Brothers

we also bought this film because of the "more topless sun-lovers than a page 3 conference" and the Gary Lineker lookalike on the back cover of the case. the film cost us a mere £2 from the pre-owned 'bin' at blockbuster (i now know why its called a bin)and we returned it for our £2. the film is just awful. heres what happens. some guys go on holiday, they get drunk, one meets a girl, one gets arrested, one discovers he's gay, they go home. seriously after reading that you might as well have watched the film. there is no firm story line and the characters are all crap.

anybody who is considering to set aside a night to watch this film, i recommend you have a back-up film ready because this is just unwatchable.

This film definitely has potential as a learning aid for budding film makers, lesson 1 don't make your film like this.

the only thing i liekd about it was the fact that dom from hollyoaks was one of the 600 producers for the film

I disagree with the other reviewer--this is definitely a film to remember, particularly for anyone planning to make a movie. It's an absolutely textbook example of how NOT to make a film. Virtually everything that one could do wrong in film-making has been done here, and to the highest level of incompetence.

Firstly and most importantly, we have the absolutely non-existent plot. Then there's the utterly inane cut-and-paste script, full of all the most tedious cliches you can imagine--sensitive "intellectual" "finding" himself through a series of "profound" observations about his situation, boring hedonist unable to articulate his disgust at his own stupidity... the list goes on... Next up, it's the acting--it's not exactly what one would call "cardboard", a better description would be "awkward and fifth rate". Whilst a lot of the acting deficiencies can be blamed on the moronic script, the actors certainly do nothing whatsoever to salvage the situation.

Lastly, but in no way to be underestimated, there's the direction, cinematography, and editing, all of which make most peoples' home videos seem highly polished and professional. Endless cutting to different scenes with no apparent continuity, the "novel" approach of playing dialogue between two characters who aren't even on the screen, and finally, the camera not even getting the subject properly in frame.

I suppose the bizarre and ridiculous cinematography could actually be considered a "feature" of this film, since I've never seen anything like it in my life--I refuse to believe that mere incompetence could have achieved such an effect. The only other redeeming feature of this movie is the mild pornographic aspect, which plays orders of magnitude above the rest of the production in terms of quality. Rebecca Cardinale is very, very hot as the lead Italian minx--but sadly, her sex appeal is wasted on this self-indulgent dross.

Ok, I admit it. I was brought in under the claim "more topless sun-lovers than a page 3 conference" on the DVD cover and, being the mug I am, handed over 6 shiny new pound coins for this cinematic dreck. I would like to forget I ever came into contact with it, but the fact that somebody has written in to imdb has forced me to grab my keyboard and do my good deed for the day by telling everybody just why they should avoid this worthless rubbish.

First off, the film has not plot. Just a random bunch of scenes sello-taped together with clearly struggling amateur actors extolling the virtues of partying, drinking, dancing and having a good time. Isn't that nice? However, the dialogue is painful and made even worse by the way the characters say it, with no conviction whatsoever and with so much soul-searching you just watch to punch the television. The camera-work is atrocious, especially during the disco scenes where there is so much spinning around and general craziness it just becomes ludicrous. Who could release the film is this state?! And as for the much-hyped nudity, most of it is blurry miscellanious female extras hanging around in the background, but true to the hyperactive nature of everything else we only highlight on them for half a second before the ADD affected film-crew bounce off to focus on something else.

Is there anything nice to say about Brothers? Well the scenery is nice, and so it should be: It was filmed on location in Greece. But if you really want to see the highlights of this famous holiday destination, why not go on holiday there? You'll get a nice tan into the bargain. Oh and the stars are of course beautiful, both in and out of their clothes, again a clear sign that they were chosen for looks, not acting ability. I doubt we'll be seeing any of them ever again in anything more complicated than a Swimsuit Illustrated photo-shoot. One more interesting point: there has been a lot in the news recently about the police cracking down on rowdy UK holidayers in Greece with their drunken antics and thuggish trouble-making. Quite apart from the grief it causes the locals and damage to their properties, if it stops people from making abysmal flicks like this, they have my full support.

0/10

Possibly the least imaginative, least coherent film I have ever seen. Clearly Martin Dunkerton and friends used this shoot as nothing more than an excuse for a freebie p*ss-up of their own in the sun.

And if art is mirroring life (a bunch of unlikeable, uninteresting 30-something males on alcohol-fueled holiday on Greek island) then it is all the more daming that there is not a single redeeming moment in the film. I waited patiently for a plot to appear, for just one scene to capture some truth, for just one funny joke. The soundtrack in particular grates, taking all the biggest and most obvious UK charts hits of the time and seeming all the more feeble and deriative for it.

Perhaps the film was pitched as a UK Porky's and certainly there are a fair few bosoms knocking around the screen and lots of attempts at bawdy humour. Yet the film is so feeble that it falls flacidly short of providing even a meagre portion of titillation. Ironically, American Pie was on TV shortly before this: a film which succeeds in many of the things Brothers fails so abjectly in.

Paul Reynolds, of Press Gang fame is the only recongisable face but playing the least appealing character. Brothers is not on his IMDb filmography for which he can only be grateful. He has - Martin Dunkerton take note - acted in at least two capable UK Films: Croupier and Let Him Have It.

Sorry to harp on but I am just incensed when there are so many talented people with fresh ideas in the UK and yet so few decent films getting made that anyone wasted the opportunity on a dullard like Dunkerton.

I got to see this at a preview screening because I used to work with Nick Valentine. I politely stayed to the end, I think I even told him it was good - but in reality, saying it was one of the worst films I have ever seen is being nice. If you haven't seen it - don't bother - it contains a thin plot, clichéd characters and very unfunny gags. I was a fair bit younger when I saw it and I think I might have laughed at a couple of the gags but you end up embarrassed at just how bad it all is. It is immature, schoolboy humour at its worst. You even get bored of yet another pair of breasts by halfway through. I wanted to like it for Nick's sake, I really did but it is awful. I cannot say that enough. Nick clearly enjoyed writing it though and if you've got money to burn why not? I can think of many other things I would rather spend my money on.