Daniel and the Fiery Furnace (Christian Movie Review)
Bogged down in stiff acting, an unfocused narrative, and uneven production value, Daniel and the Fiery Furnace is a well-intentioned but lackluster adaptation that attempts to ramp up the spectacle but fails to capture the heart of the biblical story.
About the Film
Hollywood is experiencing a boom of faith-based films and biblical epics. The recent run of success makes it easy to forget the historical difficulty in successfully making bible adaptations that work both as a faithful adaptation and a compelling work of cinema. Starting as a grassroots, crowd-funded project, Daniel and the Fiery Furnace is an easy film to root for. The good intentions are easy to see. Unfortunately, so too are the flaws and shortcomings. Bogged down by stiff acting, an unfocused narrative, and uneven production value, Daniel and the Fiery Furnace is a well-intentioned but lackluster adaptation that attempts to ramp up the spectacle but fails to capture the heart of the biblical story.
The film’s title is interesting. The famous story of the fiery furnace happens within Daniel (the book) but is an event that Daniel (the character) is seemingly absent for (he’s more of a “lion’s den” kind of guy). The filmmakers massage the narrative to include Daniel, but the decision to center on that event is notable. The film is more about the historical events recounted in Daniel than a straight adaptation of the biblical book itself, with other biblical books and some extrabiblical sources also utilized.
Creative liberties and additions are unavoidable. The film primarily adapts the first three chapters of Daniel, leaving many gaps to pad out a 1h50m run time. For example, the first 30 minutes are spent expanding the narrative of Daniel 1:1-2 and the Babylonian capture. The film aspires to be large-scale biblical epic, and it flashes some early potential, but the result is an unfocused story without a clear narrative thread for audiences to latch onto.
Rather than narrow in as an intimate character study on Daniel, the film casts a wider net. It includes characters like the Prophet Jeremiah, and an imagined meeting with Daniel not found in scripture. Similarly, a woman named Susanna is inserted as a likely nod to the story of ‘Daniel and Susanna’ (a story frequently depicted in art, but an apocryphal narrative not included in Protestant bibles). Beyond valid questions about the creative liberties, these new additions simply fall flat. Neither make an impact in the story, and they steal narrative attention away from the more central characters and plot. Susanna’s function seems only to add a female presence into the otherwise all-male story, or perhaps to check the box for a possible Hollywood romance.
Daniel and the Firey Furnace expands the biblical story’s scope and spectacle but fails to develop the characters in ways that give emotion or meaning to the drama. Mena Massoud is a charismatic actor (I liked him in Aladdin), but his performance is surprisingly monotone and stiff. Daniel is a man of steadfast faith but seemingly possesses no other qualities beyond his faith, lacking personality or any signs of internal struggle or passion. Instead, he moves from one scene to the next, providing stale exposition or attempts at inspirational spiritual messages. Even his introduction to the king is a bizarre and inexplicable moment where he slays a lion in an epic slow-motion, Hollywood-ized, action-hero shot. The moment is not from scripture and arguably undercuts the core of his character and the biblical reasons that he finds esteem in the king’s eyes.
The same is true of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who lack characterization to the point that even by the time they enter the fiery furnace, I could not distinguish who was who. The lone exception is king Nebuchadnezzar (played by The Chosen’s Elijah Alexander), who is given intriguing nuance, similar to how House of David provided a more sympathetic take on King Saul.
Daniel and the Fiery Furnace falls into a similar trap as many faith-based films of the past, in using its biblical source material as a sort of cheat-code where emotional moments are assumed rather than earned. There are multiple scenes of fervent prayer, with swelling music, and agreeable theological messages, but the film doesn’t establish the stakes or the characters enough for the moments to work on screen. Characters like Jeremiah are expected to carry gravatas, but only because of audience familiarity and reverence toward the bible, not anything established or earned within the movie itself.
To its credit, at times, the film is visually impressive. Much was shot on location in India, which gives it an enjoyably tactile feel. The scale and scope achieved on so meager a budget is commendable. But when its limitations are exposed, they are glaring. The filmmakers take a clear theological position of having Jesus himself as the fourth man in the furnace. That’s fine, but Jesus and the climactic scene are seemingly generated with AI (or else very subpar special effects) which strips all potency from the moment. Then the ‘uncanny valley’ Christ beams back up to heaven in a pillar of fire, an attempt (like the earlier Daniel ‘lion-slayer’ scene) to manufacture epic spectacle into the story, which leaves the climax feeling hokey rather than powerful.
In the end, Daniel and the Fiery Furnace is a film that wavers between lacking a clear identity and lacking the resources to achieve an identity. My least favorite reviews to write are negative ones about faith-based films. I root for these films. But if faith-based entertainment is ever to be a legitimate player in Hollywood, then it must be held to the same critical standard (and arguably an even higher standard, due to the source material). I hope some audiences are moved by the story. The filmmakers seem to have their hearts in the right place, and the film’s production journey and existence at all is admirable. I just wish the film itself wasn’t such a mess. The effort is there, but this film might have needed a bit more time and refining in the furnace.
For Consideration
On the Surface—(Profanity, Sexual content, violence, etc.).
Language: None.
Violence: The film is rated PG-13 due to some brief moments of violence, mostly occurring in the opening scenes as an invading army conquers a city. Men are stabbed and slashed with swords and spears, with a modest amount of blood. A man screams as he has hot wax poured on his face.
Sexuality: Men are brought to a room with many prostitutes—who dance seductively with their midriffs exposed—and encouraged to satisfy their sexual desires (before they are forced to become eunuchs), but they refuse.
Engage The Film
Faith in the Fire
The film attempts to stay true to the themes present in the biblical source material. It is a story about standing courageously and with an unshakable faith in the middle of a pagan and hostile world. The film’s message is most clearly communicated by Daniel, who challenges his three friends: “God does not put you through the fire to test you. He puts you through to refine you, purer than gold. He makes you test your faith, to strengthen your own heart.” It’s a somewhat self-contradicting quote, but the meaning is clear and agreeable—it is through the trials of life that true faith is both forged and displayed.
Daniel and his three friends are inspiring examples of holding true to their faith and religious convictions even when challenged—to the point of death—by their Babylonian captors. The story remains as relevant as ever and offers a timely reminder to Christians that faithfulness is not dependent on preferable cultural circumstances or political situations. God is always faithful, and we can march confidently into the fire with assurance that he remains in control, regardless of the immediate outcome.
