Playing God

Like the storyline says: a group of con artists reunite to scam a grieving billionaire. The added twist, they're trying to con their mark into believing one of them is god, which is a lofty con to say the least.

The movie is well made, with solid writing and convincing acting too. The pacing is a little slow, and the actual con could have been a little more elaborate to keep things more interesting. Also, the subplot involving the pregnant couple had a purpose, but it's the least interesting parts of the film. It's not a boring film, and the plot is more complex than the brief storyline would lead you to believe.

There is one massive contrived coincidence that I am not sure actually exists. The fact one character mysteriously went into debt suggests the selection of the mark wasn't a coincidence. The character went into debt finding the mark, and the scene where they're given their implied random target was part of the con. Unfortunately, the writing and directing is too vague on this plot point, so even adding a throw away line to confirm these suspicions would have benefited the film greatly. But to avoid spoilers, no more details will be discussed.

Near the end of the film I had concluded this was a 5 or a generous 6/10. It's a slightly above average con artist movie, but nothing spectacular or memorable. Then the final scene concluded, and this movie became a 7/10. I rate movies by what they are. I'll rate a horror/comedy, monster movie by how competent it is as a horror/comedy, monster movie.

It's not as well crafted as Ocean's Eleven (2001), and it's not as flashy as Now You See Me (2013), but it's competently made. The ending reminds me of Hellowoo Goseuteu (Hello Ghost), a Korean film made in 2010. Both have final scenes that alter the tone, themes, and intent of their entire films. Turns out, this wasn't just a movie about playing god.

Many movies don't know how to end, this movie was written for it's ending. Between the two, the latter is always appreciated. The irony that this movie conned me into believing it was a completely different movie isn't lost on me either.

I love Alan Tudyk and Michael McKean. They really bring a lot to this story. It's a family friendly film. It's not a $$$$ movie, but there are some nice moments. We enjoyed it.

I would say solid camera work, decent direction, pleasant performances overall. Some confusing moments, some pacing issues, but it also had some good moments.

If you have nothing else to watch and don't mind some religious undertones here and there, give it a try...

While in the Good standing not much is good about this. Alan's role in this was phenomenal, truly showing some of the depth of his skill, the rest fall a bit as they are not very well written. Much of the movie isn't well written but it's at least one with heart.

Finally a movie that isn't propaganda based, not even on a particular religious based. The movie had great shots, decent to okay dialogue but the story just wasn't there, it wasn't real and I didn't believe it, it was kind of hard to believe much of the "backstory" but whatever, it's a movie at a time when Hollywood pumps propaganda. - Check this one out.

Mind you it is more drama based than Alan's usual brands of comedy. Just keep that in mind and you'll enjoy this film. It's not the best out there but at least it's a step away from the garbage of modern Hollywood. Rent or Stream this one is worth a watch.

Watched this film because my wife reads Texas Monthly and they did a write-up comparing it to other movies filmed in Houston.

Obviously the plot is very contrived and suspension of disbelief will be required beyond what I'd call normal for this genre, if it really falls into any one genre that is. It's clearly a Grifters type film shooting for a Wes Anderson vibe, which is on one level somewhat annoying given that Anderson is from and has shot several of his films in Texas, including Houston. I would have liked to see a more original vision from this first time director, but in terms of production value, cinematography (sigh, has there been a movie in the past 5 years without *extensive* drone footage?), soundtrack and acting it was well done.

Always appreciate seeing Chuck ("Better Call Saul") and he doesn't disappoint despite the limitations imposed on him by the script. The two leads are fine enough in their roles, and Alan Tudyk (also a Texas product, hmm), an entertaining and charismatic screen presence in pretty much any TV/film, doesn't really bring much dimension to his character here - again, not really his fault as the script didn't allow for a very deep character study to unfurl despite its pretentions in that regard. But the brother sister dynamic didn't quite gel for me or seem realistic enough for the plot.

The writer/director attempts to portray the city of Houston as a character and in some ways, re-envision it as a viable, flexible canvas for future projects much like NYC, Chicago, LA, San Francisco, etc. Have been employed in too many other films to count. But that also rings a little hollow once you see the basically empty light rail cars and platforms both at night and during the day. That's because Houston's light rail system is nothing at all like the subway in NYC which is a real-life nerve center and backbone that links every major neighborhood/borough and cuts across virtually all demographics and lifestyles.

The (mostly drone) shots of the skyline from various angles were too many in number at the expense of any busy city street scenes and the presence of extras like you see in films based in NYC or LA was lacking by comparison. Of course, it was filmed during a pandemic, so that aspect of the production was probably quite a challenge and I didn't dwell to much on it but that was one of the major aspects of Texas Monthly's article plugging "Playing God" so I can't exactly ignore it. Good thing they didn't film in February of this past year when the whole state was crippled and definitely not "Open for Business" due to regulatory failure and incompetent government, but I digress...

"Playing God" didn't seem to know what it wanted to be, but I suppose that isn't a fatal flaw. It was a little too non-committal, trying to hit too many different buttons throughout and not really nailing any one attempt, despite being tightly filmed for the most part and possessing a largely seamless (but still limiting and contrived) script. The overall package just came off a little too 'lightweight' to merit serious awards consideration (not that I usually agree with Academy decisions) but on a positive note, it was entertaining enough to keep me in my seat, at home.

It's certainly worth a watch, and it's not like any other movies I've seen recently, so I give it 5-Stars with an added Star for Michael McKean and some very obscure Texas-themed references (look at the phone number on the card the duo hands to Ben for example) that struck a note with me personally. 6-Stars.