitimate actors. But trust me when I say this, things went wrong, VERY WRONG.
awful, just awful
digistarutah21 March 2006
I went to see this film with fairly low expectations, figuring it would be a nice piece of fluff. Sadly, it wasn't even that. I could barely sit through the film without wanting to walk out. I went with my two kids (ages 10 and 13) and even they kept asking, "How much longer?" After lasting until the end, I just kept wondering who would approve this script. Even the reliable Fred Willard couldn't save the trite dialogue, the state jokes, and the banal plot. I'd suggest that whoever wrote and directed this movie (I use the term loosely) should take an online screen writing class or drop by their local community college for a film class. At the least, there are many books on directing, screen writing, and producing movies that would teach them something about structure, plot, dialogue and pacing.
One star for each time I laughed
cricketbat6 August 2018
I'm giving Church Ball four stars - one for each time I laughed. It's not the actors' fault that this movie isn't good, the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the writers, producers, editors and the director. It's not a complete waste of time, but it's not one I can recommend or watch again.
Mildly Amusing. . .
blue-72 April 2006
It was a rainy night when my wife and I stepped into the recently opened Century 16 Theatres near us. Our daughter had sent us out for a night at the movies after we'd gone out for dinner. Of the 16 screens there was almost nothing suitable for viewing. A lot of "R" rated horror type junk, a lame remake of Disney's THE SHAGGY DOG and CHURCH BALL. I had recently heard director Kurt Hale on the local KSL Movie Show talking about the film. The host made the mistake of mentioning a comment that LDS filmmaker Richard Dutcher had made about the type of films that the HaleStorm people were turning out killing the theatrical interest of many for LDS themed films. This hit a nerve and Hale flashed back with: "All we need is another STATES OF GRACE out there!" He was referring to Dutcher's latest film which has unfortunately done poorly. While I think that there is room for both in depth drama and light comedy showing the LDS culture, I find the HaleStorm films, including CHURCH BALL, to be only mildly entertaining. Dollar for dollar there is no question that the technical quality of what is up there on the screen comes out far ahead under Dutcher's hand. The HaleStorm films seem like a glorified "roadshow". There are some laughs but little that has lasting value. I look forward to seeing what they can do as they shift their efforts from Mormon themed comedy to remakes of Dotty Dayton films such as AGAINST A CROOKED SKY. My guess is that they are not going to be able to match the $10 million that the 1975 original took in, even with the inflated admission prices of today. Hope that I am wrong! P.S: My wife said that CHURCH BALL was better then she thought it would be.
Surprisingly funny
mcomerio18 March 2006
Well done, creative, good casting, not as annoying cliché as I thought it would be. Something everyone can relate to whether you played church ball or not. Gary Coleman's surprise participation was hilarious. I fully expected to hate it, but for it's industry, I was impressed. Loved the cameos. How did they get these big names for a dinky movie like this? I especially liked how it was obviously a spoof on the Mormon take of it, and took place in a Mormon church, etc., but was done in a way that all religions (or non religious- just anyone that has played basketball) can relate to. Realistically emphasized that even those who strive to live a good live are human with weaknesses, and slip up from time to time, and we can have fun with that. The moral was laid in creatively, subtly, tactfully, and humorously.
It was okay for a church ball fan
garyrolsen20 March 2006
The movie lived up to my expectations from the perspective of making light the saying 'No blood, no foul.' I appreciated the message developed along the way to reinforce the 'would-be, should-be' true purpose of the program.
I ask my Elder's quorum president every year if they'll be having a recreational league based team this year. If so, to sign me up. (They been the region champs three years in a row.) I think the story line could have been developed further. The hotrod/eaten scenes were cheesy.
Not great, but I think anyone that has participated in church ball will feel that they got their money's worth.
I ask my Elder's quorum president every year if they'll be having a recreational league based team this year. If so, to sign me up. (They been the region champs three years in a row.) I think the story line could have been developed further. The hotrod/eaten scenes were cheesy.
