Band of Brothers

Band of Brothers is significantly flawed and yet absolutely extraordinary -- just like the men it portrays. [7 Sept 2001, p.1E]

Remarkable on many levels - as an interpretation of history, spotlighting what many consider to be the defining event of the 20th century, and as a tribute to heroism. Emotional and starkly realistic, it's not an easy 10 hours of television...The film also is notable as a collection of superb performances and, pragmatically, as an unimaginably expensive television production: $ 120 million. [6 Sept 2001, p.F-03]

After watching the 10-hour Band of Brothers, I'm so drained by the intensity of what I have just beheld that I'm ready to declare this World War II miniseries the finest piece of work ever produced for television. [7 Sept 2001, p.117]

An extraordinary 10-part series that masters its greatest challenge: it balances the ideal of heroism with the violence and terror of battle, reflecting what is both civilized and savage about war. [7 Sept 2001, p.E1]

May be the best-ever film depiction of war in the trenches, large screen or small, and TV's loftiest miniseries since the Brits sent over "The Jewel in the Crown" in 1984. Give Band of Brothers a medal. [7 Sept 2001, p.C1]

An amazing accomplishment. It refrains from emotional manipulation (unlike Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan"). All 10 parts portray human nature as it is - mixed motives, conflicting impulses. It earns every emotion it inspires in us. If it is heartening, it's because it defies cynicism and reveals the realities of courage, compassion, and brotherhood as real men in a horrendous war practiced it. [7 Sept 2001, p.15]

It's an extraordinary achievement, particularly since the miniseries ended up involving seven directors, including Hanks, and six writers. There is an inevitable difference in tone between the episodes, but "Band" never wavers from its vision of re-creating the experience of war through the eyes of average soldiers. [9 Sept 2001, p.3E]

Over nine weeks and 10 hours, this extraordinary television event looks for humanity in the midst of carnage and despair. Time and time again, Band of Brothers finds it. [9 Sept 2001, p.11]

A perceptive, powerful, five-star achievement in HBO's continuing championship season...Saluting it is a singular honor and privilege.[9 Sept 2001, p.3]

The best miniseries in the history of television..."Roots" remains the most important miniseries ever in terms of its impact on our culture--but for overall quality and artistic reach, Band of Brothers is a superior piece of work. I've seen virtually every major theatrical film released this year, but I'm not sure any of them has resonated with me in the way that Band of Brothers has. [9 Sept 2001, p.6]

This is television taking us on a journey into shared memory and the national past. This is television near the top of its game as the Great American Storyteller telling us who we were at one of our finest hours and, so, reminding us of what can be. [9 Sept 2001, p.2E]

For the most part, the miniseries honors the soldiers' bravery without hiding their fears or failings.

There have been many great war films, and any number that have vividly evoked the tension, tragedy and terror of battle. But due to the exceptional amount of time lavished on this story, the fluid manner in which men come and go and the drastic changes that mark them, it's doubtful that any film or TV venture has ever come close to "Brothers" in presenting "What Men Went Through" over the long haul. [4 Sept 2001, p.6]

It doesn't even look like a TV miniseries -- it's more like 10 theatrical films that do an amazing job re-creating battles. [7 Sept 2001, p.W01]

Band of Brothers is absolutely repellent. Obscene. Unsettling. And, if you've got the stuff to stick with it, some of the most instructive TV you'll see this year. [8 Sept 2001, p.E1]

Band of Brothers could use a little more humor, a bit more of the irreverence and profanity that frequently arises in groups of men alone, to break up its almost unrelievedly somber atmosphere. If Spielberg and Hanks have erred, it is not in taking the men of Easy Company seriously, but in taking themselves and their film too seriously. [7 Sept 2001, p.E-1]

Band of Brothers stands as a very satisfying adaptation of Ambrose's meticulous and engrossing account. [9 Sept 2001, p.61]

Band of Brothers may be the best film ever made to show the everlasting bond forged in war between ordinary men...It may also be the best film ever made to show the relentlessness and horror of war. Aurally and visually, it's as graphically real as the battle scenes of Saving Private Ryan, only Band is five times longer...Still, there's something stopping me from saying this is the best war movie ever made, and that is because Band of Brothers succeeds as a whole, but fails to be as interesting in its individual installments. [9 Sept 2001, p.2]

Band of Brothers isn't a great work. It is above all an act of tribute, and perhaps that prevents it from possessing the independence of the greatest films about war. But it is an honorable project, and one of the definitive film treatments of World War II. It brings a new honesty and depth to the way we remember that terrible war, and the boys from Chicago and Louisiana and Montana and New York who fought and won it for us. Without illusions. With abiding respect.

The production is so technically expert that it's agonizing to watch. And with the emphasis on authenticity, there's almost none of the tension that usually moves drama along. To get through it all, viewers will need to be almost as committed to Band of Brothers as the soldiers were to fighting the war. [9 Sept 2001, p.H01]

Early on, Band of Brothers is more methodical, less emotional due to its large, unwieldy cast. Once the uniformed soldiers put their helmets on, it's tough to tell them apart. If you're like me, you'll spend too much time trying to figure out who just got killed to work up much sympathy for the mystery victim. [9 Sept 2001, p.TV-5]