Rent The Sisters Brothers (2018)

An entertaining Western that is not quite as good as you would wish - The Sisters Brothers review by Philip in Paradiso

In the American West (1851), brothers Eli and Charlie Sisters are hitmen hired by a wealthy businessman, ‘the Commodore’. He asks them to kill a man named Hermann Warm. The movie shows how the 2 brothers -- killers who think nothing of shooting dead anyone they have been paid to eliminate -- track down H Warm and what happens next.

It is a good film -- a Western, which was directed by a Frenchman, oddly. Some twists in the plot are implausible and the story is a little bit too long, but the plot is good overall. If you like that kind of cynical Western, I don't think you will be disappointed. But it's not a masterpiece.

The film is billed as 'a comedy' but I don't think it is funny per se. This is a misnomer.

Ironic and subversive - The Sisters Brothers review by PD

Based on a 2011 novel by Canadian author Patrick deWitt, Jacques Audiard brings a distinctly outsider’s view to the western genre, one that both revels in the genre whilst subverting it.

At first glance the Sisters Brothers, aka Eli (John C. Reilly) and Charlie (Joaquin Phoenix), seem like tough prairie assassins, as fearsome as Clint Eastwood’s iconic 'man with no name' anti-hero. But the more time we spend with them, the more we realise that this pair of fortysomethings are actually childish, bickering improvisers who rarely know what they’re doing, nor, crucially, why they’re doing it. As with Cassidy and Sundance, they're fun to be with, and Phoenix and Reilly dig into their juicy roles with relish, with Reilly stealing the show as the big brother who touchingly imagines a quieter, more settled life whilst Phoenix plays Charlie as one who sees no sense in settling down. There are shootouts at every turn, but as the film proceeds we care more and more about what happens to these two uncivilised men grappling with the onset of civilisation. As the sensitive, prickly, blabbery Eli, Reilly is tremendous at bringing to life an essentially sweet soul who pines for the girl he left behind, and watching him get to grips with a toothbrush, a miraculous new invention, is like watching Homo sapiens experiment with fire for the first time. Phoenix, meanwhile, has a rare twinkle in his eye as hard-drinking, slightly mad Charlie. And their interplay is, aka Waiting for Godot, delightfully pugnacious but affectionate, with lots of gentle humour en route amidst the violence. As the film trundles along, it develops as a four-hander, and Riz Ahmed is fascinating as the film's cleverest and most idealistic character, a man who dreams of a utopian society and one who thinks he knows how to achieve it.

The film is deliberately meandering, unhurriedly throwing the shambling brothers into one awkward scenario after another. This West is undoubtedly wild, and brutal, and surreal, but Audiard paints it with an ironic eye, constantly puncturing the puffed-up posturings of the tough guys who inhabit it. Often restlessly moving his cameras rather than employing grand John Fordianesque compositions, Audiard keeps things authentically grubby, and it’s beautifully anti-mythmaking - the sort of film John Wayne would hate.

As with the book, the final section of the film is a bit contrived, and it's perhaps a pity that the book's ending has been changed which for me would have worked well on screen. Some might also say the film falls between two stools, being too 'light' for an insightful drama but too 'heavy' for a thriller or comedy. But on the whole I think the director has just about managed to pull it off, and comparisons with the Coen brothers are not far-fetched. Highly enjoyable.

An adaptation fights with its source material - and loses! - The Sisters Brothers review by JB

Director Jacques Audrillard usually specialises in bruised masculinity and melancholy but here he seems to have taken the wrong tack with the source material in his English-language movie debut, an adaptation of this bittersweet Western, a Coen-brothers-esque novel of brotherly strain by Patrick DeWitt.

Joaquin Phoenix and John C. Reilly play somewhat to type as, respectively, a brooding loner and a hangdog sweetheart - brothers who live a peripatetic existence as hitmen in the Wild West. Things get complicated on their current job when a private detective (a miscast Jake Gyllenhaal, with a wandering transatlantic accent) gets involved with their intended victim, Hermann Kermit Warm, played by Riz Ahmed.

It's a tricky balancing act - on one hand a Western, on the other a character study of two very emotionally wounded brothers. The novel binds all this with a dry sense of humour, which binds the violent horror of their job to a melancholy undertone. Here, Audrillard lets the weirdly large $38 million budget get away with him and ends up just making a beautifully shot (and tastefully scored) so-so Western with the odd more thoughtful touch. When Gyllenhaal's private detective dramatically intersects with the main narrative, it threatens to completely unbalance the film. It never becomes a good Western or a good character study after this point - the development of the two leads stalls and despite a peppering of moments of actually really quite touching intimacy, it becomes emotionally neutered and rather plodding in its plotting.

It really needed a low-budget indie movie maker working on the fly with some offbeat casting choices to bring out the source material's pleasing contradictions and edges. Instead we have either safe or inappropriate starry casting, and something that feels more bland, the longer it goes on. I did like the eleventh-hour appearance of an unrecognisable Carole Kane, though.

A Misleading Genre Slip Up?! - The Sisters Brothers review by trbp72

I knew nothing of this movie before we watched it...I saw John C. Reilly and Joaquin Phoenix and made an assumption...a wrong one because of the genre label even on here...but man what a great movie! Though it has a few laughs, it sits somewhere between Western and Drama more than the labelling suggests...John C. Reilly does do serious movies from time to time and his character in this movie is very well played, Joaquin similarly is a good 'serious' actor when called upon to do so...but also plays 'crazy' fairly well...and here he sits comfortably in the role.

It is a moving tale of two brothers who are assassins (guns for hire if you will) and have been tasked with taking out a prospector who has stolen from their employer...but during the course of the film John C. Reilly's character is fighting with his worth and wants more out of life...whilst Joaquin's character continues to relish in the danger...but it leads them both to the realization that there is more to life than their lot...and they wish to embrace a new direction for themselves...

If you want a Comedy Western...then try Silverado or Blazing Saddles...if you want a seriously good woven tale of life...then The Sisters Brothers is one to watch!

Travesty of a Western - The Sisters Brothers review by Alphaville

Don’t be misled by the trailer, which shows all the action that there is to an exciting score. If only the film matched up. This is a self-acknowledged “re-imagining of the cinematic Western”, with one uncinematic, dreary, stagey, interior, score-free scene after another. Expect few sweeping vistas, dramatic gunfights or stirring drama. Much of it is in darkness. The opening scene sets the tone. It’s played out in pitch-black so that we can’t see any of it. You might as well watch radio.

French-speaking director Jacques Audiard seems to be unable to direct the American actors, who speak their lines without emotion, as though reading them at a pre-production meeting. Even the film’s title smacks of desperation. The whole project gives Westerns a bad name. Judging from a Q&A on the DVD Extras, Audiard hasn’t a clue about the possibilities of the Western. Watch a John Ford film again instead to see what the genre can really do.

people acting - The Sisters Brothers review by JD

Really just a film with some people acting in it.

The title is interesting when it becomes apparent what it means!

Some interesting things happen and its well put together. But its a bit meandering with pretty much no plot at all.

While hard to say its bad (its not) its just hard to stay interested in it.