Not great, but I think anyone that has participated in church ball will feel that they got their money's worth.
Top Ten Reasons Not To See Church B-Ball
colson226622 March 2006
This movie was the beatliest mormon movie made yet. It made the RM & Sons of Provo look like well done films! It was supposed to be funny from what I was told. The best part was the best actor in the movie-Travis Eberhard-if he wasn't in the movie it probably wouldn't have been made! He ruled!
10. It wasn't funny 9. It was beat 8. It had Thurl Big T Bailey, who's character made no sense 7. It was made in Provo 6. It didn't make fun of Brokeback 5. It had Larry H. Miller in it 4. It was the 1st movie Clint Howard wasn't funny in 3. Gary Coleman chose the perfect movie 4 a comeback 2. They should have cast at Surreal Life auditions 1. It was made by Halestorm Entertainment!!
10. It wasn't funny 9. It was beat 8. It had Thurl Big T Bailey, who's character made no sense 7. It was made in Provo 6. It didn't make fun of Brokeback 5. It had Larry H. Miller in it 4. It was the 1st movie Clint Howard wasn't funny in 3. Gary Coleman chose the perfect movie 4 a comeback 2. They should have cast at Surreal Life auditions 1. It was made by Halestorm Entertainment!!
Save your time and your money
imdb-142016 June 2006
This movie is a total dog. I found myself straining to find anything to laugh at just so I wouldn't feel like I'd totally wasted my money--and my time. The writing in this film is absolutely terrible. It's a shame it's not up to the standards of other Hale Storm movies.
They should have saved the money on getting D-list actors like Fred Willard and Gary Coleman and spent the money working the script until it was right. Even Gary Coleman wasn't properly utilized for his role.
This movie leaves you wondering what the point of most of the plot was--including the subplots. After viewing this movie, I'm left with the impression that the producers were hoping to capture some kind of Napolean Dynamite-like humor, where it's not so much the lines as the character and the delivery. Unfortunately, this movie fails to deliver the lines, the characters, the delivery or the humor. I should have gone to the dentist instead!
They should have saved the money on getting D-list actors like Fred Willard and Gary Coleman and spent the money working the script until it was right. Even Gary Coleman wasn't properly utilized for his role.
This movie leaves you wondering what the point of most of the plot was--including the subplots. After viewing this movie, I'm left with the impression that the producers were hoping to capture some kind of Napolean Dynamite-like humor, where it's not so much the lines as the character and the delivery. Unfortunately, this movie fails to deliver the lines, the characters, the delivery or the humor. I should have gone to the dentist instead!
Awful
thuffaker16 March 2006
Just saw this movie, and what a waste of time. The movie was predictable and slow. It's basically the Mormon bad news bears that play church sanctioned basketball. Rather than watching this movie, I should have had a root canal. The cameo performances were obviously driven by sponsorship / funding. This movie had potential due to the outrageous behavior that is exhibited by Mormons when they play church sanctioned basketball, however because it's rated PG, the true nature of the spectacle could not be transfered to film. The acting is horrible with the exception of Clint Howard and Fred Willard. Thurl Bailey's appearance in the film was completely unnecessary.
Competitive Mormon Basketball
bkoganbing6 April 2012
Kurt Hale has once again brought us a slice of life from the world of the LDS church. As an outsider I am told that in Church Ball it is common for various Mormon congregations to have a basketball court within the confines of the local temple.
When I rented Church Ball I thought this was going to be about a Mormon kid's basketball league. But that was definitely not the case, this is a game played by adults and the adults here act pretty childish.
Including the Mormon bishop played here by Fred Willard who has lost an eye and he plays the role like John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn. It's alluded that the eye was lost do to a sports injury. These Mormon teams play pretty rough.
But his church team is apparently the 1962 Mets version of the league, they are a pretty pathetic lot. So Willard has asked Andrew Wilson to take over the team and bring home a winner in their last season since the bishop has been ordered by his superiors to drop the league all together as the competitiveness is not bringing out decent qualities in the saints.
