The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part
The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
No consensus yet.
All Critics (19)
| Top Critics (1)
| Fresh (9)
| Rotten (10)
| DVD (4)
Weak '80s fish-out-of water tale has violence, profanity.
This, one of the most disappointing films of the 1980s, was a dud upon its release and has not held up well at all.
One of Jordan's rare misfires.
Boring fish out of water story. No laugh out loud moments.
Falls short of its potential, but a fun lark nonetheless.
High powered talent delivers lukewarm oatmeal mush. Blah.
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.
"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.
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.
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.