Godless

A film of actors more film of story story. Not because the story remains a sketch, useful for atmosphere, but because, except the first and the last scenes, it is only the frame of acting. Only a frame for a gentle , precise and profound inspired portrait of brotherhood, emotions, love in intense form, loneliness, jealousy, the others, family, relations, affection, a room and a house and people around table at dinner,m talking, and the past, and the fracture almost like a womb. The details of house and definitions of small, ordinary things are the basic virtues of this film beautiful, in some measure, for different motives, against itself. A beautiful film about loneliness, the closed other and the way to define as yourself.

I had read reviews about how the pace was plodding along throughout the movie, but this did not bother me at all. Yes, some of the script sounded a bit wooden, but in general it was very sincere and I thought they handled the subject matter very well. The performances by the actors were very good and I thought the cinematography did the job too, even though there wasn't anything fancy.

The only movie that I have recently enjoyed as much as "Godless" (2015) is "Akron" (2015), which I recently reviewed on IMDb. Being addicted to happy endings, naturally I would like both movies - even though both are very different in look and pacing and place, but absolutely not different in their positive emotional impact.

Godless is movie number 2,734 in my personal movie library; Akron is 2,731. And while I seldom ride consciously on the coattails of another writer or reviewer, I must agree almost completely with my fellow reviewer of "Godless" who stated in part, "Craig Jordan as Nate is the most redeeming feature of the movie," although all of the performances in "Godless" are on the money. Period. Full stop. So I salute absolutely Craig Jordan and Michael E. Pitts, but also notably Garrett Young, from whom I hope to see much, much more.

My sole abjection to the previous review is related to pacing, described elsewhere as "DEADLY SLOW!". In my opinion, given the characters, plot, setting, cinematographic circumstances, and obvious directorial intent, the pacing of "Godless" is indeed slow, but the pacing of "Godless" is pure directorial genius, in my opinion.

With the mandatory caveat that I do not do this very often, I give "Godless" the IMDd rating of 10.

As a postscript, my long-time neighbor in what he calls "our sleepy Beverly Hills" has had an especially rewarding and lucrative career in the movie-making business hereabouts. So when I supplied him with a DVD of "Godless" and asked for his informed opinion about the totality of the production, the next evening he came over and said "first rate" and "top drawer" and agreed with my opinion of Joshua Lim's directorial genius. He also said that "Godless" is a jewel of a movie. And then he asked if I understood how hard it is for an actor to perform the understated character of Trent in the production, and how completely Garrett Young had precisely nailed all of the nuances of Trent. Of course I had to agree that Garrett Young was outstanding in his performance, and that I too hoped to see much more of him

A taboo subject, which could've made for an interesting movie. Unfortunately, the pacing, dialogue, acting and editing are God-awful.

This movie has one speed...plodding. There's no variation in scenes & actions (fast vs. slow), everything just plods along with virtually every line delivered in the same wooden manner.

As bad as the pacing and script are, they still don't mask a lot of wooden, terrible acting. Most of these actors sound like they're reading from the script. Delivery is flat & one-dimensional.

Would love to see what could've happened with better talent, script and direction.

Thoroughly enjoyed this movie, but it was solely because of the performances of several of the actors. The script had some holes in it that could easily have been filled, and the pacing was DEADLY SLOW! About 15 minutes in, I realized it was a directorial choice, NOT a deficiency on the part of the actors. By picking up the pace, the movie could have been so much better. But, I got the feeling that the writer/director slowed the pace to fill the 90 minute run time. A much better choice would have been to flesh out the character of the Uncle, or the location of the gym (where Nate and Trent are personal trainers).

Without giving away too much of the plot, the two main actors - Craig Jordan and Michael E. Pitts - play brothers who are much more than that. Told in partial flashback, their relationship is the central plot point. Both turn in good performances, but Craig Jordan as Nate is the most redeeming feature of the movie. His performance is nuanced and never crosses the line into pathos. The last 10 minutes of the movie are basically his, and while the final twist did not come as a surprise, I did find my heart pounding, waiting until the denouement. That is a tribute to his performance and his skill as an actor. I look forward to seeing much more of him (as an actor - he shows all there is to show in this film, but it is not gratuitous and central to the plot).

Also worthy of mention are Garrett Young as Trent, and Michelle Gallagher and Joseph Aloysius McGinn as the mother and father. Michael E. Pitts as Nate's brother, Steven and Jefferson Rogers as Ray (and two other sides of the triangle) are natural in their roles, and completely believable. But without Jordan's performance, there is no movie.