All this is narrated by Amy Stewart as Wilson's wife who has resigned to being a sports widow. She's got a jaundiced view of the whole situation.
One of the people that Wilson recruits is Gary Coleman and that in itself brings a few laughs, just the visual of Gary Coleman on a basketball team is probably bringing a smile to those reading this right now. Church Ball was one of Gary's final films in a most tragic life.
This one is strictly for LDS audiences only, there are too many things in it that one won't get if one is not LDS or at least have a nodding familiarity with their church teachings.
When I rented Church Ball I thought this was going to be about a Mormon kid's basketball league. But that was definitely not the case, this is a game played by adults and the adults here act pretty childish.
Including the Mormon bishop played here by Fred Willard who has lost an eye and he plays the role like John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn. It's alluded that the eye was lost do to a sports injury. These Mormon teams play pretty rough.
But his church team is apparently the 1962 Mets version of the league, they are a pretty pathetic lot. So Willard has asked Andrew Wilson to take over the team and bring home a winner in their last season since the bishop has been ordered by his superiors to drop the league all together as the competitiveness is not bringing out decent qualities in the saints.
All this is narrated by Amy Stewart as Wilson's wife who has resigned to being a sports widow. She's got a jaundiced view of the whole situation.
One of the people that Wilson recruits is Gary Coleman and that in itself brings a few laughs, just the visual of Gary Coleman on a basketball team is probably bringing a smile to those reading this right now. Church Ball was one of Gary's final films in a most tragic life.
This one is strictly for LDS audiences only, there are too many things in it that one won't get if one is not LDS or at least have a nodding familiarity with their church teachings.
Hokey, Hackneyed, Holy "Hoosiers" . . . But Not Wholly Horrible
D_Burke19 November 2013
The title "Church Ball" alone will inevitably alienate millions, if not billions, of movie fans who are either not Mormon, not Christian, or simply hate going to church and seldom do unless forced to do so. On the bright side, once you get past this film's title, you get a light comedy that, to its credit, emboldens community involvement via teamwork and enthusiastic participation in a fun extracurricular activity, and never gets preachy. It's a great message for anyone, let alone the audience who was not scared away by the movie's name.
On the not-so-bright side, "Church Ball", as far as sports movies go, is so very, very predictable. Its plot involving a number of grossly untalented athletes chasing the impossible dream has been done to death, most notably in "Dodgeball" (2004).
Also, wasn't there a basketball movie about a tiny team of five players who come together against the odds and, with the help of one supremely talented basketball player who joins the roster at the last minute, go on to win the championship in the end? It's surprising that the makers of "Hoosiers" (1986) didn't sue these filmmakers for copyright infringement given these blatant similarities, but they probably didn't care either.
Truth be told, "Church Ball" is one overdone sports cliché after another. Even the film's tagline, "It's not how you play the game. It's whether you win or lose.", isn't all that clever. In fact, it was spoken verbatim by a character in ANOTHER movie with basketball as a crucial plot point, "Teen Wolf" (1985).
Even the main characters on the basketball team lack so much originality that they become stereotypes without any dimensions to them. Church accountant Gene Jensen (Clint Howard) may as well have had his character named "The Bookworm", Nadar Nazbarechov (Sina Amedson) could have been "The Foreign Guy", and Don Weaver (Chad Long) was mainly "The Unathletic Fat Guy".
One minor character could have called this team "A Ragtag Team of Misfits", but I don't remember. It wouldn't have surprised me if they did.
With all that said, I actually liked some of the other characters when they actively avoided the stereotype trap. Andrew Wilson (older brother of Owen & Luke) actually did well here as a decent family man whose amateur basketball talent makes him look like Larry Bird compared to the rest of the team. I also liked Amy Stewart as his wife. She was very likable, but the movie could have done without her "Oh, boys will be boys!" narration.
