Tammy Faye Bakker (Jessica Chastain) and Jim Bakker (Andrew Garfield) address an interviewer on television
Film review

The Eyes of Tammy Faye

2021 · Directed by Michael Showalter · 2h 06m

In a sentenceThe make-up gets a closer examination than the conscience

Tammy Faye Bakker (Jessica Chastain) lives her faith in public, with Jim Bakker (Andrew Garfield) beside her and Rachel Grover (Cherry Jones) among the people around them. Her make-up and theatrical manner make her conspicuous in a story that also includes Jerry Falwell (Vincent D’Onofrio) and Pat Robertson (Gabriel Olds). Tammy Faye’s optimism and vulnerability sit beneath an appearance that invites judgement. The Bakkers inhabit an extravagant world, where religious conviction, personal image and excess become difficult to separate, and sincerity does not settle every question about their lives.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Jessica Chastain gives this cautious biography warmth and feeling, despite a screenplay reluctant to question Tammy Faye Bakker. Worth considering for the acting, though anyone hoping to understand her contradictions will have work left to do.

Michael Showalter’s The Eyes of Tammy Faye is a watchable, cautious biography with a performance good enough to make its caution frustrating. It asks us to look past Tammy Faye Bakker’s make-up and theatrical manner, and Jessica Chastain gives us reason to do so. The difficulty is that Abe Sylvia’s screenplay seems so anxious to secure our sympathy that it stops short of asking what else we ought to feel. We get little help in working out how her optimism survives the extravagance around her.

Jessica Chastain makes the painted face expressive instead of treating it as the whole performance. Tammy Faye’s flamboyance remains conspicuous, but the acting also makes room for earnestness, embarrassment and the possibility that she does not understand herself completely. We were moved by the vulnerability visible beneath the make-up and theatrical mannerisms. There is something affecting about the effort she puts into presenting herself, especially when that effort cannot quite conceal her uncertainty.

Andrew Garfield gives Jim Bakker an evasiveness that is entertaining and a little unsettling. There is enough charm in the performance to make that slipperiness plausible, though the writing does too little to develop the people around Tammy Faye. The supporting performances suggest a larger, more difficult story without being allowed to tell much of it. We are left wanting the screenplay to give Jim more sustained attention, particularly when his behaviour might complicate our understanding of her.

Mike Gioulakis’s cinematography and Laura Fox’s production design make the Bakkers’ extravagant surroundings enjoyable to inspect. The colour and excess are persuasive, and the film deserves credit for suggesting why this environment might appeal to someone who lives in it. Mitchell Travers’s costumes belong comfortably to that conspicuous world, helping the outward display feel consistent rather than incidental. Yet the pleasure of looking is allowed to do too much, and the film rarely presses Tammy Faye about her attraction to such excess.

Mary Jo Markey and Andrew Weisblum’s editing keeps the biography moving without making its changes feel sufficiently earned. At 126 minutes, it has time to investigate, but too often settles for moving to the next part of a life. Theodore Shapiro’s score provides emotional encouragement where a little uncertainty would have been useful. The uneven shifts between humour and sympathy are more troublesome: we are sometimes unsure how seriously the film takes the woman it is asking us to care about.

The treatment of Tammy Faye’s support for gay Christians gives the film something substantial to consider beyond her public appearance. Her sympathy matters, and the film is right not to dismiss it because she is easy to caricature. But it is equally reasonable to ask about her responsibility within the Bakkers’ extravagant world, and the screenplay avoids pursuing that question far enough. Its familiar biographical structure compounds the problem, giving us successive aspects of a life without spending enough time examining how they fit together.

There is enough here for viewers interested in Tammy Faye, provided they can accept how much of the work is left to the central performance. The acting sustains attention through passages that offer little fresh understanding, which is an achievement worth acknowledging without pretending it fixes the writing. Go for Jessica Chastain, and expect to leave with some fairly basic questions unanswered.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

54
Positive
6
Mixed
12
Negative
8

The consensus on The Eyes of Tammy Faye is mixed, with praise concentrated on Jessica Chastain rather than the biopic around her. Most critics credit her with finding vulnerability and conviction beneath Tammy Faye’s makeup and flamboyant manner. Several also admire the colourful recreation of the Bakkers’ extravagant surroundings, while Andrew Garfield’s Jim earns some approval. Even many sceptical reviews find Chastain gives the film emotional force.

