Avaliações de usuários

Subject matter is great. Dialogue is horrible. It's too formal sounding.

I have two big problems with this movie.

First, the only relationship I believed in was the one between Nate and Trent. There was real, palpable sexual and emotional attraction between those two, but there was none anywhere else in the movie. I didn't believe in Steven's relationship with Ray; every time he called him "Babe" I gave an involuntary shudder that he would say something like that to a stranger. Even worse, I didn't believe in anything at all between him and Nate, even conventional sibling affection, and the whole movie hangs on that supposedly overwhelming passion.

Second, the movie is based on a strange assumption that there's something so profoundly bad about sex between brothers that they have to sacrifice everything that matters to hide it and do everything they can to kill it. I never have understood that taboo. It's not like they'd have deformed babies. It's an absurd prohibition. But I suppose even now they wouldn't be able to get married, and since vicious lunatics have taken over the US government, that's not likely to get better anytime soon.

So I guess what I'm saying is that the actor who played Steven was badly miscast (he wasn't able to create any believable relationships on screen) and that the premise of the movie is absurd.

However, unlike many other reviewers, I loved the ending, for reasons that may be obvious from what I said earlier.

There's a lot that could be said about how Godless is woefully under-cooked, painfully slow, tortuously uneventful, visually dull and laboriously and unimaginatively directed. But let's just focus on one fairly useful guideline for film-making... if you barely have enough material for a short film - however controversial or provocative the subject matter - then arduously stretching everything - every scene, every pause in the dialogue, every unnecessary stage movement, even every fade-out between scenes, is not going to make that material somehow better or more weighty. Godless is a short film - and not a particularly exciting one - stretched mercilessly into feature length. It has the pace of a snail on valium, and the production values of an uzbekistani high-school project. Best avoided.

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.

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.

Here we have a story about two gay brothers who had consummated their relationship way before they left home for college. And then we get to see a conflict unfold as one brother desperately wants to maintain a full fledged carnal romance, while the other thinks it's best to move on and find more "appropriate" partners. Pace...really slow. Acting.....really bad. Absolutely zero emotion when reciting their lines. How many times did the camera linger on the depressed and lifeless body of the one brother???? There was plenty of time to run for a pee break and come back to see the depressed brother still lying lifeless on his bed.

I disagree with others who have said the movie was slow or had slow parts. The film progresses as it should, a slow simmer, not a quick boil. I like the actors that play brothers Nate & Steven - I bonded with the characters- perhaps that led me to like it more. I can not touch upon the movie without giving spoilers- so I will say this: go in with an open mind, enjoy the acting, the actors, summer with the pace - you might find that you enjoyed it.

If you liked the film - you might care to watch, also on Amazon - From Beginning to End 2009, from Brazil.

This supposed to be best movie. With controversial issues. I know this is low budget movie. But if they writing the correct script, play with audience emotional. This gonna be like Brokeback mountain. Im so disappoint with the scripts. This make me mad abouy the scripts.

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.

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

This film took forbidden love to a whole new level. Godless (2015) has quickly become one of my favorite LGBTQ themed films. With outstanding acting from both leads. You could easily sense their conflict. The direction was spot on. The only downfall to the film was the ending. I'm sure it could be interpreted in many ways. Overall outstanding film. Definitely will keep you thinking.

I really enjoyed this movie...enough to have seen it three times so far. Lim handles an interesting subject pretty darn well. I read here some people thought the film was "slow". I disagree. I think the perceived "slowness" by some added to the film. It almost made the house itself a character. Overall this movie is very entertaining, but the highlight of the film is, without question, the great acting by Craig Jordan. Craig really brings the character of Nate to life. I really think Craig's acting takes this film from a 7 star film to the 9 stars I gave it. He really becomes Nate. I will recommend this film to all my friends to watch.

After watching this, my heart felt like someone puts a heavy stone on it. The movie is so gentle and captivating that I felt Iike I was in the character myself (in the place of Nate for me). The movie was so practical and it gave me a lot of things to be thought after the movie had ended. The intimacy of the two brothers drove me crazy.

I saw this film a few years ago and I was so overwhelmed by it I gave it a 10. I saw it again yesterday and my feelings towards it have not changed. It is a unique film and is that most beautiful thing a quiet voice above the crowd of noisy, useless films. For those who criticize its direction I suggest they watch Dreyer, Ozu and Bresson. And if some reviewers here have never heard of them, please watch at least one of each. The film in my opinion ranks there in its approach. Many have commented on the subject matter and the kind of love shown on the screen is quite simply part of love's spectrum, experienced and cherished by more than the righteous like to think. Now for the acting which is very good indeed, and the dialogue is not terrible at all but reflective and slow, and once again I will refer to Dreyer and the last film he made: ' Gertrud '. Reviled at the time it is rightly considered during recent decades to be a great film and rightly so. The pacing of what people say and do is similar in this film and I hope it will too be cherished even if it is among the discerning few. For those who dislike it see it again, and remember that first judgements can be wrong. I have had many wrong judgements in my time, but with this film I recall quite distinctly that it was a sensitive and beautiful experience. My given 10 then is still a 10 and it is there in my pantheon of films to return to.

What a great movie, I enjoyed it,,, what attracted me the most about the movie is that they are a gay sibling couple,Both actors were great and their acting is very good, and the secondary characters are as well,,, The kiss and hug scenes stole my heart, of course it won't be the last time I watch it ,,, I advise everyone to watch it.

The film handles a controversial subject sensitively. Both the leads, Craig Jordan,and most especially, Michael E. Pitts, deliver beautiful performances. The editing is weak, but does not take away from film's emotional impact.

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.

A touching story of brotherly love and depencence.