The late Gary Coleman also did what he could as the most unlikely person to be on the team for obvious reasons. However, when it's shown that he has three full-grown sons who happen to love playing basketball (and are good at it), no explanation whatsoever is given why they don't join the church ball team.
Fred Willard was probably the most surprising casting in this movie. With an estimated budget of only $1 million, it could not have been easy to get him.
However, Willard wasn't as funny here as he could have been. As Bishop Linderman, he plays the role as if he's comic relief, as he should, but doesn't really have anything funny to say.
His character's creating the play book for the team was clever, but it's never explained why his character doesn't coach the team himself, consequently leaving the burden to another player. Willard also wears an eye patch which keeps slipping off, revealing that there's nothing evidently wrong with his eye. I couldn't tell whether that was supposed to be the joke, or if that was a mistake the director didn't notice.
Another inconsistency involved the fate of the church basketball league itself. According to Bishop Linderman, the current season in the movie would be the last, and then they would shut down Church Ball for good without any explanation as to why.
If it was because of budget cuts, that would be understandable. However, they already have their own basketball court, not to mention active and enthusiastic participation by church members who could otherwise stay at home and watch TV, or go to a bar (Oops, I forgot! They're Mormon, but you know what I mean).
The fact that the movie didn't explain why church ball was shut down shows another lack of originality in plot execution. Fierce competition between basketball teams should (and does) supply enough conflict for a good story.
I have to credit "Church Ball" with being made on a shoestring budget with obviously good intentions. I especially liked the scenes between Wilson and former NBA great Thurl Bailey, which provided a decent amount of heart to an otherwise mediocre comedy. I just wish the rest of the film could have simply sunk the ball into the basket, instead of focusing on making their moves fancier than they needed to be.
On the not-so-bright side, "Church Ball", as far as sports movies go, is so very, very predictable. Its plot involving a number of grossly untalented athletes chasing the impossible dream has been done to death, most notably in "Dodgeball" (2004).
Also, wasn't there a basketball movie about a tiny team of five players who come together against the odds and, with the help of one supremely talented basketball player who joins the roster at the last minute, go on to win the championship in the end? It's surprising that the makers of "Hoosiers" (1986) didn't sue these filmmakers for copyright infringement given these blatant similarities, but they probably didn't care either.
Truth be told, "Church Ball" is one overdone sports cliché after another. Even the film's tagline, "It's not how you play the game. It's whether you win or lose.", isn't all that clever. In fact, it was spoken verbatim by a character in ANOTHER movie with basketball as a crucial plot point, "Teen Wolf" (1985).
Even the main characters on the basketball team lack so much originality that they become stereotypes without any dimensions to them. Church accountant Gene Jensen (Clint Howard) may as well have had his character named "The Bookworm", Nadar Nazbarechov (Sina Amedson) could have been "The Foreign Guy", and Don Weaver (Chad Long) was mainly "The Unathletic Fat Guy".
One minor character could have called this team "A Ragtag Team of Misfits", but I don't remember. It wouldn't have surprised me if they did.
With all that said, I actually liked some of the other characters when they actively avoided the stereotype trap. Andrew Wilson (older brother of Owen & Luke) actually did well here as a decent family man whose amateur basketball talent makes him look like Larry Bird compared to the rest of the team. I also liked Amy Stewart as his wife. She was very likable, but the movie could have done without her "Oh, boys will be boys!" narration.
The late Gary Coleman also did what he could as the most unlikely person to be on the team for obvious reasons. However, when it's shown that he has three full-grown sons who happen to love playing basketball (and are good at it), no explanation whatsoever is given why they don't join the church ball team.
Fred Willard was probably the most surprising casting in this movie. With an estimated budget of only $1 million, it could not have been easy to get him.
However, Willard wasn't as funny here as he could have been. As Bishop Linderman, he plays the role as if he's comic relief, as he should, but doesn't really have anything funny to say.