The recurring complaints concern conventional storytelling, uncertain tone and a reluctance to examine Tammy Faye’s motives or responsibility closely enough. The spread is wide: the Evening Standard finds it highly watchable despite its flaws, while The Hollywood Reporter condemns both the shallow treatment and the cartoonish lead performances. Elsewhere, critics divide over whether the sympathy brings understanding or lets its subject off too lightly. Chastain is the main point of agreement, but her performance does not settle those objections.

Evening Standard
2 February 2022 · ★★★★ · Charlotte O'Sullivan
80

O'Sullivan finds the biopic flawed but ultimately fabulously watchable. She singles out Jessica Chastain's compelling, wide-ranging performance as Tammy Faye for praise.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
13 September 2021 · B · Katie Rife
77

Rife finds the film overly sympathetic and dramatically thin, though its gaudy aesthetic makes it satisfying to look at. She praises Jessica Chastain’s heartfelt performance, especially in a knockout musical number.

Read the full review →
Variety
13 September 2021 · Owen Gleiberman
70*

Gleiberman calls the film a very good, engaging TV-movie, though its structure feels conventional and its final act could be better shaped. He praises Chastain’s layered portrayal of Tammy Faye and Garfield’s compelling take on Jim.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
13 September 2021 · festival review · Benjamin Lee
65*

Lee finds the biopic formulaic and insufficiently probing, but compelling overall because Jessica Chastain’s performance rises above its limitations. He especially praises her ability to balance Tammy Faye’s flamboyant manner with her earnestness and vulnerability.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
13 September 2021 · festival review · Tim Grierson
64*

The accessible page identifies this as a Toronto review, but the review text is behind a registration wall. Its verdict and any specifically praised or criticized element cannot be determined from the available text.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
16 September 2021
64*

The page could not be retrieved, so the critic’s verdict is unavailable. The supplied text does not reveal what the critic praised or criticized.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is The Eyes of Tammy Faye worth watching?
The Eyes of Tammy Faye is worth considering for Jessica Chastain’s warm, affecting performance, though we score this cautious biography 60 out of 100. It suits viewers interested in Tammy Faye Bakker who can accept a screenplay that asks for sympathy without examining her responsibility or contradictions closely enough.
How long is The Eyes of Tammy Faye, and what is it rated?
The Eyes of Tammy Faye runs 2h 06m. It is a drama and history film.
Where can I watch The Eyes of Tammy Faye in Indonesia?
The Eyes of Tammy Faye is not on any streaming or rental service in Indonesia at the moment. It is available in 47 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How violent or frightening is The Eyes of Tammy Faye, and is it suitable for children?
The Eyes of Tammy Faye has a UK 12A certificate, meaning children under 12 need an accompanying adult at the cinema; that classification does not make it a recommendation for younger children. We cannot give a more specific warning about violence or scares, but its focus on public faith, image and responsibility makes it a more natural choice for teenagers and adults.
How does The Eyes of Tammy Faye compare to Elmer Gantry?
The Eyes of Tammy Faye offers a gentler biography, while Elmer Gantry is our stronger recommendation for a sharper examination of religious showmanship and personal appetite. We find Chastain’s warmth the chief reason to choose the former; the latter gives its subject a less forgiving look, though its length and repetition are drawbacks.
What should I watch after The Eyes of Tammy Faye?
After The Eyes of Tammy Faye, try Elmer Gantry (1960, Fi1m 78): Religious showmanship and personal appetite receive a sharper, less forgiving examination. Then Philomena (2013, Fi1m 82): A warmer account of faith that still asks difficult questions about institutions; and The Music Room (1958, Fi1m 88): For a quieter, more exacting study of extravagance and stubborn self-belief.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. Elmer Gantry (1960, Fi1m 78)Religious showmanship and personal appetite receive a sharper, less forgiving examination.

  2. The Queen of Versailles (2012) · not reviewed yetAnother extravagant household, with money and self-deception given considerably more room.

  3. The Apostle (1997) · not reviewed yetFor a religious character study that allows devotion and wrongdoing to coexist.

  4. Philomena (2013, Fi1m 82)A warmer account of faith that still asks difficult questions about institutions.

  5. The Music Room (1958, Fi1m 88)For a quieter, more exacting study of extravagance and stubborn self-belief.