AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Palaest recommended

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Timeee I usually read the 'Hated it' comments when I like a film, only to get a different point of view. This time though most of the comments just made me laugh. Racist? Insulting? Are you guys serious? I mean sure, there were a lot of parts that could be interpreted as such, but come on- they were in a context, they were supposed to be understood from a certain perspective. Sure there were many stereotypes, but that's not the same thing. Then again the characters expressing racist views- like Danila saying in Brat 1 he doesn't like Jews, or his brother shooting the Ukrainian ('You'll pay for Sevastopol!')- does not mean the film promotes those views. Maybe some people are hyper-sensitive and require immediate and thorough moral condemnation of every non-PC phrase uttered on screen. I for one like to watch films without the plot constantly reminding me of what is right and what is wrong, as if I was a kid- I can make the judgment myself. I welcome morally ambiguous characters, and I don't feel the urge to take offense at any given occasion. Also if this film was racist then so are 90% of American action-movies with their completely stereotypical and ridiculous portrayals of virtually every other nationality from Germans to Chinese. But we all get the point there. So what's wrong here?On the other hand this was not necessarily a great movie. I loved it and I was entertained- but it obviously has its flaws. Compared to the first one it was certainly not very realistic- Pop star-girlfriend, shooting scenes, TV-reporter etc.- but I didn't feel they went out of line. Still its success is not due to its artistic quality, but due to that it's cool- which was of course the purpose and which is totally OK.One final point. Maybe it is difficult for people in the West to understand the often exaggerated success that a film of this type can have in other countries- from Russia to Brazil, from Mexico to Turkey, or in Romania-my country. I have grown up watching mostly American movies, as did all of my friends, as did all my generation. I've never been to America and yet I've seen countless movies set in New York, LA or San Francisco, sometimes it seems I know those cities like I've walked their streets for real. And yet there are only about a handful of films about the places where I really do live; about the people here, about our point of view. Of course it feels great, of course it is something significant when an actually cool film is made locally- a mainstream film, with a little national spirit, with a little self-irony, with some making-fun-of-Americans well placed. It is still a strange feeling - for me at least- to see a mainstream movie with all the American action ingredients but with familiar places and familiar kinds of people who are speaking my language; to look at the whole thing as an insider. I guess this mix between the American way of entertainment and a kind of local pride is responsible for the success of a great number of films in many countries. I for sure liked Brat a lot partly because I could relate to the situations and the people very well.

hapoel_ta2004 Apparently Brat 2 was one of the most popular Russian movies of all time. Unfortunately that little statistic tells more about contemporary Russians than the film itself. While many American action flicks suffer from an overload of clichés, Brat 2 is an action film (if it can be called that) with an overload of mean spirited clichés. It basically caters to the very large segment of Russian population that believes that having racist ideas and expressing them is OK. It shows a great number of very simplistic clichés and stereotypes about the United States, Blacks, Russia, Jews, etc. It glorifies the Russian stereotypical traits of rudeness, self righteousness, selfishness, vulgarity, etc. The positive traits (caring for one's own people) are presented in a very unconvincing manner. When the hero meets a Russian woman, he shows care for her but due to bad acting and bad storytelling, this event lacks any kind of emotional impact. Aside from racism, nationalism, populism etc., the film is also guilty of exceptionally bad film making. The pacing is very bad, making action sequences seem bland and boring compared to American action film (which are often boring and repetitive in their own right). The reasons why the characters behave in a certain way are told - not shown. Relationships pack absolutely no emotional punch - When a character refers to someone as a brother we are supposed to understand he cares about them, but nothing else is shown to make the relationship plausible. The plot structure itself is incoherent and quite idiotic, with people behaving in completely unbelievable ways throughout the film. Overall, the movie is a work of a racist, a poor film maker, a poor writer (same person) with poor camera people, poor editors and poor actors. It is fake through out, substituting cheap clichés for meaning. 20 years from now people in Russia will watch this movie, having a hard time to believe these types of movies were popular in Russia. If Russia wants its own "Birth of a Nation," it should at least make its racist epic a better movie.In case it is relevant: I'm Russian, studied film, and live in America. I'm not offended by negative portrayals of Russians or Americans, I'm offended by idiocy, bad film making, and substituting clichés for substance.

