Benutzerrezensionen

With practically no resemblance to the 1955 Humphrey Bogart movie (nor to the play it was adapted from), film-buffs might find themselves perplexed as how to take this remake: two convicts escape prison and find themselves in a border town disguised as priests. What could be formulaic actually has some grit and ambiance to go along with its slapstick. Demi Moore, as a single mother of ill repute, gives one of her best performances and works very well with Robert De Niro, who takes a while to warm up (he's not a mugger, but is encouraged in that direction by director Neil Jordan). Sean Penn, on the other hand, never quite finds his way here, using a thick accent which is mildly irritating. Much better is John C. Reilly in a fantastic supporting bit as a novice priest who worships Penn, and there's a cute little girl in the movie who never acts like a movie kid (she's a natural). Lots of surprises in this critically-lambasted comedy, not the least of which is an extremely moving finale involving a waterfall and a holy statue. **1/2 from ****

We're No Angels,First-Viewing, owned VHS,(Neil Jordan)- Robert DeNiro, Sean Penn, Demi Moore, John C. Reily, Bruno Kirby, James Russo

An interesting comedy starring two very talented actors. This is the first comedy role I've seen DeNiro in prior to his 90s comedies (analyze this, meet the parents, etc…). DeNiro and Penn play escaped convicts who disguise themselves in a small town. Although DeNiro is great, and in certain scenes definitely shows his superiority as an actor, Penn overall gives the better performance. With a more complex character, yet simple (he is very simple-minded, but a complex character), his performance is very good. Although Demi Moore really didn't have a big role, she was convincing as a local woman in the small town. John C. Reily, once again gives a good performance, in a similar role to that of his in 'Casualties of War'. Overall a good film for laughs and well done by the director and screenwriter. Thought the acting was the highlight, and had some very funny scenes. 8/10

"We're No Angels" is a movie made for those faces, and one of the pleasures of watching the film is to see them looking sidelong at each other as they try to figure a way out of the complicated mess they're in. The movie has a lot of other good stuff to look at (including dramatic period locations in a small Canadian town) and to listen to (dialogue by David Mamet), but I can think of no other recent movie in which so much of the pleasure lies in watching the expressions on the faces of the actors - especially when they're reacting, not talking. Mamet and Neil Jordan, who directed the movie, wisely remember the most important thing about any mistaken- identity comedy: The fact that someone's identity is mistaken is not always funny even the first time and rarely thereafter. Movies that depend on mistaken identities for their laughs are among the slowest, dreariest slogs through cinema.

Too bad that the film came out to be both simplistic and ordinary despite of the talent involved especially when it features De Niro and Penn,two of the best actors in Hollywood; and Jordan,one of the finest director of the industry.There were a lot of boring moments.Also,it just turned out to be somewhat corny and provides minimal laughter in a lot of scenes.Overall,it was definitely a misfire from the cast and the director involved as it does not live up to its potential.

Overall rating: 6 out of 10.

Everyone knows what a black comedy is. But is there is such a thing as a white comedy? I think so, and I think this is one of them. In the same way that '21 Grams' works a fairly serious portrayal of a crisis of faith into a tense melodramatic thriller, 'We're No Angels' actually masks some serious thoughtfulness about the importance of faith and hope into a decently funny comedy of mistaken identity. It also illustrates concretely the truth of C.S. Lewis's famous dictum (from the Screwtape Letters)that all men become what they are pretending to be.

The movie is very plotty and all the loose points neatly wrapped up. What a lot of the critics have missed is that all of the jokes are thematic, and tied to the central topics of the movie.

I am not at all conventionally religious, but I do appreciate faith, and I liked this movie quite a bit.

A decent and peculiar remake of the classic film (1954) directed by Michael Curtiz. In We're No Angels (1989) three escapees (Robert De Niro, Sean Penn, James Russo) get away from a heavily armed prison. On the run, baying hounds on their trail and two of them, Ned and Jim (Niro, Penn), take shelter at a monastery of friars and are mistaken for monks. The escaped convicts disguised as priests and get in the appropriate series of jams. Menwhile, they are relentlessly pursued by a vicious and brutal warden boss (Ray McAnally). Planning to rob, they end up help them with various religious, financial and familiar problems. Their only chance of getting the border into Canada lies with the annual procession of monks bearing their miracle-working shrine across the bridge. It'll take a miracle to get away with this one !. The con is on !. The Cons Are Loose and The Comedy Is In!.It Will Be A Sin To Miss It!

