Rating: 
Summary: Why was I censored?
Review: ...
What were any of the people involved in this production thinking? Especially David Mamet? I knew he was capable of making (...) just like anyone else, but this! This redefines the term 'laughless.' Neil Jordan has also made some cinematic disgraces but this is a new low for him as well, I even loved the film that everyone else panned, "In Dreams" It was because of that film that I started looking into the rest of Jordan's filmography. When I saw the title "We're No Angels" I recoiled in horror. My God how was Jordan ever invited back behind the camera again? By all rights this should have been a career ruiner for all involved. But fortunatley most went on to redeem themselves with other great work, but this should remain an indeliable black mark on their record. It's absolutely unforgivable, and should have been unfathomable.
Rating: 
Summary: We're No Angels 1955
Review: I am not comparing movies, but like so many the original is
better. It would be nice to have the 1955 version in letter box released in DVD also. It is a wonderful movie and Humphrey
Bogart's last. Thanks
Rating:
Summary: I Never Saw The Original
Review: I don't know anything, but I know what I like. This was Hoyt Axton's last performance on film, and for that alone, it ought to be worth a look. Demi Moore puts in a reasonably amusing performance as a single mom with a mute daughter, who will do anything to make ends meet, and the utter implausibility of the whole film makes me want to watch it over and over again for some reason. I like the grittiness of this period piece, and to tell you the truth, I laughed out loud several times (although probably at all the wrong times and for all the wrong reasons) I enjoyed this film for what it was; a decent piece of work with a lot of good character actors, an otherworldly quality that intrigued me, and some familier faces that I will never see together again, on this side of the veil. Hope this helps.
Rating:
Summary: I Never Saw The Original
Review: I don't know anything, but I know what I like. This was Hoyt Axton's last performance on film, and for that alone, it ought to be worth a look. Demi Moore puts in a reasonably amusing performance as a single mom with a mute daughter, who will do anything to make ends meet, and the utter implausibility of the whole film makes me want to watch it over and over again for some reason. I like the grittiness of this period piece, and to tell you the truth, I laughed out loud several times (although probably at all the wrong times and for all the wrong reasons) I enjoyed this film for what it was; a decent piece of work with a lot of good character actors, an otherworldly quality that intrigued me, and some familier faces that I will never see together again, on this side of the veil. Hope this helps.
Rating:
Summary: tmaya@camera.org.il
Review: i find this movie a s one on niro's best! very funny and i like it when it touching.
Rating:
Summary: Sean Penn's best work
Review: I have always found this movie to be entertaining. This may not be a legendary movie, but it is a fun to watch. It's first problem is that "We're no Angles" is a the name of a great movie from 1955, so it easy to expect more from this movie then it could ever deleaver. De Niro and Penn talents make up for a simple script and turn it into a fun story. Demi Moore is dispointing as she provides little to the part of the prostute, yet Hoyt Axton does very well as the head of the monastery. Both men play excaped cons forced to make they way to Canada, but trapped at the boarder. Un-educated and desperate, De Niro and Penn bluff their way into the local monatery. An annual ceremony provide our two cons a way across the boarder, but the sheriff is closing in. "We're No Angles" is a good example of how great actors can save a movie. De Niro and Penn both do that very well. If you enjoy light comedy, De Niro or Penn; this movie is well worth your time. It is nice to just enjoy a movie for the talents of its stars with out car chases, blood bathes. and all special effects.
Rating: 
Summary: A movie doesn't have to be great to be enjoyable
Review: I have always found this movie to be entertaining. This may not be a legendary movie, but it is a fun to watch. It's first problem is that "We're no Angles" is a the name of a great movie from 1955, so it easy to expect more from this movie then it could ever deleaver. De Niro and Penn talents make up for a simple script and turn it into a fun story. Demi Moore is dispointing as she provides little to the part of the prostute, yet Hoyt Axton does very well as the head of the monastery. Both men play excaped cons forced to make they way to Canada, but trapped at the boarder. Un-educated and desperate, De Niro and Penn bluff their way into the local monatery. An annual ceremony provide our two cons a way across the boarder, but the sheriff is closing in. "We're No Angles" is a good example of how great actors can save a movie. De Niro and Penn both do that very well. If you enjoy light comedy, De Niro or Penn; this movie is well worth your time. It is nice to just enjoy a movie for the talents of its stars with out car chases, blood bathes. and all special effects.
Rating:
Summary: A movie doesn't have to be great to be enjoyable
Review: I have always found this movie to be entertaining. This may not be a legendary movie, but it is a fun to watch. It's first problem is that "We're no Angles" is a the name of a great movie from 1955, so it easy to expect more from this movie then it could ever deleaver. De Niro and Penn talents make up for a simple script and turn it into a fun story. Demi Moore is dispointing as she provides little to the part of the prostute, yet Hoyt Axton does very well as the head of the monastery. Both men play excaped cons forced to make they way to Canada, but trapped at the boarder. Un-educated and desperate, De Niro and Penn bluff their way into the local monatery. An annual ceremony provide our two cons a way across the boarder, but the sheriff is closing in. "We're No Angles" is a good example of how great actors can save a movie. De Niro and Penn both do that very well. If you enjoy light comedy, De Niro or Penn; this movie is well worth your time. It is nice to just enjoy a movie for the talents of its stars with out car chases, blood bathes. and all special effects.
Rating:
Summary: Time misspent
Review: I have been a big fan of the original film starring Bogart, Ustinov, Ray and Rathbone, so I approached this with some trepidation. But, I thought, how could DeNiro and Penn possibly fail when Mamet was involved? Arrgggh! This film ranks only second to "Ishtar". The acting is wooden, the writing is hackneyed and the direction misguided...and it proved that Demi Moore wasn't an actress even 10 years ago let alone now. Not one truly enjoyable moment in the whole production. The cinemtography is the only saving grace; a keen eye for space and composition. This film lacks soul and humor. The two things that made the original so engaging You would be better of spending your $ on the 1955 original. There is nothing better than watching Ray ogle the daughter of the shopkeeper, Bogart selling a much-too-small suit or Ustinov pine for "...the delicious fat woman."
Rating:
Summary: Touching
Review: I loved this movie. Its totally funny. The ending gave me goosebumps and portrays a thought provoking message of the "no matter what everlasting" love of God. Sean Penn especially was hilarious as was John C. Reilly's character and the moments these two share together. Overall a heartwarming and touching movie with funny bits thrown in. Not for someone looking to debate faith with logic in mind.
|
