Critics reviews

The older transformative or humanist-reformist ambitions of Soviet cinema are not only gone, but are actively rejected; and the only pedagogy here involves teaching filmmakers (especially Hollywood-oriented filmmakers) a new way of thinking and working. Indeed, in the film's central scene, we see Danila attempting to educate the director Styopa, to get him to trust his fearsome audience, without demanding that the audience give up any of its fearsomeness.

A true piece of junk art, equal parts crude and sophisticated, a faux-naïve crime myth with a protagonist as indelible as Travis Bickle... The thing about Brother is that it's stubbornly linear, but so suggestive that it just begs for inconclusive allegorical readings: a plot as simple and elemental as dirt, seeded with Freudian overtones, unaddressed nationalist subtexts, and black humor. The good stuff, in other words. Everything looks salvaged or secondhand. In most cases, it was.

Balabanov’s is a gangster film that slow-burns nastiness but, more impressively, critiques with precision, the latter ably—and distressingly—confirmed by Danila’s real-world elevation into a generational cinematic icon fit for a “U.S.A., here I come!” sequel.

["Brother"] has a thread of cynical humor that connects it to the American gangster movies of the 1930's as well as to more recent films like ''Goodfellas'' that examine the flashier trappings of macho gangster culture with a satirical eye.

Balabanov shows again his rare talent for deriving entirely credible performances, shooting with a no-fuss efficiency and assurance, while retaining an authorial distance that leaves the moral lessons open.