Somewhat stagey, but fun dialogue and excellent cast make for agreeable holiday fare. The film's fast-paced opening consists of a chain of rapid events, a souped up pastiche of old Warner Bros big-house movies, it is such a nightmare and overwhelming setting that you have to laugh. However, being static at times, and laden with with leaden talk with not too many things of interest the eye as recompense. Robert De Niro and Sean Penn play off each other well, turning in nice comic acting as two prisoners demonstrating that beneath their rascally exteriors lie hearts of 40 carats. De Niro 's gift for pantomime is really excessive, he looks silly and ill-at-ease, glimpsed in his plumber for 'Brazil', resulting in a non-stop bombardment for mugging on the silent screen scale; while Sean Penn is okay and sympathetic enough. Being well accompanied by a lustrous cast, such as: Demi Moore as the sluttish mother of a deaf-and-dumb child, late Ray McAnally as the slavering, sadistic warden, James Russo as a nasty series killer about to be executed, Hoyt Axton, Bruno Kirby, Wallace Shawn, John C. Reilly, Jay Brazeau, Elizabeth Lawrence, among others. Distantly related to the 1955 movie of the same name and the David Mamet play. The 1955 original by Michael Curtiz boasts a splendid cast: Humphrey Bogart (one of Bogart's few comedies), Aldo Ray, Peter Ustinov, Basil Rathbone, it comes from a French stage play titled 'La cuisine des angels' by Albert Husson.

The motion picture was professionally made by Neal Jordan; he gives an adequate direction, but it's doubtful whether anyone could have worked wonders with such material. This is Neal Jordan's first American film and he also made another comedy: High Spirits. Jordan is the award-winning author of a number of acclaimed films, novels and collections of stories. Nearly all his stories are set in Ireland and most deal with the subjects of children, family relationships and childhood memories. He has directed 4 actors in Oscar nominated performances: Bob Hoskins, Stephen Rea, Jaye Davidson, and Julianne Moore. This great filmmaker has made notorious movies, such as : Mona Lisa , High Spirits , We're no Angels , The Crying Game , The Miracle , Interview with the Vampire, in Dreams, Michael Collins, The Butcher Boy , The Good Thief , The Brave One , Byzantium , among others . Rating : 6/10. Acceptable and passable film. Worthwhile watching for Robert De Niro, Sean Penn and Demi Moore fans. Essential and indispensable seeing for American comedy enthusiasts.

Ned (Robert De Niro) and Jim (Sean Penn) break out of prison rather haphazardly. They were forced to go along with another inmate, Bobby (James Russo), as he shot his way out of Blackridge Prison. Once out they were determined not to go back. If only they could cross the border into Canada they'd be home free. In the meantime they had to lay low and pretend to be priests to avoid detection.

"We're No Angels" is a fair-to-middling movie. There were a couple of laughs and a tad bit of suspense as Ned and Jim tried to elude their captors. De Niro was funnier than I expected while Penn rehashed the annoying Brooklyn accent he donned in "Casualties of War."

This movie was painful to watch. I'm not sure if it is just because it hasn't aged well but seriously I have never been so disappointed in a movie choice from Robert De Niro or Sean Penn until this moment. And also it was supposed to be a comedy. I thought I was in for an old-time laugh out loud comedy but not so; I didn't laugh once through the entire thing.

It looks like from the other comments that the only people who enjoyed this movie have some sort of religious affiliation or belief. To me that is not good enough. A movie with religious ties does not automatically make it a good movie, a solid script, plot, cast and crew make it a good movie.

Final recommendation: You have been warned, this movie is terrible and not worth your time.

Although this is a below average DeNiro performance I enjoyed the movie. DeNiro is a jewel even if he stucks a little in some wooden stereotype comedy gestures. Still it's a very good 6/10 - I smiled most of the time.

Well, ask me why this movie has such a poor rating. Or maybe don't ask me, because I have no answer. The movie is just great. The acting is perfect for this script, DeNiro and Penn are so funny and also serious when is needed. Why such a poor rating ? Maybe because people are not so funny as they were once. For the people of our days a comedy is something like Scary Movie or a movie that makes you laugh every minute because of something stupid. But "We're No Angels" is funny, is romantic, is serious, is educative, is simply GREAT MOVIE. You have to watch it with an innocent eye, you must enjoy the movie. Don't look at it with a critical eye. That's not good for the entertainment. Just watch it to relax and to feel good. It deserves it. And you also deserve it.

