A film about life. About relations between brothers. About the long trip defining each of them. About love, building a house as metaphor of self definition. Beautiful cinematography, good dialogues. And nothing more. The poetry of feelings and emotion was too, too often used. The desire to explore the deepest aspects of relation remains a good intention. The poetry of small things and details is familiar. The result - good performances, nice story, correct film. For a part of public is enough. For other, the beach scenes, the landscapes, the travel itself are the gifts. Or just presence of Jonas Smulders or - and Niels Gomperts. But, not ignoring the virtues of film, the story has not roots. It is convincing. Only beautiful.
2 Reviews
One huge cliché
galahad261 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
BROTHERS - Utterly boring
Hey art-house filmmakers! Howcome you have the idea that two people having a difficult relationship is enough interesting material for a film? Haven't we seen this numerous times before? How many art-house films (especially in Holland) have been made about emotionally difficult relationships? Most of the time it's about a father and son. This time it's two brothers. And most of the time characters in these films (this one's no exception) are staring into the distance, or say hardly anything, because they suffer or don't know what to say, or maybe the writer didn't know what to come up with, or thought it's quite cool when characters stay silent. It probably makes it deep and more interesting, no? No!
At end of the film one of the brothers is coming to terms with himself. Did I see that coming? Of course I did! Did I feel any emotion? No. Was I involved with the characters during the story? No. Did the story bring a deeper meaning or challenge me in a cerebral way? No. Because everything in this film I have seen before. Nothing new here. It all has the same predictable pattern as all these so called 'interesting and deep and human' art-house films. One huge cliché.
Then suddenly, in the middle section, something happened, with one brother imagining he and his brother are leaving the girl and then time was turned back and it didn't happen. Suddenly the audience was challenged for a moment as there seemed to be an unreliable storyteller. For a moment it opened up possibilities that the film could go into a more interesting direction. Unfortunately quite soon it became boring again. Utterly boring. This self-indulgent film is maybe interesting for story editors of the public broadcasters, or for film funds, or other geriatrics. So I would urge (Dutch and European) art-house filmmakers to challenge themselves. Don't waste the time of your audience. Use your imagination for once. Please do me a favor, next time ask yourself: have I seen this before? If the answer is yes, then please do not write it! Please write the exact opposite of what you expect! Go watch Nouvelle Vague films and see how truly great filmmakers experimented with art-house films. How they experimented with film language and how they chose for an truly adventurous direction. Work harder! Challenge yourself! Do something different for once!
Hey art-house filmmakers! Howcome you have the idea that two people having a difficult relationship is enough interesting material for a film? Haven't we seen this numerous times before? How many art-house films (especially in Holland) have been made about emotionally difficult relationships? Most of the time it's about a father and son. This time it's two brothers. And most of the time characters in these films (this one's no exception) are staring into the distance, or say hardly anything, because they suffer or don't know what to say, or maybe the writer didn't know what to come up with, or thought it's quite cool when characters stay silent. It probably makes it deep and more interesting, no? No!
At end of the film one of the brothers is coming to terms with himself. Did I see that coming? Of course I did! Did I feel any emotion? No. Was I involved with the characters during the story? No. Did the story bring a deeper meaning or challenge me in a cerebral way? No. Because everything in this film I have seen before. Nothing new here. It all has the same predictable pattern as all these so called 'interesting and deep and human' art-house films. One huge cliché.
Then suddenly, in the middle section, something happened, with one brother imagining he and his brother are leaving the girl and then time was turned back and it didn't happen. Suddenly the audience was challenged for a moment as there seemed to be an unreliable storyteller. For a moment it opened up possibilities that the film could go into a more interesting direction. Unfortunately quite soon it became boring again. Utterly boring. This self-indulgent film is maybe interesting for story editors of the public broadcasters, or for film funds, or other geriatrics. So I would urge (Dutch and European) art-house filmmakers to challenge themselves. Don't waste the time of your audience. Use your imagination for once. Please do me a favor, next time ask yourself: have I seen this before? If the answer is yes, then please do not write it! Please write the exact opposite of what you expect! Go watch Nouvelle Vague films and see how truly great filmmakers experimented with art-house films. How they experimented with film language and how they chose for an truly adventurous direction. Work harder! Challenge yourself! Do something different for once!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
