areatw 'Philomena' tells the fascinating true story of Philomena Lee and her 50 year search for her son, who was given away against her will by Catholic nuns. The film follows Philomena and a journalist, Martin Sixsmith, who assists her in her attempt to locate her missing son.Everything about this film is excellent. Judi Dench delivers an outstanding, heartfelt and I would say Oscar-worthy performance as Philomena. The rest of the cast, including Steve Coogan as Martin Sixsmith, are also excellent. A story like Philomena's deserves the very best script and acting, and I'm pleased they did the story justice.Overall, 'Philomena' is an excellent biographical film that I would highly recommend. No fake Hollywood nonsense, just a real story told exactly how it should be. 'Philomena' is a fascinating film.

juoliver-70482 I think that Philomena is in many ways comparable to Vertigo, the classic 1957 Hitchcock movie. Let's see in what they are different. Vertigo is fictional. Its character, Scottie, is a middle age weary, depressed man while Philomena is a real senior citizen who is some kind of an idealist person. I found a similarity in the sense that both characters are victims of tragedies that have hurt them tremendously and marked out their life. Both tragedies were committed by evildoers not by natural disasters. Scottie and Philomena are characters involved in searches looking for answers that may heal their scars. Both characters are complemented by another person in their search. They founded their partners by chance. Unlikely Philomena, Scottie's partnership is dark and mysterious. Phil's partnership is unambiguous although non symmetrical. Martin would be professionally helpful to her but his heart is not fully into this pursuit. He is wounded after a setback related to his job as a high roller political journalist and at this point he is cynical and pessimistic. Both movies are emotionally complicated stories involving a travel to the past and in both cases it was resolved with subtlety, ability and talent. Philomena is actually a road movie since many of the leads are quite far apart. This implies a close interacting between Phil and Martin even more intense when we add the chasing of leads which entails new emotional brinks due to the hopes, doubts and uncertainty involved. Of course I am not going to get into details but there are few finding and leads that enhances the story. Movies which are inquisitive and go into obscure paths, to the heart of a tragedy, into places where individuals have been gravely injured are very hard to realize. When the backbone of a story is the theft of a toddler by catholic nuns is very hard to create art while holding anger, fury and sentimentality. Evildoers holding positions of power are common material for movies but you need a special vision to make them entertaining. Stephen Frears counted with an apt cast and crew. The adapted script is excellent. If you are familiar at all with Judi Dench's work, you can predict the quality of any of her roles but this time Dame Judi fleshed out Philomena with a tenderness that expresses a unique, real human being. Another outstanding performance.Steve Coogan very aptly expressed the nature of his character and the evolution from quiet cynicism to open, sincere anger. Stephen Frears implemented and balanced the golden elements available for this film. He creates an atmosphere that expresses the points of view of Philomena and builds a sequence of images and dialog that keep us our attention intact. As a director he took the job of master storyteller and excels at it.

Paul Guest Based on a true story, 'Philomena' (on TV, 26 02 16) mixes documentary realism, a mystery story and comedy with consummate success. At its heart is the striking contrast between the journalist Martin Sixsmith (Steve Coogan), portrayed as a cynical 'hack' and atheist, and Philomena Lee (Judi Dench), a devout Catholic, seemingly simple yet thoroughly clear-headed.The story looks back to 1952, when Philomena's father sent her to a convent as punishment for having a child out of wedlock. It portrays Ireland at that time far more harshly than 'Brooklyn' (also set in 1952). The nuns subject Philomena and other girls to a shockingly Spartan regime reminiscent of pre-Revolutionary French convents in Diderot's novel 'La religieuse' (filmed most recently in 2013). Worse still, they have no compunction in selling the girls' babies. It's sobering to think that their appallingly misguided practices could have taken place in such relatively recent times.Sister Hildegarde (Barbara Jefford), superior of the convent in 1952, embodies one of three variations on the theme of Catholicism. She is an unyielding fundamentalist, for whom sexual relations are 'carnal incontinence'. At the opposite extreme, Martin Sixsmith is a lapsed Catholic who bitterly detests the Church. Philomena, by contrast with both those characters, not only keeps her faith but practises it – heroically so in one case. So the story is essentially fair to the Catholic Church.By the time of the main action, 2002, Sister Hildegarde is very old and frail. Mother Barbara (Ruth McCabe), her successor at the time, is completely different: quite young, dressed in an unobtrusive habit and caring in her manner. It's also striking that one of the nuns (played by Wunmi Mosaku) is black.Sixsmith has temporarily abandoned his specialist field of Russian history for investigative journalism. In that role, he's accountable to his editor, who is really no more humane than Sister Hildegarde. When he tells her on the phone that Philomena is 'in bits' over her long-lost son's fate in the USA, she crows with delight.His investigation makes the film partly a mystery story. Its outcome is a great surprise, linking Ireland and the USA well after 1952.Judi Dench is thoroughly convincing as a talkative, warm-hearted and sometimes slightly embarrassing Irish woman. One of her most endearing traits is the way she repeats the name Martin in her conversations with him. Like her, Steve Coogan achieves some very subtle changes of attitude, mood and pace. There's just one touch, I think, of Alan Partridge when Sixsmith makes an awkwardly suggestive quip to Mother Barbara on seeing photos of Jane Russell and Jayne Mansfield.This film struck me as profoundly moving and I felt the tears welling up more than once. Yet another fine piece of work from Stephen Frears, and full credit to Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope for the screenplay.

vanmechelen74 I watched this movie because of the great actors in the cast, but found it to be really predictable and boring from beginning to end. The cast was great, lovely locations, but not really a movie that i will remember in a couple year's time. Maybe because i strongly dislike babies and motherhood and all that and all the "oh, pity me, they took my baby away" leaves me unaffected? i found myself rolling my eyes in exasperation instead of being moved by its obvious twists and ending. It is supposed to be a moving, inspirational movie for some reason. Well, it didn't work for me (and some other people i know) despite the fact that i cry easily with movies, specially if it involves injustice.