Once we are past the opening scenes set in what seems to be a coal mine doubling as a prison, this film can be enjoyed as a fable. Many films should be prefaced with the phrase 'once upon a time' and this one is no exception. Producer DeNiro could not get Stan and Ollie so he put himself in the latter role, and chose Penn for the part of Laurel. We keep expecting to see Penn break out into Laurelish tears at any moment, and it is only the sound of the water that prevents us from hearing DeNiro shouting "whooaaaaaaa" as he slides down the falls. And there are so many times I expected Ollie to swat Stanley, but it never happens.

Left to their mugging, my rating might be higher, but somehow inserting Demi into the mix spoils something. If the time were 1930, the little girl who plays a key role would have had a much older looking mother, or at least one who looked more bedraggled by her life in that wilderness.

Then the storyline takes a disastrous violent turn just after the statute seems to have produced another miracle. Such a scene worked in Some Like It Hot when the killer jumped out of the cake. Here it ruins the mood that is being set. Surely there was another way to get the girl into the water.

I have no problem, however, watching it again.

I was aghast at and distracted by the over the top mannerisms of both DeNiro and Penn in the staring roles. I know that this was supposed to be a comedy/drama, but all that head bobbing was too much. Not that all of the other roles were something to write home about. The priests and monks were caricatures as were the warden and his bunch of deputies. Demi Moore added little but a gratuitous nude scene and a lot of senseless yelling. The ending was a predictable mix of worldly and spiritual resolution, but most interesting to me would be what happens after the end of the movie when all the secrets are uncovered between Demi and DeNiro. Why did I watch it if it bothered me that much? Well, my wife liked it because of the religious underpinnings and sentimentality. I guess between the two of us it averaged a 5 just like the overall rating.

I always look for the beginning choices of an actor,Demi Moore stays constant in her choice of roles(outsider),Sean Penn with his usual dichotomy of hard guy/softie and De Niro himself but with a twist of humour.I enjoyed the epoch and the guilt and penitance idea of choices we make in life.I just liked the film and I could see a few times Demi Moore trying to keep a straight face which made me laugh.

It's 1935. Ned (Robert De Niro) and Jim (Sean Penn) are friendly cellmates in Black Ridge State Penitentiary near the Canadian border. Jim is beaten by the sadistic warden for talking. Ruthless killer Bobby escapes from his execution and forces them to help him escape the prison. On the run, the guys are mistaken for priests by Mrs. Blair. They are desperate to cross the border but are forced to stay at the monastery with the search party nearby led by a deputy (Bruno Kirby). They pretend to be Father Brown and Father Riley. Single mom Molly (Demi Moore) is willing to sleep with men for $5.

This seems to be a screwball comedy struggling with some serious material and a darker tone. Neil Jordan is a good director and he should be able to make this work. De Niro is trying to be bumbling. The jokes rarely succeed. There are aspects which suppress the light humor. The setting has more in common with Popeye. People die right from the beginning. Demi Moore is too young for De Niro. As a comedy, it doesn't have enough laughs. It would help if their crimes are proclaim to be something non-violent. They need to be somebody whom we want to escape. It's interesting.

"We're No Angels" is a charming comedy film directed by Neil Jordan and released in 1989. Starring Robert De Niro, Sean Penn, and Demi Moore, the film follows two escaped convicts who disguise themselves as priests while on the run from the authorities.

Set in the 1930s, the story begins with Ned and Jim, two convicts who escape from prison and end up hiding out in a small town near the Canadian border. There, they come across a struggling store run by a family of French immigrants. To avoid capture, Ned and Jim pretend to be priests, taking advantage of the trust and hospitality of the townspeople.

As they get to know the family, Ned and Jim find themselves drawn into their lives and ultimately become involved in helping them overcome their financial troubles. Along the way, they discover their own capacity for kindness and redemption.

The film is filled with witty dialogue, clever humor, and heartwarming moments. Robert De Niro and Sean Penn deliver standout performances, portraying the unlikely duo with humor and depth. Demi Moore shines as the love interest who becomes entangled in their scheme.

"We're No Angels" is not just a comedy; it also explores themes of friendship, redemption, and the importance of second chances. Despite their criminal pasts, Ned and Jim ultimately prove themselves to be good-hearted individuals who are capable of doing the right thing.

With its picturesque setting, memorable characters, and touching story, "We're No Angels" is a feel-good film that leaves a lasting impression on its audience. It's a delightful blend of humor and heart that continues to entertain audiences decades after its release.

