Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

colinmatts Probably the worst Irish film ever made. "Father Ted" creator, Arthur Matthews penned this awful script and in the DVD extras he confesses to being "plot dyslexic". One is left wondering why a writer who is "plot dyslexic" gets to have his witless ramblings turned into a movie. Seriously, there are thousands of very clever plot writers out there who can't get a break. Anyway, there is no plot, no character development and no meaning to this mess of a movie. Yet, it brings together some fine actors. Gerald Mc Sorely and Owen Rowe are two of Ireland's best actors and its just as well that their careers are established because getting associated with this nonsense could really ruin an actor's career. There is not one proper laugh in what is supposed to be a comedy film. Attempts at Beckett type, minimalism fall embarrassingly flat. There are one or two Laurel and Hardy type visual moments which just look like bad impersonations. The pace of the whole movie is unbearably slow, so slow in fact, that at times it seems as if the director was making it up as he went along. I could go on and on but it really gives me no pleasure to be so critical.

James Newman Imagine the Irish boom years never happened. Everything is run down. No-one has any actual money, everyone relying on other peoples I.O.U.s. Politicians are grubby and self serving. "Entrepreneurs" and "Developers" are loud mouthed chancers. Some of the best Irish comedians came out of the grimness of the pre-Celtic Tiger era, and now the bad times are back, Arthur Matthews obviously feels back on familiar territory.Less a conventional film, more an extended shaggy dog story. Echoes of Father Ted? They are there beneath the surface, though disconcertingly Ardal O'Hanlon has morphed from Dougal to Ted. The archetypal comedic paring, stuck together like Vladimir and Estragon, Myles is a self-aware loser, struck by the despair of his situation, unable to part himself from Austin, an innocent fool, never able to see quite how bad things have got.Owen Roe is the star attraction though, with his famine theme park, and worship of Michael O'Leary. The DVD extras where he is interviewed about the park are almost better than the film. Ted Fans will spot Father Todd Unctious and Father Cyril MacDuff in nice character rolls.Would the film have been better with more development and a bigger budget? No doubt, but that sort of thing really doesn't matter to connoisseurs of the offbeat. Those who like Father Ted for its slapstick outrageousness (more Linehan's style) will perhaps be disappointed, those who value it for its sense of place, quirkiness, and getting under the skin of deeply flawed characters are more likely to warm to this film.

billythehick i was one of six people who attended the screening, i was one of three that stayed to the end. i thought i was in the clear when the credits started rolling, but then there was more footage during them. i felt like screaming "end you bastard!"all fault can be landed at the director's feet. the cast do a fine job, the script hits the right notes, the sets are fine, but the whole thing is so, so, so bloody boring.then i realised that this was one of the most high-profile Irish films that year. then i felt so royally betrayed.just because your film has all the hallmarks of the Coen Bros, doesn't make you as good, or even comparable to the Coen Bros. Referencing Withnail & I doesn't make people find your movie as good as Withnail & I.

lav13 I'm not sure exactly what this is.It's like someone has watched a couple of Beckett and Pinter plays then a Carry On film and decided to have a go themselves.It's full of inexplicable silences and overblown slow prop mishandling. There's an over- current of drabness with a lot of very affected acting. There's the conversations that go nowhere and have no purpose. All of these things can be great, if done well... and a lot of it has been done well but still isn't great. There's a mystery here somewhere as to why this has gone wrong; it's hard to point a finger at. Can't fault the actual performances and it's an interesting enough story...It just somehow doesn't work. If I had to make a stab at it I'd say that there is something in the execution that puts a distance between me and the film. It's the putting together that's made the problem maybe.I'm coming to the conclusion that they meant to do a play and accidentally ended up making a film. I could see it working as a play, but it just doesn't as a film.