I hate boring movies but this one is definitely not.

I saw this movie for the first time the other day. It wasn't that bad. Granted, it's definitely not Heath's best movie, but I've seen much worse (i.e. "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigalow" is one of the WORST movies ever made, in my opinion. I actually contemplated leaving the theater early). "The Order" was more than tolerable. There's no bad acting in it, but some of the special effects seem a little silly. I give it 6/10 stars.
"If you can't fix it, you gotta stand it."
Ennis Del Mar

^^^I saw that ep of The Night Gallery about six months ago. My brother has some Night Gallery dvds. While watching The Order, I kept thinking about it. You're right. It is a better presentation of the sin-eater theme.
GG's-Sophia: ". . .my dear husband Sal, may he rest in peace until
I
get there. . ."

If you want to see a good presentation of 'sin-eating', watch this.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/58780/night-gallery-you-cant-get-help-like-that-anymoresins-of-the-fathers
I 'get' this movie without having to strain my brain. If it makes YOU think, that's good. It's ok, nothing special.

i wouldent be able to decide a winner for the worst movie of 2003 but in nominations i would go with
marci x
gigli
from justin to kelly
gods and generals
grind

It still wouldn't matter if some of my questions werent answered. I did watch it again and it still didnt make much sense.
Also it didnt erase the jumbled nature of the plot and the horribly underdevloped characters. What a weird and dopey romance. Also Heath ledger was seriously miscast. These character need to get a clue. Even in incoherence I was many steps ahead of the characters themselves. Finally the incredibly dumb special effects wont get fixed on another viewing.
I call all of these good reasons for calling it one of thr wrost of the year or that Ive seen.

maybe you should rewatch the movie again cause so many of your questions above DO have answers!!.
The movie is good on the basic idea, story plot, screenplay, and cinematography. indeed it is not a perfect movie, but which one is? just because it has some weak points or flaws, doesnt mean it is not worth watching.

I forgot who posted this but lets get something straight. Just because a movie doesnt have a lot of explosions doesnt make it thought-provoking. This movie wanted to be thought-provoking but fell on its faith with its horrid script.
There are so many things wrong with this film:

1. Heath Ledger's one-note performance.
2. The odd, uninvolving, and uunderdeveloped relationship with Sassomon.
3. Jumbled plot
4. Incredibly silly special effects ( peoples souls are extoplasmic calamari)
5. So many things that made you laugh
   -towards the end Ledger and his friend are being chased so Ledger leaves ona step hurt and runs away. Wow your a good friend Ledger.

• How did Sassomon get on an airplane? Didnt she escape from a loony bin? Besides why would he want this extremely annoying woman with her.
• So this weird cult is hanging people and this one guy gives Ledger crucial information as hes been hung!!!!! What the beep??!! There was never a clear connection between t he Sin Eater and the weird cult.
  Horrid film that never should have been made.

This message has been deleted.

Actually I AM a Christian and I seem to be one of the few defenders of the movie!

Actually, I'm not a Christian, so in your face!

I just watched and I must say I liked.
I'm sure that only Christians don't like it. Haha, in your face.

This message has been deleted.

this movie was a jumbled mess. i don't think it was the worst movie of the year, i think that gigli or legally blonde 2 should get that award. i didn't see the former, but i walked out of the latter.

I just watched this movie tonight, and I have to say, it's really bad. I wanted it to be good, I truly did. I enjoy watching movies about religion and religious conspiracies. But this onewhewit was just way below other favorites like Stigmata and The Exorcist.
To me, it isn't a good sign when the jokes from my best friend and I start flying a mere few minutes into a movie. The best laugh being, of course, when Thomas broke the lock with his crucifix. That was just silly to me.
In the end, too much was left unexplained and the audience was forced to accept too many things without question. That is shoddy filmmaking. End of story.

Just what exaclty were you hoping to find when seeing this movie? In a world where every movie is over the top with explosives,in your faceaction and glamour shots of greased down celebrity, this movie was a sigh of relief for me. It had a nice late 70's quality, "Just tell the story in a beautiful setting and decent acting. (Ledger) It sounds like you had no reason to watch this picture.
"We are all plastic soldiers in a miniture dirt war"

This message has been deleted.

LOL I also really liked the post that used the word "understanded".

Wow that was just such an intellectual statment I had to read it several times to comprehend "intellect of dumb people" just smashing.

Just saw thisit was pretty bad. Lots of empty theological flailing, flat characters and unconvincing portent. Not surprised it sank.
worst of 2003 (sucky to suckiest)
5. The Order
4. From Justin to Kelly
3. Gigli
2. Charlie's Angels - Full Throttle

1. House of 1000 Corpses
   "The Real Cancun" somehow deserves its own category

This message has been deleted.

In reply to mbusson: Finally, someone with some sense. I have never posted on this site, but I read posts, and they are often so juvenile.
I watched The Order a couple of weeks ago, and I wasn't impressed. I know nothing of its historical value, but the ideas presented in the story were interesting - its a pity they didnt make something better out of it. I found it slow and hard to follow (although the "hard to follow" bit could be chalked up to my wandering attention :S). And Heath Ledger's acting was unfortunate. (forgive me, people who think being hot = being a good actor).
One thing that I never really understood - what is it about the Carolingians (or however its spelled) that makes them so different and scarce? This may be my ignorance of things Catholic speaking.
Thanks

I agree with you that it is pretentious to say that a person did not understand a film simply because they did not like it. But you realize that many of the complaints posted about this film are based upon certain elements of the plot that have to be interpereted in order to be understood or enjoyed. Therefore it is certain that some of the people who do not like the film did understand it and still did not like it, such as a scholar like yourself, but many films with layered plots are misanalyzed or simply not analyzed at all and people are left either confused or just bored.
PS. I definetly agree with you on the grey area point.

This message has been deleted.