His character's creating the play book for the team was clever, but it's never explained why his character doesn't coach the team himself, consequently leaving the burden to another player. Willard also wears an eye patch which keeps slipping off, revealing that there's nothing evidently wrong with his eye. I couldn't tell whether that was supposed to be the joke, or if that was a mistake the director didn't notice.
Another inconsistency involved the fate of the church basketball league itself. According to Bishop Linderman, the current season in the movie would be the last, and then they would shut down Church Ball for good without any explanation as to why.
If it was because of budget cuts, that would be understandable. However, they already have their own basketball court, not to mention active and enthusiastic participation by church members who could otherwise stay at home and watch TV, or go to a bar (Oops, I forgot! They're Mormon, but you know what I mean).
The fact that the movie didn't explain why church ball was shut down shows another lack of originality in plot execution. Fierce competition between basketball teams should (and does) supply enough conflict for a good story.
I have to credit "Church Ball" with being made on a shoestring budget with obviously good intentions. I especially liked the scenes between Wilson and former NBA great Thurl Bailey, which provided a decent amount of heart to an otherwise mediocre comedy. I just wish the rest of the film could have simply sunk the ball into the basket, instead of focusing on making their moves fancier than they needed to be.
Dumb, but fun and true
mwideman21 October 2006
It was dumb, but so much of it was true, and it had a good heart and a good ending. It seems to be a part of the gender to compete. And even when we don't compete, we watch. The younger guys play video games. I remember helping to take the rims down in the Stake Center because the basketball players would be trying to get the Relief Society and other groups to hurry up whatever their activity and get out of the Cultural Hall, even when the other groups had it reserved long in advance. The guys felt that they had a permanent reservation on the gym. And recruiting was true even for the youth teams. There were so many high school players playing on church teams, that the schools finally put out a rule against it.
Hoosiers Church Basketball Style, Sort of...
notyourordinarymoviecritic18 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Here's a movie from these producers that's not Utah Mormon culture specific, but it is Utah specific just as Napoleon Dynamite was Idaho specific. I don't have a problem with that.
I saw the movie at a 12:10 matinée in Tooele, UT (the closest theatre to where I live). There were about a half dozen people in the theatre.
The POSITIVES: *Good message (despite the "misleading" taglines on the ads for it) that shows people matter more than sports or winning. *The acting was above par. *Jeremiah is the best character because he has the largest character arc. *The feel good sub story involving Moses Mahoney (Thurl Bailey) *The soundtrack I'd give a 7 out of 10. *The sub story romance between Thurman and Bertha was refreshing. *The cinematography had a more natural look instead of a bright clean look like previous Halestorm productions. *Seeing Gene (Clint Howard) wearing athletic shoes at church and the rest of him being dressed in a suit. *The opening "documentary" footage was excellent. *The location scout(s) did a pretty good job of finding a variety of locations. One of my little fears was that 90 % of the film would take place in a basketball gym. There was a good variety of locations. *The slow motions shots of opposing teams walking the halls. *The church restroom doubling as a locker room. *Dennis Buckstead's (Andrew Wilson) epiphany moment that has some humorous but realistic result. *The way the opening credits were presented was a lot of fun. *Some excellent laugh-out loud moments--it takes something really funny to get me to laugh out loud. *The fact that a good variety of ethnicities were represented--Polynesian, African-American, south-American, etc.--added because it didn't feel like a Caucasian movie made by Caucasian guys for a Caucasian audience.
The NEGATIVES:
-Some of the night shots looked grainy. -Some of the running jokes (like the fat guy eating doughnuts) were
repeated a tad too much, but not to the point of annoying. -The climax could have been ratcheted up a notch or two. -There was one subplot that seemed a little too ridiculous that didn't add much to the film. I won't give too much of it away only to say that it reminded me of the RM in the RM going door to door trying to sell knife sets.
