Sandcooler This was an almost unrealistically ambitious co-production between Belgium and a whole bunch of other countries, but the many different sources of interference don't hurt the finished product as much as I thought it would. More funding brings more supplies, and that shows. Paul Cox may not be a particularly skilled director, but his country does appear to have a lot of money so it evens out. The visual style to this movie looks really professional, sometimes it'll give you a made for TV-vibe, but that will just be a sporadic feel. The screenplay has some pacing problems, but that doesn't mean it's slow. It just keeps randomly changing in pace, which isn't nearly as exciting as you'd think. There are bunches of scenes where there's nothing happening, but when father Damien ends up contracting leprosy, the movie suddenly looks like it's sick of itself and just takes every possible shortcut to the ending. I do like that very last line though, as corny as it may be, and it is very corny. The biggest plus this movie has is the performance by David Wenham. Hiring an Australian guy to play Damien sounds like the worst idea ever, but he's really authentic. He's pretty much why I kept watching. This movie is fairly well-made, but there's room for improvement.

isabelle1955 I hate to be negative about a film that was obviously made with such good intentions, and I certainly don't want to offend anyone who sees Father Damien - the self-sacrificing Belgian priest - as a saint, but there isn't much that's positive to say about this inferior biopic. It isn't bad enough to be unwatchable, or good enough to deserve a second viewing. It's just very, very dull. I rented it on DVD and came to it open-minded but after half an hour I was struggling to stay awake. The opening twenty minutes are probably the best part of the movie, where the background is laid down and we see young, keen, fresh, athletic Father Damien striding off to fulfill his destiny.I can't quite put my finger on what went wrong, although I have read of "dissension" between the director and producers. The cast, crew and financiers appear to be drawn from just about every nation on the face of the planet, and maybe that's one of the problems because the film has no distinctive "feel" to it; it's not a British movie or an Australian movie, or a Belgian movie, although all of those countries are well represented amongst the players and producers. What it so obviously lacked, was anyone strong enough on the production side to stamp some kind of distinctive character and style on it. It feels like a movie made by committee rather than created by artists. A committee may succeed in writing a technical manual, but it's not the way to create a passionate piece of cinema. And that's what it lacks. Passion.Here we have a film set against stunning natural beauty; an ensemble cast list that reads like a Who's Who? of highly competent English speaking actors, (including Derek Jacobi, Leo McKern, Peter O'Toole, Sam Neill and David Wenham in the lead, with a mop top haircut that Ringo Starr would have envied in 1964); a moving, true story of a man who was obviously a remarkable human being; and more than enough controversy in his dealings with authority to create some real tension in the story. It's an appalling tale of the isolation and virtual abandonment of thousands of sick people from babies to grandparents, who had the misfortune to contract Leprosy at a time when it was still regarded as a biblical plague, and who were left to die alone in misery. That should be more than enough material for a really good movie, yet it's inexcusably dull, dull, dull, and really quite badly filmed. The photography looks "muddy" in shot after shot and some of the dialogue is hard to discern against what appears to be a permanent Force 8 gale.It might work as an educational tract, (in fact it reminded me of some of the worthy but dire stuff I sat through 30 years ago in my last high school, a convent, when the teachers decided to go all "trendy" and treat us to an educational film) but it doesn't work as a cinematic piece. It would have been dull, even as a TV movie. Australian David Wenham gives an honest, engaging, workmanlike performance as the priest who arrives on Molokai expecting to take confessions and officiate at Mass, but finds himself instead making coffins for children, and trying to scrounge money for beds and medicines from uncaring superiors. Try as he might, he can't lift this one. (Anyone who has also seen Better than Sex will appreciate that he has range, and this movie is now 7 years old in fairness.) The film moves from scene to scene showing him treating the sick, comforting the dying, dragging people out of the surf, building houses etc etc. in an utterly formulaic way which never generates any real passion. He writes letters to HQ, and complains politely, but there is a remarkable lack of tension and drama in his dealings with his superiors. The sick shuffle around Molokai wrapped in rags, and we feel suitably uncomfortable, but it is all so dull. I wanted to be moved and I wasn't. Eventually Father Damien succumbs to Hansen's Disease (Leprosy) himself, literally giving his life for these forgotten people. It's a strong story that should have had audiences weeping in the aisles, but personally I was just glad when it finished. I can't really fault any of the individual performances, (in fact Aden Young was excellent as the young doctor and Sam Neill is always good value), it's just the overall effect that's so second rate.Given the subject matter, it's really quite sad that such a good tale got such an inferior treatment. I know nothing about Father Damien but I'm sure he deserved better.

hamtun This was a magnificent film. I had heard that there were some creative differences between director Paul Cox and other people involved in the film.But this does not seem to affect the film in total. I found it a very moving uplifting film that presents the best the human species can aspire to. Like Mother Teresa and Gandhi Father Damian was probably a pain in the rear to the authorities civil and religious.But that is the way of people who are so sure of their beliefs.David Wenham, who is well known to Australian audiences, showed yet again what a talented actor he is.The international actors who provided cameo roles were all excellent, particularly Peter O'Toole.I've enjoyed Paul Cox's films many times over the years. They often win awards but are rarely major box office winners, But he has the ability to present the best of the human experience. He portrays real emotions and real people.

ozone I saw this in a film festival just yesterday. It was not really the sort of film I would go to normally (I'm not really into religious themes in film). I already knew a little of Father Damien's story, and I had a fair idea of how the story would end but I was glad I saw it just the same. I wouldn't say I "enjoyed" it because the subject matter was in many ways depressing but in a way it was an inspiring story. It showed what one man can do to improve the lives of 1000-odd suffering people that the rest of the world has all but forgotten. Damien had a will of iron and he needed it to counter the resistance of the government and his superiors in getting the help he needed.If this sort of theme appeals to you I'm sure you will appreciate the film, if you definitely don't like religious themes then it's probably better that you don't see it.