Surprisingly incoherent and boring

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Great plot, this had the potential to be a fantastic movie but the main character/s never had obstacles to over come. Everything was just all of a sudden handed to them and it just ruined the movie for me. But other than that it was kinda a good movie and it should have run a bit longer

That was the movie I least wanted to see the nominated Oscar in 2014 , most ended up being one of my favorites to win, Philomena is a great movie with a great story , the script is well written , the cast is a plus, Judi Dench is great , the soundtrack fits the film, the picture is very good, the direction is good too, Steve Coogan is very well in this film , the characters in the film are well placed , it is nice to see the journey of it to search for child she did not see 50 years, the chemistry of Judi Dench and Steve Coogan is very good, the costumes is also good , the film as well as virtually all of the same theme, criticizes the Catholic church , and the film has good moments of humor. Note 8.7

Based on a true story, 'Philomena' (on TV, 26 02 16) mixes documentary realism, a mystery story and comedy with consummate success. At its heart is the striking contrast between the journalist Martin Sixsmith (Steve Coogan), portrayed as a cynical 'hack' and atheist, and Philomena Lee (Judi Dench), a devout Catholic, seemingly simple yet thoroughly clear-headed.The story looks back to 1952, when Philomena's father sent her to a convent as punishment for having a child out of wedlock. It portrays Ireland at that time far more harshly than 'Brooklyn' (also set in 1952). The nuns subject Philomena and other girls to a shockingly Spartan regime reminiscent of pre-Revolutionary French convents in Diderot's novel 'La religieuse' (filmed most recently in 2013). Worse still, they have no compunction in selling the girls' babies. It's sobering to think that their appallingly misguided practices could have taken place in such relatively recent times.Sister Hildegarde (Barbara Jefford), superior of the convent in 1952, embodies one of three variations on the theme of Catholicism. She is an unyielding fundamentalist, for whom sexual relations are 'carnal incontinence'. At the opposite extreme, Martin Sixsmith is a lapsed Catholic who bitterly detests the Church. Philomena, by contrast with both those characters, not only keeps her faith but practises it – heroically so in one case. So the story is essentially fair to the Catholic Church.By the time of the main action, 2002, Sister Hildegarde is very old and frail. Mother Barbara (Ruth McCabe), her successor at the time, is completely different: quite young, dressed in an unobtrusive habit and caring in her manner. It's also striking that one of the nuns (played by Wunmi Mosaku) is black.Sixsmith has temporarily abandoned his specialist field of Russian history for investigative journalism. In that role, he's accountable to his editor, who is really no more humane than Sister Hildegarde. When he tells her on the phone that Philomena is 'in bits' over her long-lost son's fate in the USA, she crows with delight.His investigation makes the film partly a mystery story. Its outcome is a great surprise, linking Ireland and the USA well after 1952.Judi Dench is thoroughly convincing as a talkative, warm-hearted and sometimes slightly embarrassing Irish woman. One of her most endearing traits is the way she repeats the name Martin in her conversations with him. Like her, Steve Coogan achieves some very subtle changes of attitude, mood and pace. There's just one touch, I think, of Alan Partridge when Sixsmith makes an awkwardly suggestive quip to Mother Barbara on seeing photos of Jane Russell and Jayne Mansfield.This film struck me as profoundly moving and I felt the tears welling up more than once. Yet another fine piece of work from Stephen Frears, and full credit to Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope for the screenplay.

A political journalist is moved by the story of a woman who tries to find her son after 50 years and so he takes upon helping her and writing her story. As it is based on real facts, the story couldn't have outdone itself. But the simplicity of it along with the extraordinary twists gives the movie a freshness that couldn't be found in a made up story. The performances are brilliant, along with simple, real dialogues. The story doesn't focus only on Philomena finding her son, but on the role of church in it, of society and how religion can be viewed differently from different people. Philomena is kind hearted, religious but flexible. She forgives the people who have harmed her and she loves her boy, even if she hadn't seen him for 50 years and he is different of what she expected. So 7 out of 10, only because the movie tended to focus on the journalist and his character more than on Philomena's story.