OK, no one’s really seen it yet, but two “reviews” of Jim Sheridan’s “Brothers” are out there. One, from the L.A. Times, is not really a review per se and it comes from Oscar blogger Peter Hammond so proceed with caution because as we all remember, his taste is rather crap and he was named the Movie Quote Whore Of The Year in 2007 by EFilmCritics.
As discussed several times here, “Brothers” is a remake of the 2004 Danish film, “Broder,” directed by Susanne Bier. In the remake by Sheridan, Jake Gyllenhaal plays the black sheep of a snowy Pennsylvania-based family whose bad behavior has left him in jail for three years while Tobey Maguire plays the military man older brother done good with Natalie Portman as his wife and the mother of their two daughters. When Maguire’s character’s tour of duty in Afghanistan goes awry and he is presumed killed in action, Gyllenhaal’s character — who has just been released from prison — starts to encroach, seemingly to finally give back and support the family. Things are thrown into chaos, however, when Maguire unexpectedly returns.
Hammond posits, does Lionsgate have “a second contender looming in the wings?,” calls the film a “powerful” story and says Maguire could get some awards love, “due to his strong performance, Maguire’s name undoubtedly will start popping up on Best Actor lists.”
He says that after the screening, “Sheridan received a tremendous ovation Sunday afternoon when he was introduced for a Q&A. ”
As previously reported, U2’s “Winter” plays over the end credits and Hammond posits it could figure into the Oscars, but we’re pretty sure that track was already released in bonus-disc form (though technically just over a short film directed by Anton Corbijn that accompanies the digipack format release of No Line on the Horizon, so maybe that will still count). He also has some praise for Natalie Portman’s performance, but again, Hammond isn’t necessarily the greatest source on the web (Honestly after that major 2007 diss we stopped reading him all together; the evidence of quotes therein and the films he backed was beyond embarrassing).
Over on the opposite spectrum of things is a review in the recent issue of Film Comment which is not online, but written by Laura Kern and excerpted here (she also writes for the New York Times). She says that fans of Bier’s 2004 film (that certainly counts us) should, “steer clear of this ill-advised though faithful remake.” She says Portman cannot compare to Connie Nielsen, (the female lead in the original who is rather amazing) isn’t very believable as a mother of two and calls David Benioff’s script, “near-blank working.” She adds that the average Gyllenhaal gives a “respectable performance compared to Maguire” and says the appearance of Sam Shepard and Carey Mulligan add some clout, “but not nearly enough.”
It’s short, but overall a negative review. So thumbs up and thumbs down, really. And though we don’t follow Kern’s work closely, we’re inclined to side with almost anyone over Hammond. Still, we need to see it with our own eyes and are actually looking forward to it. We assume those that haven’t seen the original will have less worry and/or issues, but it is a remarkable film so Sheridan has a lot to live up to.
Like i said, the Maguire awards potential is real, people are just reluctant to buy into it at first without seeing it. But he will probably get nominated.
I can't take this movie seriously because I can't help but laugh at the trailers. When Maguire is destroying the kitchen and screaming, "Do you know what I did to get back to you?" I think he is actually screaming, "Give me an Oscar, damnit." Or at least thinking it.
I'm beginning to think that there may be somewhat of a disconnect between those who have seen the original and those who have not.
I assume most critics have seen the original.
I think the story itself is good and interesting and many/most people might be drawn to it, but if someone is aware of the original (and has watched it) making comparisons is inevitable. That may be problematic.
There were also some tweets about that very showing. Both were positive with one comparing it to the "Hurt Locker." So take that for what it's worth. For all I know they may have come from Jim Sheridan's own brother.
I guess we'll have to wait and see. Although, I still think that acting nominations are the only likely ones to be forthcoming here.
Good to hear something about this movie finally. But I'm confused – did Kern call Gyllenhaal average or is that Playlist's editorial comment? And his performance is respectable compared to Maguire's – does that mean Tobey's performance is good or bad?
I understand that you couldn't just repost the Kern review, but you need to clarify some points.
What I'm dreading is the, surrounded by the police with their guns pointed at him, as he must decide whether to drop his gun or point it and get blown away scene I saw in the trailer. It's such a cliche.
I saw this movie early, and while I don't think I would quite give it a standing ovation, I definitely felt highly invested in the characters. Dismissing the performances of Portman and Maguire seems ludicrous to me. That reviewer must hate 99% of all movies if the acting in this film wasn't good enough for them. The acting was superb.
Does anybody know or think this film respects and honors the military or is it anti-war? Since its about Afghanistan will it provoke controversy?
I saw the movie last weekend. I'm surprised at how well acted it was. I was skeptical at first because I've seen the original, but the new version from Sheridan was totally justified. I'm predicting oscar buzz on this one.
My girl had to drag me out to this cuz I was really turned off by the cliche trailers I saw. But damn, it was actually pretty deep. I'm not a big Tobey Maguire fan but he really tapped in with this role…