According to Ben Adams

I kept getting the feeling while I was watching According To Ben Adams that if it was made before the days of CGI and franchises that are all the same film that this would have been a film that stood out. When you tell a story with good actors, a good story and very good script and all of that seems old fashioned then you know it must be 2018. But it doesn't look like an old fashioned film though. It's a small film and it's from Australia and it does a good job of not making you feel like you're anywhere in particular. Even time seems to have stood still to follow the sometimes funny and sometimes creepy adventures of a devil character messing with people's minds. All you need to know about the story is that there's a character that calls himself Jesus who has a bit of a racket going at an asylum. He has a following and is sure doing a lot of good until the devil comes along. Now I don't know who it was that said why should the devil get all the good tunes when they were talking about music, well the same usually happens when you stick a devil into a film. Well the devil in According To Ben Adams easily gets all the best lines. Bramwell Noah plays the devil and he's unbelievable. He does evil and dark and handsome in a plot that pits him up against a nemesis that's a Jesus with even more of a heartthrob presence. But the actor playing Jesus (Daniel Schepisi) can act too and he acts his heart out let me tell you. He gets help from a cheeky use of illustrations to literally illustrate the stories he tells and it works wonderfully. The whole package works too with everything coming together and everything thrown in. This film lived up to the hype and I loved every minute of this slice of brave cinema i'm going to call it. Like I said in the title to this review, I don't know what I was expecting. But all of the above is what I got. I think that puts me ahead.

Dunno how this won any kind of awards, was boring and the use of music in it was atrocious......worse thing is I went into this really wanting to like this movie as I thought the premise was interesting but poor execution ruined it.

It is an outstanding movie. It's not what it is expected to be. It can be boring for those who like action, but for people who for people who adore wordplay or wit wars, it could be a real pleasure. This movie is not for feelings or compassion. It is for following the intricate little story.

The pictures are good. The actors are right in their places. Also, I enjoyed sounds coming out of their mouths. The story flows showing humor and leaving nice feeling behind.

I wanted to like this movie because I found the premise unique & interesting. But whatever promise it held was wasted through poor acting and a rambling script. I don't recall seeing such bad acting in a film ever before-- it's truly on the par of a small town community theatre, and often sinks below that meager bar. Some movies shouldn't have been made. This is one of them. Hopefully someone with more experience will pick up the concept & run with it.

This film won't be for everyone, but for those who enjoy layered symbolism and a more theatrical exploration of spiritual and psychological themes, there's a lot to admire here.

Bramwell Noah delivers a nuanced, quietly magnetic performance as The Devil-one of the more interesting takes on the character in recent memory. He brings a simmering tension to the role that doesn't rely on cliché. Opposite him, Daniel Schepisi as Jesus is equally compelling, adding both charisma and unexpected vulnerability to a character often portrayed in one note. Their scenes together are the film's heartbeat, and easily justify the watch.

Yes, the supporting cast is uneven. But in a story where reality and metaphor blur, it's possible that the stylized, sometimes flat delivery is intentional, perhaps even a commentary on emotional disconnect in clinical settings. The sterile, almost dissociative feel of the psychiatric unit adds to the film's surreal, dreamlike tone.

The soundtrack may seem fragmented, but it felt more like a collage-less traditional score, more emotional soundscape. If you view it that way, the dissonance starts to make sense within the film's internal logic.

Some characters (like the Solicitor and PI) feel extraneous at first, but they do add to the broader allegory - each figure potentially representing aspects of doubt, logic, and moral ambiguity. This is a film that seems to ask questions more than it answers them, which is a strength for viewers who like to engage and interpret.

This isn't a flawless film, but it's trying something daring and different. It's the kind of project that lingers with you longer than you'd expect. And for that alone, it earns its stars.