Tim Marsden This movie was good - thought provoking, touching and inspiring. I really liked it however i acknowledge that it will divide people - it's really for those who've read the book and respond to the authors message. If you relate to this and are interested in knowing more about Neale Donald Walsch's story, there's a good chance you'll be pleasantly surprised by this movie. I was. I thought it was well put together, gave due attention to the different parts of the authors story, didn't play him out to be some savior or evangelist and wasn't sugar coated. I don't agree with the infomercial comments, and I'm Australian and we have little tolerance for infomercials and cheesy sales pitches. Obviously its not a big budget movie and its more about the story and the message for those that hear it.

djansen24 Simply put, hedonism cloaked in spirituality. My wife checked out this film out of curiosity in the title. We found that this bland movie was both boring and offensive. It has a decent cast who seem to have been given a novice scriptwriter and director. Editing is confusing, with segue-ways that are all but non-sensical. It plays like a Hallmark production with its glossy soft light colors and its message is horrible. I can't help but feel that this film is a way for Walsch (the author of the books the movie is based on) to justify why he had so many broken relationships and has so much wealth. The movie does not make his case well. His spirituality is self-serving. He claims no transcendence and therefore no meta-narrative to existence. According to him, there is no responsibility to others other than just doing a nice gesture every now and then. When "god" supposedly tells him to only do what he loves, I wanted to ask him to make that statement in poverty stricken countries where people have little choice to do anything except what they can to survive. And in the meantime, he lives cosily cushioned by his wealth. He was probably more in tune with himself when he was homeless. The author's form of spirituality could only have come from an economically fat and spiritually active society like the USA. We Americans are so spoiled by our wealth and freedoms that we think we can make God who we want him to be. But the living God is above our petty perceptions of Him. Most of the poor around the world would hate teachings like what Walsch gives. On top of this, the movie falls flat on a technical level. I have not read the books and I definitely have no intention of wasting my time doing so. What we need to change the world is a truth that humbles us. Read the Bible if you want to know what that is. Now there is a book that has truly transformed our world.Blessings.

scholara2 This film is very similar to Will Smith's, only has a New Age feel. Same plot of how a person is made homeless, and then struggles to regain his dignity.I found the parts where he takes dictation from God to be very enlightening, and that's why I give this movie 8*'s.The story itself leaves large holes as to the character's life, and it would've been better from a continuity standpoint (for those who haven't read the book, like me) to give more background.From a storytelling continuity standpoint, I felt Pursuit of Happiness was better, though a minor quibble, I felt it dwelt too much on the character's low points, and then only made a passing reference at the end, to his rising from the ashes.But, back to Conversations. For example, the narration alludes to Neal's problems with women, but what are they (ie. sexual infidelity?)? They must be pretty deep, for him to be turned away after a debilitating accident. We see him visit his old home, only to see his name on the mailbox and nothing else.He suffers from a broken neck, yet midpoint in the movie he takes his neck brace off. His homelessness healed his broken neck??? And lastly, he loses his part time job as a DJ, but yet can continue living in what seems like a nice house, while taking dictation from God for what seems like a long time. How is that? Anyway, there are these inconsistencies, but his conversations are what really make the movie.I can see how traditional fundamentalists, be they Christians, Jews, or Muslims, might find the bits and pieces of the conversation unbelievable (or heresy), as has been already expressed here, but if you can get away from orthodox theology and open your mind, you might learn something, or at least cause you to rethink your perspective.The movie at least made me curious to read the book.

D A Proving the so-called spiritual genre still has an awfully long way to go before feeling half has meaningful as underlying content would suggest, this quest for meaning and purpose remains ironically dull for it's intended purpose. Rather then adapting Neale Donald Walsch's massively successful spiritual dialogs, the film version of Conversations with God plays more like a biography, detailing the catalyst behind this reluctant author's unique journey which saw him living on the streets to becoming an international bestseller.In a film plagued with bad choices, choosing to go the docudrama route proves one of the only wise decisions, producing a few of the Lifetime-worthy affair's only authentic and moving sequences. It is a testament to the inept direction then, when any and all emotional sincerity takes place during the initial struggling and unanimously subsides when relaying the inspirational turn of events that will fail to inspire the viewer. Proving quite contradictory indeed, the more Conversations with God presses on the book's inspirational themes of love, surrender, and other random insights, the less impact any previously watched glimmer of truth seems to reap.There is just a massive divide between parlaying this intensely personal information in a way that does not feel trite, even laughably condescending, to all but the most ardent of sheep-fans... Meaning, until dedicated efforts into this budding genre begin translating our inner spiritual discussions more believably by refining their techniques into many more subtle shades of consciousness, they will continue to bare the new-age brunt of jokes, contradict what they so earnestly try to capture, and give moviegoers every which reason to extract spiritual qualities from other genres that unconsciously produce this sentiment so much clearer, with a lot less strain. For the few heartfelt moments that detail Walsch's struggle with homelessness, the film rises above the emotional sterile, Hallmark-prone manipulation that the majority seems to be. However, anyone who is not already begging to enjoy this movie, having been a rabid fan of the author's work, has every right to leer in cynical jest at the film's unintentionally ironic tone of detached insincerity.