WAKING NED DEVINE

WAKING NED DEVINE has real charm. Its beautiful Irish landscapes, good acting, and touching friendship between Jackie O’Shea and Michael O’Sullivan give the movie warmth. But it is more a minor character study than the hilarious comedy some viewers may expect. The comic buildup is weak, and there are too few dramatic climaxes.

The larger concern is moral. The town’s scheme to claim and divide lottery winnings receives a mildly moral resolution, but the movie still sanctions the fraud and the lies needed to carry it out. Its casual treatment of Ned’s death and another death may also trouble some viewers. Strong profanity and male nudity add to the reasons for discernment.

Older teenagers and adults may find enough beauty and humanity here to appreciate it, but your family is better served by watching this one at home, where you can judge its content together.

In the small Irish village of Tully More, two old friends discover that someone in town has won nearly $7 million in the lottery. When the winner cannot be found, Jackie O’Shea hatches a scheme involving his friend Michael O’Sullivan, the other villagers, and a convincing impersonation.

The plan becomes increasingly complicated when a lottery official arrives to verify the winning ticket and the winner’s identity. What begins as a private scheme soon involves the whole community.

Three stars means WAKING NED DEVINE is enjoyable in parts but falls short of its promise. Ian Bannen gives a good performance as Jackie, James Nesbitt is strong as Pig Finn, and David Kelly has a wonderful scene with the lottery official along with touching moments with Bannen.

The beautiful scenery adds to the film’s appeal, and the acting gives its characters interest and warmth. Still, the movie lacks comic buildup and has too few dramatic climaxes. Its advertising and some reviews may suggest a laugh-out-loud comedy, but the film is better understood as a modest Irish character study.

The source describes WAKING NED DEVINE as having a mildly moral worldview, with a moderate touch of pagan larceny throughout and a few Christian elements, including two priests. The film values friendship, community, and the idea that lottery winnings can serve as a memorial to Ned. It also gives fraud and lying a surprisingly approving treatment, even though the scheme requires deceiving a government official.

The film’s treatment of death is another concern. Ned’s death, along with the death of another person, receives a cavalier response that some viewers may find distasteful. The story’s moral resolution is therefore limited: it acknowledges some goodness while failing to condemn the dishonesty used to achieve it.

Scripture calls God’s people away from such deception: “Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor” (Ephesians 4:25). The film’s longing for community is worthwhile, but community cannot make falsehood righteous.

WAKING NED DEVINE offers beautiful scenery, good acting, and genuine warmth, but its weak comedy and approving treatment of fraud make it better for a discerning home audience. Older teenagers and adults may appreciate its character work; younger viewers should choose something else. Our answer is WAIT FOR HOME.