Cristi_Ciopron Better made—at least in one certain sense—it's more ably, deftly made,in terms of conventional thrillers, than the first installment.And also,as I just put it,also more conventional.It's differently paced than the first installment.A Russo-American jam,it should of looked like a weird cartoon;as such,the patriotic overtones sound as crap.For a quite naive thriller,there are so many things to be said for and against.It is,in a conventional way,more amusing,and certainly less scary than the first movie ….It pedals with conviction on some patriotic clichés;it also tries to naively raise against some commonplaces of the political-correctness (e.g.,the episode with the Afro-American infuriated by Danila's racist use of the words …).But this populist side is part of the franchise's mind—it is conceived as a populist/popular thriller with patriotic undertones;as such,all these have their places in the movie's notion.This ingenuity is delectable,till it starts undermining itself by pretending to be what it is not.The concept of the second Brat is somehow 'epigonic,with this second-hand vigilantism.And Danila is deprived of any human or epic or thriller-minded dimension.The first installment worked in a straightforward jail-bent way;the second brings this useless and conventional confrontation that finally shows nothing.It is like the director dreams that Bodrov is Eastwood.But Bodrov does not think that about himself. And this was not the pace for such a movie.I also disliked the incensing of Danila as if he was Rambo or a legendary desperado, and the complicity with the fans and the baksheesh for the fans ('you already knew that Danila likes Nautilus and DDT,did you not?')—this is a banger.The first installment has been naturalistic,brutal, grisly and harsh—its conventions were that of the jail's and the underworld's folklore.That popular tone rang true.It was a tested thing.It was an essayed thing.You do not like to spend time with Danila,but his story had that strong popular intonation.It was scary in a Gorky and popular way.In this second installment,they try to show Danila as being mythical,as being Rambo.But this is certainly not the actor for a Rambo franchise,nor for an urban thriller in the Rourke,Gere,Willis way.Danila is a convention,the lead in a tale from post-Glasnost's urban folklore.Therefore,I think the second installment is a little self-complacent.It does not have the grisly tone of the previous film,and it does not find another tone.It simply conforms to a label.It is conceived just as regular thrillers are conceived.What can I see,it is almost as if they beg for a Hollywood remake.I hope that will never happen. Some things are a little programmatic and didactic (e.g.,the friendship between Danila and the American trucker).This second installment makes obvious the limits and limitations of the concept—it does not work very well in any environment—and Danila is,as a vigilante, obviously not as interesting as Bronson or Rourke. A bum has no charisma,of course,and Danila is supposed to be a cold bum,not Paul Kersey.This is unsatisfying,as Bodrov has the guts for action roles,or physical roles,as they called them,the Eastwood/Gibson/Willis/Bronson way ….The director seems not to have found the scale of this movie;but speaking only of the American part of the film,it should have been made as that Coens' thing from the '80s,Blood Simple—yeah ,it should of looked like that one,and it should of chosen that scale. Otherwise,it is a well-made thriller,very no-nonsense as approach.I was alone,and a little groggy, when I saw this movie;but I think that,seen with other people,many of its deliberately comical sequences would provoke laughter.I would of liked much more violence and action;the movie sets the rules,and then it is not up to them. It should of played as a machine-gun;it does not.It only plays like harmonica.Take the sequence where Danila's brother fires through the car's back window after he breaks it;it is ludicrous. The director chosen to make a vigilante stuff,then he pumped phrases about loving one's country.This is not fair.He has chosen to play on foreign ground,and,to some extent,he has lost the game.A single word for the final:if the director made it only for the money,it is entirely OK and I do not blame him for this.

shusei This film seems to me better than "Brat" and Balabanov'some recent films("Voyna" and "Mne ne bol'no").Danila, the hero played by Sergei Bodrov Jr.here reminds us of some well known character from action films(Travis from "Taxi Driver", or better to say,James Bond from "007" series).Hero with firearms,who never loses in love affairs and in gunfight, who revenges his friend's death, protects potential victims of villains, saves good people,and then goes back to motherland with new girlfriend. The villains here are an American cunning businessman and his mafia-like bodyguards, who are exploiting poor Russians in various ways. Too simple to be commented.But in fact "Brat 2" is not so simple. Danila doesn't kill that American businessman,after having managed to convince him that money doesn't make a man stronger than those who are with truth. But his elder brother,who had come to America with the same purpose as Danila(avenge) is already been infected with "money worship" to the end of the film.Danila remains as he was, to be Russian "muzhik(bumpkin),sympathetic and sometimes violent, tactful and full of wisdom of life, but not at all refined or intelligent.The last sequence with inserted song of Russian rock band Nautilus Pompilius is really great, whole seeming reference to American and Western action films gets toppled upside-down,because when credit titles appear, suddenly the song declare:"Boodby, America, where I've never been.". In fact, the song was made in 1980s by provincial young musicians, who have never been to America. Russian "Muzhik" won fictional America and its soulless capitalism in the end.