This movie is downright awful! It has what could be argued as a great cast, but everything about this film is painfully horrible. I can't believe DeNiro and Penn made this movie. Either the director is at fault for creating this mess, or the actors blew it. You'd think actors of their caliber might have managed to save this film, but DeNiro, especially, sunk it. DeNiro plays himself, badly. In fact, the more I see of DeNiro lately, the more I wonder about his true acting ability. Was Raging Bull a fluke? He's really picked some dogs the past 10-15 years, which is a shame. Sean Penn is pretty much in the same boat. Don't even get me started on Demi Moore. I've seen better acting in 4th- grade school plays. Take my advice and ave a couple hours of your life and pass on this movie.

We're no angels has a heavyweight cast lead by Irish director, Neil Jordan and his ability to bring humour to dark subjects is ideal for this movie. With the reigning heavyweight champion of movies at this point in time being Robert De Niro, a lot of people felt Sean Penn would be the future to wear crown. Here they are gifted the opportunity to square off and what a great opportunity. It must've been for a young penn to learn from De Niro add to that another heavyweight in the form of the brilliant Demi Moore and you have four good reasons to watch the film without knowing anything About it. While it is for from perfect is a film I got back to about once every 10 years and an easy watch with some solid performances.

People talk about seeing a film and never being able to get that time back. This is one of those movies. If I didn't know better I would say that DeNiro and Penn were deliberately doing bad acting. DeNiro's face is frozen in a mock grimace the whole film is seems like. Demi Moore's character has no decernable character. It is half developed at best. If I had to guess I would say that the actors lost a bet and had to appear in this film. Then I learn that DeNiro produced it. I don't know how these can be the two Oscar winners I know and love (DeNiro for Godfather 2 and Penn for Mystic River) So what kind of film is this really? Is it a comedy? No...it's not funny. Is it a drama...No! It has no suspense. Is it a waste of time for who ever sees it....YES!!!!

I just saw this film again after not seeing it for over a decade. For all you who are wondering... is it good? is it bad? I have this to say. Excellent cast. Excellent castING. One of Demi Moore's best (yet small) roles (I'm not a big fan of hers.) Great script (Mamet). Great score. High quality filmmaking. They don't make them like this anymore, really. If you don't agree that its a very clever, dry-witted film, then, oh well. That's what makes the world go round. 9/10.

More of a question really. Why did De Niro's head keep constantly bobbing around like that while he pulled the old sniffing Mafia Face? did that appeal to anyone out there? it irritated me immensely. Have to score the film low as I couldn't see any finer points as his head kept bobbing around and distracting all else. Penn's Performance seemed sound from what i could see through my red mist and basically saved the film, he also resisted from picking up this head bobbing method under immense pressure to do so, I wasn't so lucky for three days i couldn't keep it still. I wonder did the Director suffer from Star Fright as any other Director would have said something on the first take, like 'Mr De Niro why are you bobbing your head like that? are you OK?'

We're No Angels (1989)

*** (out of 4)

Remake of the 1955 film has Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn playing escaped convicts who hide out as priests in a small town where they try to sneak across the border into Canada. Most of the reviews you read for this film will probably be negative but I've always enjoyed what the movie has to offer even though there's no way of denying that it could have and should have been a lot better than it turned out. I think the biggest problem with the film is the direction of Jordan who just wasn't right for the material. This is suppose to be a comedy yet you wouldn't know it because Jordan handles the material so dark that it's rather hard to get many laughs. We've get some rather strong tones on religion and even some strong violence, which just doesn't sit too well in a comedy. Even the entire atmosphere of the film is rather dark, which is a staple of Jordan but again, that wasn't really needed in this film. What does work are the performances by DeNiro and Penn who are excellent together. Playing dumb is never an easy thing but both men pull this off remarkably well, which is very important since most of the laughs come from them not understanding anything to do with religion yet they're suppose to be priests. The two men's facial expressions is what works the best because the look on their faces when they're put on the spot are just flawless as is their constant begging and pleading for various things throughout the movie. Demi Moore has a supporting role, which brings in more darkness that really isn't needed but Bruno Kirby and John C. Reilly turn in nice supporting performances with Reilly really standing out as another priest obsessed with Penn. The laughs throughout the film are certainly minor but to me the film still works well thanks to the terrific performances. You really don't expect to see DeNiro and Penn in a movie like this but they both pull it off very well and make it worth viewing.