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.

Dmitry This movie was a real milestone, it marked the end of Yeltsin's era. Like the part one is a snap-shot of 90s, this one is the reflection of, on the one hand, started changes of RF internal and external policy. Of course, partly they were (as usual) just proclaimed changes, but it doesn't matter in this case because, on the other hand, Brat-2 showed nation's feelings and hopes of those days. As far as I remember Balabanov himself said something like "The movie was just the answer to the state of public opinion". Also keep in mind it was time just after aggression of US against Yugoslavia and time of victories of federal forces in the second Chechen war - everyone still remembered the humiliation of the first war as well as all previous decade . Now you can imagine the eye we watched Brother-2 with. And you can understand what we felt… The main message of the movie is Danila's words: "So I think that the truth is the power: the one who has truth he is stronger". This phrase has become a byword. In fact, all the movie is about that: neither ascendancy and criminal (personified as "New Russians" and Ukrainian bandits), nor money and hypocrisy (American smooth operators) can defeat the truth. The idea is shown with use of violence. This point was subject of much criticism, but it's certainly not the main thing in the film, at most the decoration for its message. If you saw Brat-2 you would understand me. Another idea is that you can find good and sincere people in any country, any nation and any order. It doesn't matter what all damned governments and bigwigs do: good hearts will always find each other in this cruel world. In addition, Brat-2 is full of sentences, including humorous, which became famous: the above-mentioned "truth", "Russians never desert their own in the war", "You bitches will answer to me for Sevastopol!" and many others.So. Despite some rude episodes I disliked, despite (I think) excessive violence shown, I give it 10 of 10. Brother-2 deserves.

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.

s_rocketship POSSIBLE SPOILER INFO BELOWThis film has a simple plot - although, in my opinion, it is not a plot oriented movie. Danila and his friends have returned to civilian life after a tour of duty in Chechnya.Danila, after an excursion in Saint Petersburg (watch the original film "Brat" for more info), travels to Moscow, where this movie begins. Danila's army buddy's twin brother (and professional hockey player in the U.S.) is having problems with the Ukranian/American mafia in Chicago. Danila's friend is killed for having requested an influential Russian "banker" to intervene on American brother's behalf.This leads Danila to travel to the U.S. to help solve the hockey star's mafia-related financial problems. There are essentially two phases to this film: the preparation to go to America (which occurs in Moscow) and carrying out the business in the states (mainly NY and Chicago).I enjoy this movie immensely, but I can see how it is not for everyone. I was living in Moscow at the time this movie came out - I saw a matinée at the Pushkinsky theater in the center of Moscow. While many of my Russian friends consider this movie to be extremely low-brow, I still can't put my finger on what I like about it so much. Danila and his brother are great characters. Like I saw another reviewer write, Danila cares about others' lives more than his own. I think there are brilliant shots of Moscow and many are picturesque. I recognized most of the locations in the movie, including the inside of Sanduni banya (located behind TSUM) where Danila and his friends party with some pretty ladies. The soundtrack is great - I even bought it on CD (although some of my more hip Russian friends refer to it as "otstoy" or "lame"). Generally, the film is action-packed, funny at times, nostalgic, and one of the more commercialized Russian movies that I know of.If you have some connection to Moscow and enjoy gangster-type movies, you will probably like this film.I have seen several critiques of this film, some of which are valid. However, I haven't seen a criticism that overwhelms this movie's appeal.Brat 2 is a nationalistic movie, but not in a bad way. The basic message is that life in Russia is NOT really worse than the un-realized American Dream that many Russian immigrants experience.Although I read many reviews that deemed this movie "racist," I haven't seen a single reason presented. I'm sure some viewers from Los Angeles cannot comprehend that Danila's use of the Russian term "negr" is not to be confused with the extremely offensive English "n word." In Russian, "negr" is the appropriate and non-offensive way to refer to a black person - although it is very harsh on American ears.In response to Danila's statement to the police, an American (non-Russian speaking) cop hears Danila use the word "negr." The cop confuses this statement as being racist and uses it to segway into a truly racist comment of his own. Just because a character makes a racist comment in a film does not mean that a movie's message is racist. This is a critique of race relations in the U.S., not a reason that this film is "racist."The soundtrack is cool. I like most of the music on it, which includes some commercially successful Russian groups like: B2, Zemfira, and Krematory.My only real criticism of Brat 2 is that many of the Americans are either portrayed as evil or stupid. This is most likely in direct response to how Russians are repeatedly portrayed in American cinema - either as gangsters or stupid (Yakhov Smirnov-esquire characters).Overall, this film has a very positive message - one of loyalty, anti-materialism, honesty, and friendship. How is that negative?