I'll tell you why so serious

From my favorite movies..

I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Back to the Middle Ages ,but as the precedent user wrote ,what's the point?It was already questionable in "le retour de Martin Guerre" ,an overrated movie which used the era as an "exotic" background for was finally a story which could happen nowadays."Le frère du guerrier" ,on the other hand ,seems at first sight less spectacular,less academic,depicting a rural landscape,like Bertrand Tavernier in "la passion Béatrice":only the first sequence recalls the heyday of the French swashbuckler in the late fifties/early sixties ,some of which are still entertaining today.The main problem with "le frère du guerrier" is :is this entertaining?and if it is not,is there much food for thought? Entertaining is not a word I would choose :the movie definitely lacks tempo and the characters meander endlessly in an hostile environment."Le frère du guerrier" fills its quota of blood and sex ,even when it gets tougher,it never succeeds in exciting .The actors are never given a chance to move us ,even in the last sequence.Now for the "intellectual" side (if there is any):like "la passion Béatrice" ,the most interesting subject is the stranglehold religion had on everything:in the Middle Ages culture was to be found in the nunneries and the cathedrals .But it's only skimmed over and even refuted by the ridiculous "latin" sequence.At least,Tavernier's hero,coming back from the crusade and having lost his faith was a strong character superbly portrayed by Bernard-Pierre Donnadieu.Neither Canet nor Lindon have his talent and the movie is finally a disappointment.