Colibel Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

bob the moo Anthony O'Malley is an old actor who has long since said goodbye to his best days. A lacklustre performance in a terrible version of Richard III that nobody wants to see. One of his support cast is the unsuccessful and jobbing actor Tom who is equally in need of some form or career or income boost. In order to help develop his villain, O'Malley has been hanging around a rough pub in the docks with a criminal called Barreller and, in doing so he has learnt that Barreller owes another party money – a party he does not know. So O'Malley makes a proposition to Tom – that Tom will present himself as an agent for this "other party", collect the money and split it with O'Malley. The first act is simple and well executed but quickly the two find themselves getting deeper into lies.At the time of release I must confess that the trailer did nothing to make me want to see this but, by the time the television premier rolled around I had forgotten this and decided to tune in for the presence of Dylan Moran whom I find very funny in certain things. Sadly this was not one of them and laughs were pretty thin on the ground throughout. So instead I settled into the plot, which at first seemed to offer some interesting scenarios before quickly collapsing into a series of disguises and unconvincing ideas that don't really work. It isn't "bad" per se but it certainly isn't any good. It produced enough forward movement and amusing ideas to hold my interest but it rarely did anything to justify doing so and I was generally disappointed with the fact that it failed to do much.The characters are not that well developed and the sort of pathos I hoped would add value to the material and there isn't that much for the actors to work with. This lack of depth means Michael Caine can't do much with his character and has no laughs to help him out – thus seeing him finally dressed as a woman is yet another low in a career of highs and lows. Moran struggles with the lack of good comedy to work with but still makes a good fist of his various characters and is amusing if not funny. Gambon collects his check and turns in an average performance while Headey looks sexy but doesn't have much else to do. Iverson also lacks material but she gives a nice performance and avoids being an annoying cute kid type of actor.Overall this is a fairly average film that offers some fun early on but generally just becomes messy and poorly delivery the more it goes on. The cast are so-so mainly because they lack the laughs (Moran) or the depth (Caine) that they needed to turn in good work. It all does enough to be watchable but it doesn't do anything particularly well.

mccarthyos It is hard to imagine two actors of such class and experience as Michael Caine and Michael Gambon getting involved in such an embarrassingly inept film. The responsibility for this ill-judged production has to be down to the writer, Neil Jordan and director, Conor McPherson. I doubt I've seen such a bad film with such good credits in a long time. The comedian, Dylan Moran, who made his mark as the irritable and incompetent bookshop owner in the TV sitcom, Blackbooks, turns in much the same routine here, except with such excess and lack of comedic control as to leave one squirming. It is easy to see how the story could have been made to work, for the situation is an interesting one and loaded with comic potential. A classical actor (Caine) tries to rip off the mob (Gambon and co) with the aide of a bumbling wannabe colleague (Moran), with predictable results. It could have and should have been good. Sadly, it was not to be.

Harriet_C_Dufresnes The plot drunkenly careers from silly to ridiculous and makes less and less sense as it nears the end. The photography isn't exactly the stuff of Oscars, either. I still can't see what the point of the little girl is. And the theme is, frankly, dreadful.Fortunately, there is a reason to see this film. The two Sir Michaels re - like the Richard III poster says - "Perfect-ly Adequate" but Dylan Moran is seriously good as Tom, and it was his performance that stopped me from walking out of the cinema. How frustrating to see his first major movie role be in such a dumb film. Here's hoping it doesn't stop him from getting the recognition (and the roles) he deserves!

Danny_G13 The Actors is never going to win any awards for originality, ingenuity or cinematography, but what it does do is to entertain without ever remotely taking itself seriously.Michael Caine (The Quiet American), Dylan Moran (Black Books), and Michael Gambon (The Singing Detective) star as 2 actors who are down on their luck, and one apparent gangster (Gambon) who the actors will try to exploit. Of course the scheme doesn't quite work out as planned, and the yarn spins out thereafter.All the players appear to enjoy themselves tremendously. Gambon and Caine especially give the impression of enjoying this light relief as a little break from their more 'serious' roles. And Moran is just excellent in comedy anyway as proven by the British TV comedy, Black Books. Forget what the critics say, this is a blast assuming you don't expect an intellectually stimulating comedy.Thumbs up.