KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

oodyrejid this movie is so poor ... The version I watched had even had the title changed(from "21 Brothers" to "1914") which actually made things worse...it gave me the impression that the movie was actually set in 1914, well, would YOU suppose that a movie entitled "1914" is actually set in 1916...........? Foolishly assuming that the title meant the year the film was actually set in, found me criticising the fact that the troops were wearing helmets, which weren't in use until 1916, also being critical of the fact that they were Canadian, and of course in 1914 the Canadians were not on the Western Front, then add in the ludicrously inaccurate representation of the trench, which at most must have been 18 inches deep, which might possibly have prevented the men manning that sector from being shot in the ankles, but would have provided no other protection at all, especially since the sides of the "trench" had no supports, revetting or strengthening whatsoever, and would have collapsed with the first artillery hit, or even after the first heavy rain......... there's no signs of any kind of communication, support or supply trenches, in fact the "troops" are basically overweight actors in a shallow ditch in a meadow in summer, and anything less like bitter, desperate frightened men in a frontline trench in the midst of the bloodiest land war in history would be difficult to imagine.......let's ignore the mediocre acting for a moment, the over-excessive use of the f--- word which was quite inappropriate and not really representative of the time, when the Sergeant happily sat down with his lieutenant for a drink and chatted with him using his first name I lost patience and gave up watching such dross.........I cannot imagine any instance of a senior NCO in the British army in any year of the Great war taking such liberties in the presence of even a junior officer..... my friend who has also seen this movie actually expressed all you need to know about it in one sentence........."this is'nt the worst war movie I'd ever seen, but it IS in the top one............."

crispinj I don't mind watching a movie that doesn't live up to expectations but to brand this movie a breathtaking, epic war film, is laughable. At best it is a low budget tribute to a brave Canadian force that led a renowned battle in France. At worst, the DVD release seems to simply cash in on the anniversary of the Great War. It has no real story, doesn't engage the viewer, and the music and the cinematography are not worth commenting on... Apart from a couple of performances (Clayton Garrett, Tom Sinclair) it is pretty forgettable. Biggest disappointment is it offers nothing more than a stage play so misses an opportunity. On a positive... It's only 92 minutes long.

michaeljharrison2003 Please do not make the same mistake as me and buy this professionally packaged film, unless you want to watch 10 overweight Reenactors mess around with a video camera for a couple of hours. Personally I managed 20 minutes, and then had to stop watching.Do not buy , unless you are curious to see just how bad it is. I would welcome comments from anyone involved in this amateur dramatics to justify how it can be on the shelves of shops.I see on the film info page here that it has an estimated budget of $4000,000 .Don't make me laugh. The budget of the film looks like it wouldn't even have come to the price i paid for the DVD.

foxinbc I'm not a big fan of writing up 'reviews' as they are only people's opinions and should be taken as such. I certainly could not have produced a movie like this and I applaud these young guys in making a film with limited funds about a subject which defined Canada as a nation...Like our neighbours to the South, we should fly the flag a lot more.. However, if we are to portray in film the suffering and hardship of a Canadian Battalion at Courcelette on the Somme and the sheer hell of life in the trenches then an accurate depiction must be attempted in every way. Very clean uniforms/webbing, in-accurate trench system, the VERY heavy use of the word f..k (rarely said by soldiers in that day and age) The cliché'd depiction of a soldier with shell-shock escaping over the top only to be retrieved by his mates, just made me sigh. The Canadians fighting in September of 1916 at Courcelette did so in thick mud and heavy rains !! There was neither in this movie.. Sorry, but I just feel that if we claim to depict what our Great Grandfathers went through then we've got to get it right..