The reviews I've seen so far are all strongly felt, strongly stated, and interesting to look at in aggregate. Thus the early buzz indicates that the film may very well move to the center of the American cultural and political conversation.  If it does, the way that the religious right is understood and is discussed, changes.

Newsday:

"Lake of Fire" needs every one of its 152 minutes to lay out the full range of opinion, nuance and history surrounding the abortion debate in the three decades since the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision.

Somehow, despite the movie's inclination toward moderation and rationality, it's the rancor from both sides in street demonstrations and in private conversation that tears through the screen. "Intolerance," Terry says, "is a beautiful thing." There's a lot to chew over in "Lake of Fire," now and for years to come. But it's that sentence of Terry's that sends an involuntary chill up one's spine.

Kyle Smith, a New York Post film critic writes:    

Tony Kaye's epic new documentary on abortion "Lake of Fire" looks like a strong candidate for an Oscar nomination.

Entertainment Weekly:

It's impossible to watch Tony Kaye's theatrically supercharged, equal-opportunity button-pusher without experiencing a welter of emotions -- which is just what the filmmaker planned. Here, after all, are some who consider abortion to be murder (sometimes killing to make their point), others who support the right to choose, and a couple of women who exercise those rights on camera.

The title itself, a reference to a biblical notion of hell reserved for sinners, is a demand for attention; ... Shot in dramatic black and white (or is it shades of gray?) that lends its subjects and settings a heightened sense of crisis and journalistic gravitas, the movie wanders from opinion to opinion about the '' rightness'' or '' wrongness'' of terminating a pregnancy, provided by commentators of certified intensity of purpose.

Cinematical thinks the film is unfair:

Lake of Fire is ostensibly a balanced look at the abortion debate in America, and two sides are certainly represented, but when you have Noam Chomsky in one corner and a snake-handling, chromosome-missing, relative-of-Leatherface type in the other corner, is that really a fair framing of the debate? Perhaps you think so, but either way, Kaye's film places such an overwhelming emphasis on abortion-clinic shooters, beady-eyed Biblical literalists and other non-negotiable types that his film ultimately comes across as pro-choice even if it's not intended to. In a film that lasts 150 minutes, there are perhaps five minutes devoted to exploring the position of, say, pro-life liberal Nat Hentoff, who lays out what I would consider a perfectly defensible argument for his beliefs. Couldn't we have had more of that?

Filmcritic.com:

...it's hard to imagine a more honest and clear-headed documentary that's been made or will be made on the subject of abortion. Kaye doesn't attempt to explain these irreconcilable parties but instead attempts to view them as they exist, unafraid of the faults in their arguments and steadfast in their righteousness.