The Sisters Brothers

On EOMs (Election Observation Missions) we are asked to assess the overall conditions in polling stations; very good, good, bad, very bad are the choices. We thought they were mostly very good in Ukraine but decided to mark them as ‘good’ so that when there was an especially good one we could make it stand out with a ‘very good’. This is the methodology I use when judging films.

Quentin Tarantino’s The Hateful Eight was very good, Jacques Audiard’s The Sisters Brothers is good. The latter is multi-genre: mid 19th century western, road movie, dark comedy, gold rush drama, exploration of the relationship between two dysfunctional brothers, and a pinch of fantasy. There is violence and there is some lovely photography of the Rockies. Critics love it:  a gold and a silver lion at Venice and a clutch of other awards. Perhaps because it doesn’t fall into any one category it has been toxic at the box office. It cost $38 million to make – takings are inching towards $11 million. That’s a pity because it has some great acting, the story rattles along, and I was as uncertain where it was heading as the eponymous Sisters Brothers are in the film. It’s good but not a class act like The Hateful Eight.

And yes, we did see a ‘very good’ polling station in rural Ukraine.

4 comments

  1. …..may I commend The Ballad of Buster Scruggs by the Coen Brothers to make up a triumvirate.

    A number of vignettes / fables about cowboy life – very subtle, funny and some writing that is nearly as good as Fleabag.

    Happy watching to all

  2. Saw this movie in plane and I thought it was a beautiful story! Judging by the movie beginning you are Always expecting absolute mayhem and the ending is just poetic!

    1. Pavel, I thought you would have given up reading the rubbish here but glad you are persevering. I met a more-or-less mad Czech who wanted to be my election partner in Ukraine. I suppose he will be your Prime Minister as he’s no dafter than Politicians UK!

Comments are closed.