Through the entire movie I was trying to figure out why he was so angry. There wasn't even a glimpse of why until the end where he explains that the book he wrote where he supposedly speaks to God wasn't true. He said he was angry because his father died and he needed answers. He begged God for answers and got none. So he wrote all his questions down. Of course then the answers just started coming to him so he wrote those down too. So then people were asking if he made it all up and everyone seemed angry and upset. This to me is the confusing part. It seems like yet another anti-God or religion movie, and yet isn't anyone going to point out that, that is exactly how God communicates to people. Perhaps not to Prophets, but to the rest of us out there. You are so confused and then suddenly the answers just appear. No we don't hear the voice of God, but that doesn't mean God doesn't talk to us. So I was surprised that no one in the audience when he made this confession said something like that. So although the movie seems like it may be anti-God, it is actually God affirming in my opinion.

Jeff Daniels is the author of God and Me a self help book supposedly filled with all of the insights that God wants us to have. In the 20 years since its publication its become a cult industry with Daniel's character being a reclusive loner trying to work out the meaning of life. Into his life comes the mother of a young boy whom he meets when his back goes out, and the owner of a local bookstore he frequents. Wildly uneven, ultimately not really good, romantic comedy of sorts about a bunch of lost souls trying to find meaning and themselves. The problem here is purely the script which seems to go off in every which direction, as best explained by the opening scene where we meet the profanity spewing Daniels which then runs up against some of the scenes with Daniels and the son of the woman he's romancing. The later scenes are utterly charming and their tone seems at odds with the early stuff. yes I know there is arc to the characters but the shifts of tome happen all over the place often between scenes in sequence. It drove me mad because at its heart this is a really good story thats been put on to the screen not very well. In all honesty the film is worth seeing at some point (whats good is really choice) I just wouldn't pay money to do so. Wait for cable,

I usually don't write reviews but rather I usually read them to see if the film is something I truly want to watch or not. But given the one, and only, poor review on here so far I thought I'd add some perspective. This film centers around Arlen, who is a irritable man who once authored an existential book but now lives in recluse and away from prying eyes. His character I find fully believable because there are many people who write a book or several books but don't want the fame handed them, they just simply wanted to write a good story or get their thoughts out, the fame was mere collateral damage. This is how Jeff Daniel's character feels. He dislikes people and attention in general. Partially due to not wanting the fame but partially due to having his own personal demons and issues. Along comes a struggling chiropractor who is trying to get her own business going and also a struggling recovering alcoholic who is trying to keep his small bookstore open. Their paths converge in various ways, of which I won't tell to leave some mystery to the reader. The chiropractor (Lauren Graham) eventually becomes Arlen's romantic interest. But it is not a simple or easy relationship and I don't feel that Arlen makes a magical unbelievable change as the prior review states. He is at first softened by her professional expertise and out of appreciation seems to let a door open and try to get to know her. I'd say him liking her son, and kids in general it seems, is part of his character. I would also say his character opens up to the bookstore owner (Pucci) because he is honest and persistent, things Arlen admires. Everyone has their demons and flaws in this movie which I feel add a certain honesty to the film. It didn't feel particularly flawed or predictable. Although there are a couple turn points and their consequences that felt predictable but in all I'd say it wasn't that predictable because of the characters not being formulaic. I thought the pacing was in general nice and enjoyable. If you want a dark comedy that becomes a bit lighter and romantic then this is for you. I'd say its a bit smarter and more enjoyable then most of the made for rudimentary teens romantic teens out there. Take this review at what you will but please read this and the prior for a more balanced view point of the film.

When drama is rushed it can feel like the slowest thing in the world. The characters never get any time to breathe. The turmoil that they go through feels so compact, tidy, and meager that it's like your watching nothing at all. That's what it's like watching "The Answer Man", writer/director John Hindman's dramedy-romance about trying to find God and the answers to life's problems. The quest for life's answers seems like a subject done before and this movie is way too bland, stale, and unbelievable to really find the heart.Jeff Daniels plays Arlen Faber, who 20 years ago wrote a book called "Me and God", centering around a conversation he had with the big man himself. The book was a mega-hit but nobody has ever really seen Faber in person. Perhaps because he's a reclusive, angry, stressed out asshole that hates people. He spends his days reading other self-help books and meditating; neither seems to lighten his miserable mood though. When he throws his back out one day, he meets a chiropractor named Elizabeth (Lauren Graham), an obsessive single mother trying to raise a young son. She has no idea who Arlen is at first but after reading the book, she seems to think that he is the one for her. Luckily he likes her too. Kris (Lou Taylor Pucci) completes this tripod of people. He's a recovering alcoholic, just out of rehab, managing a failing bookstore.The whole thing follows James L. Brooks' "As Good as it Gets", without ever reaching a great movie, or even a good one. These people will come together and help each other but it's all done in such a weak and contrived way that none of it is effective. Arlen wants to get rid of some books so he makes a deal with Kris in exchange for some life answers. But can't Arlen just throw them away and not be bothered with Kris at all? And who is Arlen exactly? He changes from miserable crank to charming romantic lead with the snap of a finger. Saying he hates people in one scene and then taking on this silly relationship with Elizabeth where he shows her his monster action figure collection and befriends and acts as father to her young son are very schizophrenic and unbelievable. And Kris' failing business, his alcohol problem, Elizabeth's struggles raising a young son, and the daddy issues that Arlen, Kris and the son have are all given short shrift so that we can see a too-cute romance that never gets off the ground.If Hindman had taken more risks and allowed us to empathize with the characters a little more, this movie would have been much better but it just feels like everyone is trying to shoot it and then move on. No care is given. Daniels tries. He's a good physical comedian and some of the movies best lines come at his most cranky. "I hope to find a cure for people who listen to techno" Arlen mumbles at one point. Graham has a nice smile but she's not called upon to do much. And Pucci tries to grapple with the weight of addiction but he seems more like a fifth wheel than a character and his plot line is just distracting."The Answer Man" looked like a mature, adult answer to some of the crappier romantic comedies coming out this year but it winds up getting it mostly wrong.