Diagonaldi Very well executed

Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

aazell1 A nice idea and some great concepts in the script. It seems to me that whomever wrote the script was aiming to make an Aussie movie that would appeal to the US audience. This is a real shame as it sucks the punch out of the story and undermines some good performances and some good comedy.Here's a few problems with the direction and script that bothered me while watching this: Characterisation: With the exception of the main characters all other characters are poorly drawn. The TV and Radio hosts are badly acted along with the TV interviewers who stand on the steps of the court house. The problem is that these are the elements that we as viewers are the most familiar with leaving me with the impression that they just couldn't be bothered to pay enough attention to the detail.Music: Oddly, the music editing in this film is amazingly distracting. The music is often too loud over the actors voices which makes it hard to concentrate on the performances. Also it seems that the editors couldn't resist in laying music over almost every scene. Basically there's way too much music and it's used heavy handedly throughout.The Love Story: Where the **** did that come from? There was a nice bit of friendship chemistry between the two leads but I don't think there's any element of the film that hinted at them falling in love until they start snogging. I think the film would have been stronger if they'd remained friends with a strong respect for each other.Cop out ending: It seems that the writers wrote themselves into a bit of a corner and by the beginning of the third act you start to wonder how their going to get themselves out of it. For a film that raises a pretty serious issue they seem to abandon their principles at the last moment which is a shame because it's the main hook of the movie in my opinion. Plus and ill conceived "sign from god" episode which is completely pointless.Summary A reasonable vehicle for Billy Connelly who is as watchable as ever but unfortunately it lacks the courage of its convictions.

Thomas Hardcastle I thought it was rubbish. The premise is interesting, but when you actually sit down and watch this, it becomes clear that the premise was the only thing that had been worked on.Poor script. Average acting. There isn't much about this film that can be commented on in a positive manner. They even added the usual love interest trash.This film is bad, but it's certainly not, "Gangs of New York," bad. This film, although a boring piece of cheap film-making is three times better than Gangs Of New York, which is why I've given it three out of ten. Never, ever watch Gangs Of New York, or you'll probably end up wanting to watch something three times better, like this piece of sheet.

quatermax-1 Scottish stand up comedian Billy Connolly (recently featured in The Last Samurai) plays divorced and disillusioned ex-lawyer Steve Myers, who now whiles away his time on a fishing boat in New South Wales, Australia. One afternoon his boat, which is now basically his life, is destroyed by a bolt of lightning, which also results in a chard of the hull being embedded in his foot. On crutches he approaches his insurance company who refuse to pay as the incident is deemed an 'Act of God'. Connolly's traditional Celtic brand of outrageous, yet amusing, expletives result in his being carried unceremoniously out of the building. Undeterred by this he decides to challenge the very meaning of the term 'Act of God', which by it's very nature determines that someone (in this case God) is responsible, and if someone (God) is responsible then they (or He) can therefore be sued… or at least their (or His) representatives can. The subsequent court case generates a media storm as Myers, a not unaccomplished and uncharismatic courtroom tactician, initially runs rings around his opponents. Thus begins the David and Goliath battle between the little man and the formidable powers of the Church and the massive legal and insurance firms in their employ. Myers also gathers 800 or so co-plaintiffs, all victims of the 'Act of God' clause, to support him in his case. It eventually gets to the point where it looks like the only way the church are going to win their case is to prove that God doesn't exist. It's a clever, simple premise and one you wish you'd thought of yourself. It's no coincidence that Connolly's character is a fisherman, or even a fisher of men, and that his beef is with the corrupt insurance companies representing an apparently corrupt church. If it was suddenly discovered that Christ was Scottish, then it would have been Connolly calming the storm out on the Sea of Galilee, and Connolly who threw the moneylenders out of His Father's house, and, hirsute and ranting as he is in this movie, impressive he would have been too. Billy Connolly as Christ – now that would even give Mel Gibson a run for his money… I bet he'd be great at parting the Red Sea… oh, no, that was Moses wasn't it. Never mind, he could play that role too (nobody seems to worry about accents in movies anyway) and in fact he almost pleads to the court on behalf of his co-plaintiffs 'Let my people go', or rather 'Give my people their money you bastards', but with a smile and a twinkle in the eye that only Connolly can get away with – well, him and Sean Connery. Why haven't they been teamed up in a movie? It seems like a match made in Heaven to me. There are many storms brewing toward the end of the film; Religious zealots surround the courthouse hurling abuse at the blasphemer Myers; Myers can't afford to lose the case; the lawyers can't afford to either, nor can the church, and there's also a mighty wind storm approaching the town bringing forest fires and floods (and no doubt frogs, plague and locusts) with it. Needless to say it's a happy ending, the lawyers and the church get their knuckles rapped, the image of God remains untarnished (of course), Myers gets the girl and the zealots go home sulking and dragging their large wooden cross with them in another Christ reference. It's a refreshing film, as most Australian movies are. There's great attention to character and background detail. Connolly (Water, Mrs. Brown, Muppet Treasure Island, Boondock Saints, Timeline), undoubtedly a talented actor and comedian, is obviously cast for distribution purposes (Myers isn't a particularly Scottish name after all) and seems a little out of place in the Australian backdrop, but his rants are very funny. Veteran and versatile Australian actress Judy Davis (Deconstructing Harry, Celebrity, Absolute Power, The Reagans), as Myers' journalistic co-conspirator and love interest, is subject to some slapstick humour as a drunken and literally legless Myers wrecks a restaurant, and the excellent supporting cast are all the more convincing for their unfamiliarity.

bob the moo Steve Myers is a small-time fisherman who used to be a lawyer but quit it for a simpler and better life. When his boat is destroyed by lightening he and his extended family are faced with ruin when the insurance company refuses to pay out citing "act of God". Not ever willing to take no for an answer, Steve decides to register as a lawyer again and sue God – or rather this representatives on Earth. With journalist Anna chasing an "important" story giving him the publicity that helps give his case weight, Steve starts the battle.In the opening fifteen minutes or so this film moves quickly to set up the plot and does the absolute basics to establish character and relationships (by a blurred collection of overlapping short scenes). This approach in itself should tell you something and that is that the film is not looking to build a strong base and instead is looking to take the concept and run with it. This is not necessarily a bad thing but so early in the film it was a tad worrying. It gets better but essentially it does continue on the same vein as it tries to produce a reasonable drama without actually doing a lot of work to get it. It didn't help that the marketing made it look like a hilarious comedy with Connolly at the helm. As it goes though the concept well enough and is engaging but it is never that funny, that clever or that interesting.Connolly is good in the lead thanks to his natural charm. He hones down his occasionally abrasive personality and makes an engaging lead. Sadly Davis is not as good. She is so-so at the start but she cannot cope with the developments in her character later on. Friels saunters around in the way that he normally does in small parts in Australian films. Beyond him the cast is OK at best and it does fall to Connolly to carry everything – which, although he is OK he cannot do the whole time.Overall then a so-so film that distracts but doesn't really offer much more than that. Despite the potential in the concept for comedy and/or drama, the film has few laughs and very superficially delivers a morally basic sort of romance drama. It isn't much cop but those that like him will find that Connolly's presence at least lifts it a little bit.