Though the producers' hope is having this film reach a wider audience, I think that it's popularity will still be limited in some respects because it is Utah specific (Utah landscapes, Utah license plates, a BYU/Notre Dame reference, "Utah" celebrity cameos, Delta Center shots, etc.) I believe the producers' intentions are good in filming the movie entirely in Utah and paying tribute to it's charm/beauty/it being their native state or whatever you want to call it. However, I feel this will still limit its universal appeal.
Overall, I found the film funny, endearing (unexpectedly) and a great film for all ages. It's pretty clean language wise even for the most sensitive viewer. No swear words, just about 20 that are bleeped out, which is actually pretty funny considering who the character is. There's a "dang", "holy crap," "crap," a "that sucks," "freakin'," and one time the really heavy guy says "darn it" which almost sounded like "dammit". Then, another character asks, "Is this hell?" referring to the place.
Peace out...
I saw the movie at a 12:10 matinée in Tooele, UT (the closest theatre to where I live). There were about a half dozen people in the theatre.
The POSITIVES: *Good message (despite the "misleading" taglines on the ads for it) that shows people matter more than sports or winning. *The acting was above par. *Jeremiah is the best character because he has the largest character arc. *The feel good sub story involving Moses Mahoney (Thurl Bailey) *The soundtrack I'd give a 7 out of 10. *The sub story romance between Thurman and Bertha was refreshing. *The cinematography had a more natural look instead of a bright clean look like previous Halestorm productions. *Seeing Gene (Clint Howard) wearing athletic shoes at church and the rest of him being dressed in a suit. *The opening "documentary" footage was excellent. *The location scout(s) did a pretty good job of finding a variety of locations. One of my little fears was that 90 % of the film would take place in a basketball gym. There was a good variety of locations. *The slow motions shots of opposing teams walking the halls. *The church restroom doubling as a locker room. *Dennis Buckstead's (Andrew Wilson) epiphany moment that has some humorous but realistic result. *The way the opening credits were presented was a lot of fun. *Some excellent laugh-out loud moments--it takes something really funny to get me to laugh out loud. *The fact that a good variety of ethnicities were represented--Polynesian, African-American, south-American, etc.--added because it didn't feel like a Caucasian movie made by Caucasian guys for a Caucasian audience.
The NEGATIVES:
-Some of the night shots looked grainy. -Some of the running jokes (like the fat guy eating doughnuts) were
repeated a tad too much, but not to the point of annoying. -The climax could have been ratcheted up a notch or two. -There was one subplot that seemed a little too ridiculous that didn't add much to the film. I won't give too much of it away only to say that it reminded me of the RM in the RM going door to door trying to sell knife sets.
Though the producers' hope is having this film reach a wider audience, I think that it's popularity will still be limited in some respects because it is Utah specific (Utah landscapes, Utah license plates, a BYU/Notre Dame reference, "Utah" celebrity cameos, Delta Center shots, etc.) I believe the producers' intentions are good in filming the movie entirely in Utah and paying tribute to it's charm/beauty/it being their native state or whatever you want to call it. However, I feel this will still limit its universal appeal.
Overall, I found the film funny, endearing (unexpectedly) and a great film for all ages. It's pretty clean language wise even for the most sensitive viewer. No swear words, just about 20 that are bleeped out, which is actually pretty funny considering who the character is. There's a "dang", "holy crap," "crap," a "that sucks," "freakin'," and one time the really heavy guy says "darn it" which almost sounded like "dammit". Then, another character asks, "Is this hell?" referring to the place.
Peace out...
Did someone say "FUNNY"? ... Yes...I did!
jimklekas21 March 2006
I saw Church Ball over the weekend and I was blown away! I thought it was casted extremely well. Wilson did a great job as the lead! I dare say he might be the most talented of the Wilson boys. I loved having Fred Willard as the Bishop! He really added a lot of humor to that character. It was nice to see Gary Coleman as an adult, Coleman was a clever touch. His parts were great (I do wish he was in it a bit more though) The stuff with the Braken Bros. was hilarious. I loved the little flash back to Buckstead's youth. For me, many films fall apart at the end. Not this one, this has a great ending that I won't mention (but trust me it's good.)
