Brothers in Arms

2005
2.5| 1h25m| R| en
AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes
Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.
Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.
baby_girl-71588 I am NOT a fan of cowboy movies. I was flipping channels when I saw it on TV. I don't like any of the classics like John Wayne. This movie was very well done and I was captivated for the whole thing. I was so touched by the ending till I had to Google to find out the name of it. I love truly artistic movies, especially when it's by African Americans. This is not one of those stupid movies which is derogatory or demeaning like "Soul Plane" this film was captivating. I recommend that you truly give this movie a real chance it is worth it. I know there are several negative reviews and I have noticed that several of the movies with African American casts get negative reviews. Its easy to judge and write off people and art when you don't open your mind to understand. I hope after reading my review you feel compelled to try to understand this is not meant to be funny, but is a very touching movie.
robospyindustries Factual errors: The film contains several background story scenes which are designed to make the audience care about the characters. However, it is not actually possible to care about any of these characters.Continuity: David Carradine appeared in several movies which were good. Then, inexplicably, he's in this movie.Errors made by characters (possibly deliberate errors by the filmmakers): After being identified by multiple witnesses during a blatant murder in a small town filled with vigilantes, the main characters return the next day to rob the bank. This idea is, in fact, completely f**king retarded.Anachronisms: Sequined chaps did not actually exist in the old west.Miscellaneous: The credits for this film list a director and several actors. However, acting and directing do not appear in the film.Audio/visual mismatch: Good western soundtrack was apparently accidentally replaced with generic hip-hop garbage.Revealing mistakes: Movie exists.
macrocephalic This is one of those movies that I couldn't even sit all the way through, and I have sat through some absolute crap in my days, even many Baldwin movies! I don't mind the blacksploitation genre, but this one was just terrible, acting was terrible, story line was terrible, costumes were cliché and let's not even get into the historical plausibility.The bottom line is: even if you can get this movie for free or see it with a friend, you'll regret the hour+ of your life that you spent watching it (or less time if you can't sit through it like me).On the plus side it may be good for a laugh if you're drunk at home with some mates, although it still doesn't have the drunken laughter appeal of something like Python or any of the 70's and 80's cult movies.If you want a serious movie, don't get this, if you want a drunken laugh then only get this if ALL of the 80's horror films are already hired out.I gave it a score of one because 'awful' really is fitting.
krywolff Let me start out by saying that I am a white male. I thought it was a decent effort at what they were attempting to do with this movie, so I've rated it a 4. But overall, this movie sucked.Every time the camera was on a different person it was like the show stopped and they were trying to make some big drama out of each character. In order for that to work, people have to care, and I didn't care at all. It was like a bunch of different ideas that they were trying to mold into one film, but they didn't complete any of those ideas and in my opinion they didn't even work together.Now let me get to the part that is probably controversial. I watched the special features on the DVD to see what the maker of this film, Jean Claude, was thinking... because really, a black western? An urban western?? Hey I'm a fan of Moulin Rouge where they incorporated modern music through the whole movie and it was superb, so I am not against new ideas. But Moulin Rouge was as much of a comedy as it was a love story and musical. It was meant to be a fantasy world of dreamers.Brothers in Arms was to be taken completely seriously. Jean Claude explained that he wants to be the person to show people that there can be black westerns, that there can be black sci-fi, and a "black race car movie", etc. I admire his intentions, but for the love of God, a black western?? I kept waiting for there to be some kind of narration in the beginning that spoke of blacks in the old west, historically speaking. If that were the case, if the movie were to be documenting the little known black addition to the old west, I would have been glued to the screen. But this movie's attempt to put blacks in a western is like someone making a remake to Roots featuring an all white cast.