AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Armand at first sigh, a lesson. about Shoah, faith, Judaism, resistance, hope. at the second - seductive film with a splendid performance of each actor. in fact - only a form of definition of sense in a Nazi camp. a form of fight for survive. the atmosphere, the dialogs, the tension of acting. all as parts of an admirable circle. a story who may be a parable. but, in essence, it is only slice of reality. and not just reality of Holocaust but measure of each day from each life. a terrible film. for its questions and for the images from a hell. and for precise - delicate manner to remember one of many trials in which God was not only defendant but, in same measure, prosecutor.

bob the moo Despite opening with a rather clumsy narrative device for framing the story, this film is almost entirely set in a dormitory block in Auschwitz. The Jewish men in the block have already been divided into who will die tonight and who will not, while new arrivals are poured into the block a day earlier than expected. What comes out of this environment is a sort of trial where God is in the dock accused of breaking his covenant with the Jewish people – a debate about his actions, inactions and motivations if you will. It doesn't sound like a lot of fun to watch and indeed it sat on my HDR for quite some time before I recently got round to being in the mood for it (on a Saturday night weirdly enough, which probably says a lot about me). Seeing for myself I must admit to not being as won over by it as most other viewers seem to have been and I'm not sure if it me "not getting it" or others reviewing their feelings on the Holocaust generally rather than this film.You see, the film is moving towards the end for reasons that should be obvious given the subject but for the vast majority the focus is on the discussion/trial between the men. This aspect is not as emotive but it did have the potential to be challenging and insightful. Mostly it is, and I found my attention easily held as different opinions were raised and evidence examined. The problem with it is that it is never as good or thought-provoking as I expected it to be. At times it is challenging but at others it seems less coherent and the "trial" structure weakens at these points. It is very good at times though and it was a shame that in some regards the final bookend scene felt like too neat a summary of the questions considering the emotion that had gone before, not quite a cop-out perhaps but not a million miles away from it either.Where the film doesn't have a single problem is with the cast because every one of them is excellent. To pick one out would be unfair and Skarsgård, Dillane, Sher, Sheppard and all others are passionate and convincing. DeEmmony directs well within such a tight space – keeping it part of the story of course, but not letting it constrict the ability of the camera to get in and around the characters; although the material remains the feel of a play in regards the dialogue, the film certainly doesn't look like filmed theatre.So mostly God on Trial is excellent, full of passionate performances, engaging dialogue and a real sense of place. It is not a massive problem that it feels like it doesn't deliver in the end and that the final scene itself just feels weak and convenient, flying in the face of everything that had gone before. Not as perfect as some have suggested here but still a very good piece of television drama from BBC2.

Candi A very engaging piece of work, I was particularly impressed by the outstanding performance by Ashley Artus playing Ricard. Artus performance shone above the rest, who although good actors seemed less committed to their characterization, some of them a little too healthy and composed looking to be in a concentration camp in Auschvitz. Ashley Artus in particular displayed both immense talent and dedication to his craft, with clear signs that he was fully immersed in the character of Ricard from the edgily moving displays of varying levels of emotion right down to the weight loss undergone. Somebody ought to give this man the recognition he deserves!

mesere In an interview the writer said he wanted to create a "debate drama" and he was wary of exploiting the "emotional petrol" of the Holocaust. In that he was very successful I must admit, if you expect anything else you will be utterly disappointed, especially if you have ever read accounts of Holocaust survivors. Spoiler alert!A group of prisoners put God on trial: why did God turn against the Jews, but has he? It goes on like this for 90 minutes. It seems the writer didn't do his research properly, there are plenty of silly mistakes, the "Jews" don't wear stars, you think there were only British Jews (one French) in Auschwitz, everything makes an unrealistic or even worse fake and cheap impression. I read it was shot in two weeks and no wonder it's such a poor production. I'm sorry but as a viewer I just don't expect long and quite boring academic speeches from starving prisoners. Interesting questions are raised but sometimes you get the impression the writer didn't want to dig too deep, sometimes the characters seem to be detached from the Holocaust, he created a "debate drama" but setting it in Auschwitz was a mistake.