Customer Reviews

We're No Angels (No Somos Angeles) [NTSC/REGION 4 DVD. Import-Latin America]

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn are 1920s-era convicts who are dragged along when a vicious killer escapes the electric chair. They end up in a town near the Canadian border, and are mistaken for a pair of priests expected at the local monastery.

So they masquerade as priests while looking for an opportunity to cross the border into Canada. An opportunity presents itself in the form of a procession/pilgrimage to the church's sister church across the border. Each priest participating has to bring along someone who needs help, so they decide on the deaf daughter of local laundress and prostitute, played by Demi Moore.

This version (there's a 1955 version, but there's no similarity between the movies at all) is billed as a comedy, but it's much more a drama, or maybe an allegory, though I don't have the time or inclination to delve into what it's an allegory for. There are humorous moments, to be sure, but it's not a laugh-aloud comedy at all.

It's about life-changing events, about miracles. We never do learn why DeNiro and Penn's characters were in prison to begin with, but we don't need to know. They begin as buddies, but the masquerade affects them in different ways. Penn's character thrives in the monastic life, despite, or maybe because of his ignorance. DeNiro and Moore's characters are world-weary and cynical, but they too are affected by the miraculous.

The movie leaves it up to the viewers to decide if the miracles are divine or human, but there's just enough mystery to allow you to believe if you want to.

We're No Angels leaves me with the same sort of feeling that Christmas movies like Miracle on 34th Street do--a kind of uplifted feeling, and a renewed faith in the human spirit. Or maybe I'm just feeling sappy.

I loved this movie. Its totally funny. The ending gave me goosebumps and portrays a thought provoking message of the "no matter what everlasting" love of God. Sean Penn especially was hilarious as was John C. Reilly's character and the moments these two share together. Overall a heartwarming and touching movie with funny bits thrown in. Not for someone looking to debate faith with logic in mind.

I really loved this film. I have never seen Sean Penn in a funny role before, he's very good indeed. He should stop playing bad boys and become a comedian instead. Robert De Niro I have seen in so many movies. He's the greatest of his generation.
Well worth watching this movie. It's funny, moving and thrilling up to the end. Well worth the money!

Like most viewers (and the critics), I wasn't crazy about this buffoonish comedy when I first saw it in the '80s... but time has been kind to it. This remake of the Humphrey Bogart-Aldo Ray 1955 comedy-drama concerns escaped convicts (cut from three men, now two) who disguise themselves as priests and hide out in a bordertown, learning to love the residents if not their new vocations. Robert DeNiro mugs with a surprising vigor (his face seems to be made of rubber) and Sean Penn plays the dumb mug sidekick, and they're OK; but don't forget the supporting cast, which is excellent (particularly Demi Moore as a flooze and John C. Reilly as a seminarian). Production values are incredible (that entire town was built for the film) and there's a rousing climax involving a parade, a statue and a little girl (another great performance). Really not too bad, once you get over the shock of seeing two of our most intense, dramatic actors acting like two outta three stooges.

Its only a little bit funny , but it is touching in an unusual way . Sean Penn is great and so is Bob , but the film slows down a bit in the middle and Bob growls his lines too much . But this is watchacle and entertaining if you have patience and a light heart .

I am not comparing movies, but like so many the original is

better. It would be nice to have the 1955 version in letter box released in DVD also. It is a wonderful movie and Humphrey

Bogart's last. Thanks

This is simply another film that I had seen years ago, a film that I wanted to add to my DVD collection that began not all that long ago.

This is a very funny movie that seems to get better the more you watch it. DeNero and Penn are great as two escaped convicts posing as priest to get accross the border into Canada. Try it you'll like it! Very funny with an excellent cast.

To me any movie with Sean Penn, or Robert DeNiro is going to be a good movie, and the combination of both of them in one movie is a masterpeice. The movie was Funny, and exiting. I hope whoever reads this review, sees the movie and enjoys it just like I did

Viewed: 5/11
Rate: 3

5/11: There is nothing more fun than seeing Sean Penn to make a gigantic fool out of himself in a film, and I can just mock him for being one of the most overrated actors alive. He certainly looked like a huge idiot by his facial appearances alone. On the other hand, Robert DeNiro made a painful attempt at comedy by letting his faces to do the work for him like how Curly would do for his The Three Stooges skits. More often than not, he just looked incredibly stupid. To top the worst of acting is Demi Moore. What an awful actress she had been for years. She reached the zenith of corniness when she began to cry during that ridiculous speech given by Sean Penn after winning the lottery. Moreover, I was surprised that she didn't bother using American Sign Language with her deaf daughter character. So, I guess her nude breasts will more than make up for that deficiency. We're No Angels, or should we say...We're No Actors?, is a complete disaster of a film. Sure, once in a while, it's funny primarily because Robert DeNiro kept making a fool out of himself with these stupid faces, and I laughed out of pity. Obviously, intelligence is zero in We're No Actors. First of all, we don't know what crimes Ned and Jimmy committed prior to being incarnated. What if they were convicted murders? Or better yet, what if they were sadist homicidal rapists? Second of all, say...how about replace Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn with a couple of nobody actors? Would we be rooting for them as well? Obviously, no. Simply put, there was too much manipulation at play with the audience. Third of all, just because they might escape to Canada didn't exactly mean extradition becomes impossible. Fourth of all, 1930's wasn't really backwards of a time when it came to photography and newspapers. Surely, there must be newspapers being distributed around the town with clear pictures of the escaped convicts, and surely, the citizen of the town would be greatly alerted about the possibility of seeing them. Remember the scene where Bobby was ready to be electrocuted? To get away with suspension of disbelief, Neil Jordan let him have a gun after turning off the lights for a second or two. Yeah, that's a great piece of directing...not. Fifth of all, nobody from the penal institution was able to recognize Ned and Jimmy in a town? That's why the movie failed as a whole. All in all, skip We're No Actors because it is cut and dried dud.