La proposition

Kenneth Branagh, as expected, performed very well. What was difficult to absorb as "possible" were the Catholic religious elements depicted. They were wrong and inaccurate. For example, the Mass vestments were not correct. The conversations and characterizations of the pastor and the young priest, for that period of time (Boston in the late 30s, early 40s) were off key, to say the least. The plot was interesting, but the film was too long, and there was too much "symbolism", and the "next move" was always predictable. With such a fine cast, and a great story, the producers and the directors should have taken time to be more accurate and correct about details. Another example of the lack of care was the scene where the young priest is seen administering "Anointing of the Sick" [formerly called "Extreme Unction"] to a corpse about to be buried. This never happens and is actually forbidden in the RC Church. Dead people cannot receive "sacraments." Attention must be paid. Details, details, details. The truth is in the details. However, I did enjoy it. I think most people would find this film interesting and entertaining.

Love it or hate it, and the opinions seem to be pretty evenly divided, this is a compelling film because of the performances of three fine actors--Kenneth Branagh, Madeline Stowe, and William Hurt. The story is incredibly far-fetched but, a la Six Feet Under, because it deals with emotions and fantasies we've all felt, it works in some sort of quirky way.

Madeline Stowe is absolutely radiant--confused, vulnerable, strong, passionate. William Hurt perfectly combines the ruthless Wall Street professional and the condescending tenderness of a man of his time. Branagh is a cypher whose screen charisma makes him riveting.

Some of the nitpicking in earlier reviews seems wrong to me. The Mass vestments are exactly right for the solemn high mass of that period, as is Branagh's demeanor. Extreme Unction can in fact be administered for a short period after death, though not, of course, on a corpse in a coffin. In fact, the only reason to open the coffin before burial is so that Eleanor can see who it is that's being buried.

Great actors, good story - what went wrong? Kenneth Brannagh as a priest was an inspired choice of casting (If only all my priests were that ruggedly handsome & masculine, I would never miss confession!). William Hurt's presence, however, always seems to blur the edges of the characters he portrays. I never know where the character starts and the typical William Hurt begins (he did a great job though, I was almost convinced). Madeline Stowe is both brilliant and radiant as Eleanor (a pleasant surprise from her typically subdued ingénue roles!). Blythe Danner is a gem (as usual) even though she is horribly miscast, this lady is really foxy - far from the matronly and bitter spinster she plays. Neil Patrick Harris is always a treat (it's hard to forget him as "Doogie", he could play a cab driver and still be endearing and sweet).

It's amazing how art reflects life. The movie deals with death and I couldn't help grieving because this could have been such a great film. The story had (at the risk of being corny) all the timeless symbolism and core themes of love and life. I was excitedly anticipating to see how these themes (such as that of human creation, as dealt with through the issue of "baby-making", or the relationship between religion and gender etc. etc.) were fully explored. Stowe and Brannagh make a tantalizing pair. They remind me of some sort of "fully ripe" Adam and Eve! (their love scene could have been sooo much better).

Like I said, I kept wondering "What went wrong?" : The actors were exemplary (probably to overcompensate for the movie's weaknesses). The story itself was quite good but the plot line was seriously flawed. The cinematography was exquisite, but the scenes were poorly set up (there's one where saucy family secrets are revealed - where else? but in a soup kitchen!). I don't know much about the art of movie-making (movie-watching, maybe) but I think even a seasoned film professional will watch this movie with tears after seeing such a great cast and good concept go to waste. (Like I said, the movie is sad, unfortunately because of reasons other than it intended).

I propose that this movie be redone and soon! (With Brannagh, Stowe and everyone in it, except Hurt and Danner)- yeah right!

The other option is for it to remain as a prime example of when great acting meets a good movie idea, but the sparks just don't fly.

Watch it for the actors, and weep for the film.

Though there may have been some inconsistencies to real life, I enjoyed the movie and so did my friends and acquaintances...I was taken by the snowball effect...though some scenes could have been done differently...I accept it for exactly what it is...movie drama, not real life...some scenes were predictable and some I never saw coming...I was impressed with the job interview...the job...and then the transition from BOY to MANHHOOD and then the snowball effect that changes the lives of all persons involved including the priest...for me personally...the movie was well done...I am sure it could have been better but so could every movie once it has been seen and critiqued...GOOD JOB!

As another reviewer said--either you love it or you hate it. I loved it. A well acted movie--somewhat far fetched in the storyline. Very intense deep story and you really get caught up in it. I do not think a lot of the comments from other reviewers really see the value of the movie, or look at it from all of the character's points or motives. William Hurt as Barret is totally selfless in his quest for a family and Madeline Stowe as his wife is also very convincing. The big surprise comes from Blythe Danner, although I really cannot figure out exactly what her role was--is she secretly in love with Hurt? Hard to say. But the acting is fine and Kenneth Branaugh does a terrific and convincing job. He is a good actor and this role suits him splendidly. I do recommend this movie.