We're No Angels (1989)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Sajin P

  
  Expecting an out-and-out comedy(considering its plot), I was disappointed slightly, but still it was a fun watch with that feel good factor.

• Jani H

  
  "Father, Father I've been shot! - I'm very happy for you." When the director is Neil Jordan, the screenwriter David Mamet and the cast includes Robert De Niro and Sean Penn, you'd think that 'We're No Angels' should be something quite good. I… More
  "Father, Father I've been shot! - I'm very happy for you." When the director is Neil Jordan, the screenwriter David Mamet and the cast includes Robert De Niro and Sean Penn, you'd think that 'We're No Angels' should be something quite good. I recently saw this and I'm stunned. But not in a positive way. Jim (Penn) and Ned (De Niro) are two convicts that escape with a murderer called Bobby (James Russo). They arrive to a town near the Canadian border, where they are mistaken for two priests that have been waited for at the local monastery. They continue to pose as priests while looking for a chance to sneak to Canada. Things just get a bit harder when Bobby, who's wounded, is captured by the police and recognizes Ned. There's a lot of potential in 'We're No Angels' but things seem to go pretty wrong here. First of all, the acting is below any standards of mediocrity. Even my favourite actor from the 70's and 80's, Mr De Niro, seems annoying in every possible way. Sean Penn looks completely lost throughout the whole movie. Bruno Kirby reminded me once again why I dislike him. There is one (actually two) good performer in the movie and that is Demi Moore's breasts... The story is totally pointless, there's like zero excitement and the character development is slim. Jim's character left me a bit confused. John C. Reilly acts as one of the monks and I'm not sure what they're relationship is. There are some homoerotic undertones between them but this monk is also a big fan of the priest, Father Brown, that Ned presents himself as. Father Brown, who is one of two priests that should have arrived to the monestery, has written a book and Reilly's character is a big fan of him. He has a copy of the book with his picture on the back cover. His picture! You'd think that he, or any of that matter, should recognize an imposter? I don't know what Jim wanted at the end. Did he find his true calling as a person of faith or did he just want to look at the monk's "sinful place"? The acting is terrible, the story is weak with lots of holes in the plot and.. Well, what else do you need to say that a film is not just worth it? As a crime movie it doesn't work and as a comedy it falls flat. Skip it.

• Anthony L

  
  I have a real soft spot for this fun film! I really like Neil Jordan films, this isn?t his best but I think the slamming it got from the critics was a little unfair!

• Lafe F

  
  Sean Penn and Robert De Niro are a bunch of smelly escaped criminals from a cruel prison environment. They take refuge at a church and pull the wool over townspeoples' eyes while evading justice. They prove their worth by saving some lives. Not too funny or enjoyable.

• xGary X

  
  Robert DeNiro made a few shocking career choices in the 80s, and this is one of them. Witless and annoying mugging with zero laughs, despite the quality cast and director. And I have two words for you; "Demi" and "Moore".

• Erin C

  
  The story was interesting enough, but the acting was just over the top and ridiculous. The entire cast annoyed me, and I typically love De Niro and Penn.

• Alice S

  
  All that remained of the movie from 1955 is that the characters have escaped from prison. But I don't understand why everyone is expecting to get a sequel. This movie certainly is not recommended to those who are willing to see the story from 1955 retold, and it is also NOT… More
  All that remained of the movie from 1955 is that the characters have escaped from prison. But I don't understand why everyone is expecting to get a sequel. This movie certainly is not recommended to those who are willing to see the story from 1955 retold, and it is also NOT recommended to all those who think that a comedy is something that makes you laugh continuously or are allergic to simple questions or religious matters. But it is STRONGLY recommended to those who appreciate good acting and are not afraid to feel and think a little.

• Dimitris S

  
  This wasn't exactly a frame by frame remake,the location has adamantly changed,the protagonists however (minus one) and the confusing events have remained,with 50% changes as to the....main theme: priesthood!!! A larger number of characters (plus extra subplots) which apparently… More
  This wasn't exactly a frame by frame remake,the location has adamantly changed,the protagonists however (minus one) and the confusing events have remained,with 50% changes as to the....main theme: priesthood!!! A larger number of characters (plus extra subplots) which apparently work up until the last 10 minutes where Mamet and Jordan fail to push it to the limits,rather creating the most conservative diversion.Woe to the uneducated audience.

• Leo L

  
  Hilarious!

Read all 9 featured audience ratings