I was glad to finally see a real soundtrack! I thought I would shoot myself in the head if those Halestorm folks had another soundtrack with Rock & Roll hymns. Halestorm Entertainment is the company that produced this flick. Church Ball is BY FAR the best Halestorm movie to date. It had a real plot finally (real enough for a sports comedy anyway) It had a great cast that understood comedy, it was shot well and edited well. Great soundtrack! The whole concept for church ball is hilarious, a bunch of Christian brothers taking a "friendly" game of sport way too far. This definitely raises the bar for these home grown flicks coming out of Utah. Check it out!
I was glad to finally see a real soundtrack! I thought I would shoot myself in the head if those Halestorm folks had another soundtrack with Rock & Roll hymns. Halestorm Entertainment is the company that produced this flick. Church Ball is BY FAR the best Halestorm movie to date. It had a real plot finally (real enough for a sports comedy anyway) It had a great cast that understood comedy, it was shot well and edited well. Great soundtrack! The whole concept for church ball is hilarious, a bunch of Christian brothers taking a "friendly" game of sport way too far. This definitely raises the bar for these home grown flicks coming out of Utah. Check it out!
Good as hoped
playerpage19 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I attended the World Premiere of this film as a guest of the filmmakers. I know them personally but have no loyalty holding or requiring me to love what they do. (I, like many, thought "Home Teachers" was the nadir of the company's efforts.) Church Ball, like "Mobsters & Mormons" before it, (and coming from half of the writing team that worked on Halestorm's original "Singles Ward" who went on to do "Mobsters") is a slam-dunk. A late season streak, as it were, after a number of difficult pictures where Halestorm had been sucking their market dry.
The return to form comes none too soon, (what with the new studio in the works) and the recruiting of top-notch talent like Fred Willard and Clint Howard helps make it look easy.
Not that it's perfect. Despite the "generalization" of the dialogue this is still a Mormon Movie. Who else puts Basketball courts in their chapels and calls their leader Bishop (without him wearing a special collar)? A larger budget may have been too much to hope for, but it would have helped, because as some people have noted many scenes looked grainy--but what they don't know is that it was a budgetary constraint, not a photographic error. Scenes at the games were shot on Hi-Def video instead of film, to ensure all the action could be captured without wasting precious film stock.
I almost fell over laughing just about every time Fred Willard opened his mouth, but there were other characters without quite enough to do or say--most notably Gary Coleman. I personally thought his part was as short as his frame, but I loved the "Pudding in the Clouds" play! Those who saw it will know what I mean, but the best relationship that was the most underutilized was the janitor and the organist--it needed either to be played up more, or actually scaled back just a tad (specifically, to have the dance number removed).
All in all, Halestorm has put out a great little feel good film with heart. (And I can taste the sugar on my tongue as I say that.) But I mean it; especially in the way the team comes together to recruit their new Center.
Now save me the center aisle seat.
The return to form comes none too soon, (what with the new studio in the works) and the recruiting of top-notch talent like Fred Willard and Clint Howard helps make it look easy.
Not that it's perfect. Despite the "generalization" of the dialogue this is still a Mormon Movie. Who else puts Basketball courts in their chapels and calls their leader Bishop (without him wearing a special collar)? A larger budget may have been too much to hope for, but it would have helped, because as some people have noted many scenes looked grainy--but what they don't know is that it was a budgetary constraint, not a photographic error. Scenes at the games were shot on Hi-Def video instead of film, to ensure all the action could be captured without wasting precious film stock.
I almost fell over laughing just about every time Fred Willard opened his mouth, but there were other characters without quite enough to do or say--most notably Gary Coleman. I personally thought his part was as short as his frame, but I loved the "Pudding in the Clouds" play! Those who saw it will know what I mean, but the best relationship that was the most underutilized was the janitor and the organist--it needed either to be played up more, or actually scaled back just a tad (specifically, to have the dance number removed).
