Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Sanjeev Waters A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Kayden This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Sherparsa This movie's nothing like Deer Hunter, Apocalypse Now and that kind of anti-war movies ... but it's certainly not pro-war either ...in fact, it's not exactly anti-war in the traditional sense ... but it leaves it well to the viewer to decide for himself if war is bad or good or ...the tv-movie style in which this movie's been made, makes it look and sound 'simple' at first ... and i believe that's what makes it a good show in that it's not trying to be a masterpiece, the way Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now are ...don't get me wrong though: i love both of those two movies, epics! but this one not being an epic (on purpose perhaps?) doesn't mean it's not just as great ... maybe it could be a 'shocking' anti-war movie the way the other two are and then attract more viewers and sell high at the box office, maybe ... but i'm glad it's been made like a plain tv movie ... now it has even more impact i'd say ...

chuckm76 Not being a veteran myself I can only guess at the supposed events in this film, but from the awful opening scenes where the soldiers seem to put themselves in harms way I knew this film had major problems.Everything is so completely by the numbers and clichéd it's quite sickening, even before watching, it's patently obvious what issues the characters are meant to be having ingratiating themselves back into society. Some very bad script writing and unbelievably cheesy dialogue doesn't help, there's even "THE" most obvious Vietnam vet thrown in there for some extra cheese. I must point out that the acting in this film is also way below par, especially by the more established actors. Biel and Jackson don't seem to have the capacity for this at all, in fact Biel is thoroughly annoying throughout and that 50 Cent guy is atrocious.The motives of this film also seem a little skewed as it tries to preach to you some garbled anti-war message. Thank you but I can make up my own mind!If this was the first film ever made about soldiers returning home from a war and their struggle to fit back into society then it would still be awful, the fact that it's been done countless times before but with much more success makes this a complete stinker and probably a little insulting."I was there....." Yeah it's that bad!

JoeytheBrit Sincerity oozes from every scene of The Home of the Brave, but it can't disguise a rather routine story that has been told many times before. Essentially an updating of The Best Years of Our Lives, the film follows the trials of three veterans of the Iraqi occupation as they struggle to adjust to life back in civvy street. Jennifer Beils returns home minus her hand, Brian Presley is haunted by witnessing the death of his childhood friend while on duty, and surgeon Samuel L. Jackson is guilt-stricken by the lack of emotion he felt when he failed to save the wounded soldiers on his operating table. Like Harold Russell, Biels struggles to come to terms with the loss of her hand (although the hook has been replaced by a chunky looking prosthetic), which costs her a relationship, and like Dana Andrews, Brian Presley returns home to find his job has been given to someone else and finds employment in a low-paid job (ticket clerk at a multiplex instead of Andrews' soda jerk). In easily the least convincing storyline, Jackson seeks refuge from his feelings in alcohol.The film's script can best be described as prosaic, with a couple of high-points standing out from the alarming reliance on familiar phrases and sentiments. The scene in the vice-principal's office is well played, and there are a couple of insightful moments, but everything looks too familiar, as if the film has been cobbled together as a kind of homage to the best of previous 'coming home' movies.While no one questions the bravery and dedication of the troops from all countries in places like Afghanistan and Iraq – and there is no suggestion that this film is anything other than a genuine attempt by the makers to depict how it feels to find yourself a stranger in your own land with emotions you can't control or understand – you can't really hope to create a successful film if you're not prepared to allow it to embrace the bigger picture. I wonder how many people return from these places feeling betrayed by their leaders, and that they've been used by their country for reasons other than altruistic. The idea that the war in Iraq is about America's need for oil, and the questions arising from the States' heavy involvement on the world stage and the perception such an involvement gives rise to amongst its own population and people around the world, is only briefly alluded to – and even then by a troubled juvenile who is ostensibly rebelling against his parents.

rockdalecop I don't like being so negative, but my God, this was bad. I should have researched this before I bought it. It started good. Some nice action and good stuff going on. Then it turned into Lifetime's Movie of the Week. I wanted to see Samuel Jackson kicking ass and taking names. But instead all I got was him drinking and kicking his annoying teenager son in the ass which as annoying as he was, it was nice. Then the other 3 soldiers were boring too. All this was, was a "remembering" the war and how screwed up life is now for them. It reminded me of Dead Presidents in a remote way. But Dead Prsidents was way better. Curtis Jackson is as annoynig as an actor as he is a rapper. This is good if you want film to watch and think "wow, those guys have it really bad". Certainly not for action fans.