I had high hopes for this one
I guess they were TOO high. First of all, I've often had trouble with the concept of obviously filmed plays
"Noises Off" and "The Man Who Came to Dinner" were two of the worst offenders in my opinion. Static, motionless, tons of expositional dialogue crammed in as fast as they possibly could. And that was my experience with "We're No Angels". (I should note that I was unaware it had originally been a play when I started it
but I figured it out in about five minutes. How did "Arsenic and Old Lace" manage to be so entertaining, since it basically had the same limitations? I don't know, but 'static' is not a word I would apply to that film.)
The first fifteen or twenty minutes of this one are basically filled with Bogart, Ustinov and Ray up on the roof watching and listening as the Ducotel family rolls out their long list of woes. How long can you watch someone looking in a window? What worked on the stage doesn't necessarily translate well to the screen. There was no action that I needed to see in order to follow the film, so about the time the daughter fainted for the second time, I went to work on a project in the kitchen and finished the film by listening only. It was so incessantly talky that it was like listening to a radio dramatization perfect background for a little DIY puttering; not enough to keep me sitting and staring at the screen for the entire running time. I certainly had no trouble following it from the next room.
That said, I thought Peter Ustinov and Aldo Ray were both excellent; they both presented well-drawn characters and delivered their lines (including some real zingers) with appropriate gusto. Bogart was all right, but I've been much more impressed with him in other pictures. He didn't seem to be working as hard as the other two were.
Dull, predictable, nothing special. Wanted to like it more; wish I had.
The first fifteen or twenty minutes of this one are basically filled with Bogart, Ustinov and Ray up on the roof watching and listening as the Ducotel family rolls out their long list of woes. How long can you watch someone looking in a window? What worked on the stage doesn't necessarily translate well to the screen. There was no action that I needed to see in order to follow the film, so about the time the daughter fainted for the second time, I went to work on a project in the kitchen and finished the film by listening only. It was so incessantly talky that it was like listening to a radio dramatization perfect background for a little DIY puttering; not enough to keep me sitting and staring at the screen for the entire running time. I certainly had no trouble following it from the next room.
That said, I thought Peter Ustinov and Aldo Ray were both excellent; they both presented well-drawn characters and delivered their lines (including some real zingers) with appropriate gusto. Bogart was all right, but I've been much more impressed with him in other pictures. He didn't seem to be working as hard as the other two were.
Dull, predictable, nothing special. Wanted to like it more; wish I had.