Divino Processo

There are no words to describe the love I have for this little film! I have seen it multiple times at different festivals and have recommended the film to friends and family where ever I go. The writing was and is very clever, poignant and moving to someone like me who has had multiple struggles and disputes with questioning their faith and the existence of a higher power.The acting by both Ever Caradine and Henry Ian Cusick were nothing short of phenomenal and utterly moving in every sense of the word. I could really feel and understand what they were going through. They were very genuine in their performances; they spoke to my heart and hit right at home! The actors were both in-sync and the courtroom scenes just blew me away.They made me laugh, they made me smile and at times made me cry. The film made me understand what was important in life and that regardless and I will always treasure it for that. TERRIFIC FILM!!!

One of the best films I've seen in a long time. Frank v God is both an Indy film and a Popular one rolled into one. It's funny, heartfelt but not over the top, and always with a dose of poetic irony that gives the plot a nice thick depth. Frank as a character is played wonderfully, and the supporting cast is also strong. The inter-religious context is one of the most hilariously played parts, yet the film is so philosophical, I almost blush that people could see the film and not leave changed. The cinematography is nicely done, with exciting action shots and scenes, and provide entertainment for many of the various demographics (men who like action, women who like drama and romance, film buffs who enjoy interesting plot twists and stunning dialog, etc.). I hope to get a copy of the film after it is released.

Remakes should come with a prominent warning. So I hope you're reading this BEFORE watching Frank vs God.

The glowing reviews for Frank vs God are clearly from viewers who are unaware that it's a remake of the miraculous 2001 Australian film "The Man Who Sued God." The main thing in favor of this new version is that it follows the original script more or less faithfully. (Up until the ending, of which more in a moment.) Beyond that, there's no comparison.

It might be argued that some stories are worthy of multiple treatments, and that various filmmakers can each bring something new that's worthwhile. True: sometimes the third version of a particular story turns out to be the best. That's not the case here. Like far too many remakes, Frank vs God cannot rival the freshness and style of the work it's copying. This is especially obvious in the substitution, in the leading role, of the earnest Henry Ian Cusick for the brilliantly acerbic Scottish comedian Billy Connolly.

Losing Connolly is just the start. Frank vs God shifts the overall emphasis, becoming darker and adding a very American denouement (which I won't give away). The US ending is more shocking - I guess the filmmakers felt the existential Australian ending was too subtle for the US audience. That's an ironic and rather insulting lack of faith on their part. And a poor substitute for the wit and effervescence of The Man Who Sued God.

To be fair, the revised approach of Frank vs God isn't terribly bad. Ultimately, however, The Man Who Sued God is the superior film, not to mention the one and only original. It's only fair that The Man Who Sued God should be seen first, without any preconceptions.

(And while I'm at it, beware also of the Nicolas Cage movie The Family Man - a lame Americanized remake of another amazing Australian film - Me Myself I.)

I came across this movie unexpectedly one day. It caught my interest because of the title. I decided to give it a few minutes of my time and before you knew it, I watched the entire thing. It was funny but thought provoking. I really liked the concept and it kept my interest entirely. What a pleasant surprise. Highly recommended, especially to believers.

This movie was an almost carbon copy of the 2001 Australian movie "The man who sued god", that starred Billy Connoly, Colin Freils and Judy Davis.

The original had the main character being a retired lawyer that became a fisherman. His boat was anchored in the harbor and was struck by lightening and burned/sunk as a result on a dark mid morning.. this led to the familiar storyline of the man having his claim rejected under the Act of God clause.

With the description of this 2014 movie, it is quoted that it was directed from the directors own script, I'm thinking that it really means "his own pirated script".

A blatant rip-off of the original Australian masterpiece...