What were you expecting with this cast and subject matter? No, it is not academy award material but I thought it was a delightful movie. One of my favorites ever! I will have to see it again and see if the acting really is as terrible as some seem to think. I saw this on a flight and had searched unsuccessfully for a theater playing it or the DVD. I had a friend who was pregnant at the time and thought the movie would be great fun for her. Now, of course her child is in Kingergarden, but I'd still love to see it again. Thanks so much for the detail on why the movie was not released in Sept of 2001. At this point, I love seeing movies with the Twin Towners in it, so even more reason to search it out at the movie store! LL

I saw this movie just a few hours ago at the Cleveland International Film Festival and I found it to be an excellent movie.I must strongly disagree with the other reviewers who've panned the movie.I'll admit that the movie has a few Hollywood elements and better-than-indie production values. It also has an understated, but important, plot element that involves religion. It's also sentimental, it could be classified as a date movie or even a "family movie."This is a wonderful movie about freedom and redemption. I found it well-crafted, well-acted (Albert Finney is just terrific) and for a movie with a bit of fantasy, very much believable on that level with few plot holes. Yes, you just might figure out a few things half or three-quarters of the way thru the flick, but so what.I would urge anyone thinking about seeing this movie to reject the too-critical reviews. It's not a Coppola flick and it doesn't pretend to be. But it's not "Ghost" either. This movie delivers what it promises - a good yarn, told, acted and directed well.On a slightly peripheral note, I see that this movie, finished in 2000, has yet to find a distributor. This movie would be a winner at the box office. I'm not a moviemaker, but I have a few friends who are. I've heard them complain about not being able to find distributors for their very indie movies. NOW I understand.Want to just have a nice, enjoyable evening out at the movies? Then go see Milo.

"Delivering Milo" delivered big time! Albert Finney shines as the "guardian angel" sent down to Earth to (so he thinks) help "some kid" see within a 24 hour day that the life the kid was about to begin would be worth living. Refusing to "be born" would not only end the kid's life, but also that of all babies who were to be born henceforth.The premise is even more outrageous than that certain 1946 Frank Capra "sleeper", but I still enjoyed this film very much. Seeing the "man-about-town" Finney character enjoy his "day back on his own turf", constantly loored by temting women from his past, is fun to watch. When at the very end Finney gives up on the kid who seems to have made up his mind NOT to "go for the deal", the old man (and the kid) make a discovery that changes everything.Regarding those who criticised the casting choices of the "Heavenly Officials", I strongly disagree here as well. I found the fact that these characters were all played by youngsters refreshing and effective. Why do we always look for the Lionel Barrymoore type to give sound advise or direction? Why can't a 16 year old have something brilliant to add to a plan?I have seen many films, and a few of them receive 10 out of 10 points on the scale. This is one of them! 10/10

I went to see this on the strength of Albert Finney alone. He's one of my favorite actors and he rarely fails to deliver. I'm not sure if the plot is interesting or just silly: it's about a little boy who is about to be born, but as his mother goes into labor, he refuses to come out! This sends God and the whole human being factory into a crisis and Albert Finney is called out of purgatory to try and convince the boy to change his mind and decide to want to be born. So Finney takes the unborn boy for an adventure in the Big Apple in hopes of showing him all the reasons he should want to live.Despite the ridiculousness of the plot, I could have accepted it if the director had not tried to turn this into your typical Hollywood sentimental moralistic message film. Directorially, the film was rendered unbearable by a horrible soundtrack of the stock sentimental music that Hollywood directors seem incapable of resisting.He further butchered the somewhat unconventional story by giving away its hand at every moment. Whatever twists and turns were in store in the plot were completely given away by the way the story unraveled. It was as if the director assumed the audience is just a bunch of idiots who cannot see the obvious hints coming from a mile away.Even Finney in his performance, though satisfactory, seemed a bit awkward and out of place; and the little boy with curly locks, though he was supposed to be cute, was in fact rather dull. Bridget Fonda seemed intent on trying to duplicate Demi Moore's performance in 'Ghost', shedding tears at a moment's notice.I understand that the film has been unsuccessful thus far at getting distribution in the U.S., which surprises me as I think it has the box office potential to be a modest hit, appealing to both kids and sentimental adults. As far as the quality goes, it's not an awful film, it's just not very good. (4 out of 10)