All in all, Halestorm has put out a great little feel good film with heart. (And I can taste the sugar on my tongue as I say that.) But I mean it; especially in the way the team comes together to recruit their new Center.
Now save me the center aisle seat.
True to life satire
saboyer195328 December 2006
I had a chance to watch this movie with a mixed group of people in Salt Lake City. By mixed, I mean that some of us were Latter Day Saints and some were Methodists. We have all played softball in both the Utah Protestant leagues as well as the LDS leagues. My brother, a protestant, played on an LDS league basketball team in the late 1960s. It was rough house basketball. My brother got his nose broken in an LDS ward basketball game.
This movie is not "true to life" but it is true satire of the real situation when some people play for a church league.
I am a Methodist who was born, raised and still live in Utah. My LDS friends and I have played softball on the Methodist, mixed men and women co ed team and on the all male LDS team. All of us have played on the same teams in both leagues. We are not the best athletes. We are probably the worst sports. The best sports on these teams are the men and women who have actually played high school and or college sports.
The situations and attitudes in this movie are real. There is a little flare for the dramatic by adding Hot Rod Huntley and Mark Eaton to announce the final game, but the situations and the attitudes displayed in the movie are true to reality in both the Protestant and LDS leagues in Utah.
This movie is not "true to life" but it is true satire of the real situation when some people play for a church league.
I am a Methodist who was born, raised and still live in Utah. My LDS friends and I have played softball on the Methodist, mixed men and women co ed team and on the all male LDS team. All of us have played on the same teams in both leagues. We are not the best athletes. We are probably the worst sports. The best sports on these teams are the men and women who have actually played high school and or college sports.
The situations and attitudes in this movie are real. There is a little flare for the dramatic by adding Hot Rod Huntley and Mark Eaton to announce the final game, but the situations and the attitudes displayed in the movie are true to reality in both the Protestant and LDS leagues in Utah.
Church Ball is a Slam Dunk winner!!!
peaceofmind-120 March 2006
As a 3 decade church baller I have seen almost every character in the movie on the church ball court. This movie is right on the money on so many levels. It helped me to refocus on the positive goals of the program, having been guilty of so many of the negative feelings myself. Feelings that we must win at almost all cost to gain the trophy and bragging rights are all too common, and yet bringing ragtag neighbors together into a team is really the ultimate joy. To achieve this goal comes with it a lot of shin splints and bruises amongst the old time players, but completing a pick and roll with your 44 year old neighbor is a timeless event that permanently bonds the friendship. I encourage everybody to see this movie and laugh until tears flow down your cheeks like mine did. As a light spoof basketball comedy it is a slam dunk winner!!!
Extremely funny - IF you've ever played in a church league
saburton00121 August 2006
It's easy to tell that there is a huge divide between those that liked or hated this show. I have played church ball and was laughing all the way through this movie. Yes, I'm LDS, but have not especially liked some of the other LDS oriented movies that have been produced over the last few years. This one hits the nail right on the proverbial head. Very funny.
I agree with the other comment that Gary Coleman was not utilized nearly as much as he should have been, but for anyone who has played basketball on a church team, this one is a buyer. Two thumbs up all the way.
I agree with the other comment that Gary Coleman was not utilized nearly as much as he should have been, but for anyone who has played basketball on a church team, this one is a buyer. Two thumbs up all the way.
All you haters out there are crazy
reeseman6022 December 2006
I don't think i've ever laughed so hard at a movie except for bad santa this was one of the funniest movies I've seen in years it even rivals dodgeball. And even if you didn't think the quality was very good what do you expect it was an independent film. This movie was great. First off just the combination is great chirch and basketball that's just setting up comedy and then the fact that Fred Willard was in it. Also that for how low budget it was and how few known movie stars were in it it was very good. So if you didn't like it i don't know what to say except for that you do not like to laugh a little bit, and that you have a terrible sense of humor because this was one of the funniest movies ever.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
