User reviews

This film lingered in the memory for days after I saw it. It was a portrait, not only of the scabbier side of the music business, but of the intimacy, love and hate that exists between siblings of all descriptions. A lot of it rang true; the cinematic values were lovingly collaged within an overall 'feel' that was at times stunningly beautiful. The performances, particularly of the real-life identical twin brothers, Luke and Harry Treadaway, were lyrical, loving and intense. There was a sense that these two talented actors-who are also rock musicians in their own right, no musical stand-ins or overdubbing here-were giving the performances of a lifetime. After all, how many conjoined-twin-rock-star movies are there likely to be? Having said that, the fictional Howe brothers made a stunning metaphor for the freakishness that is almost a natural part of getting on a stage and screaming into a microphone; it really looked as though it could work, especially in this post-Slipknot world.

The plot was, at times, obscure; there was perhaps a bit too much cleverness in the multiple, and terribly post-modern, overlapping of supposedly-documentary narratives. I found that there was so much going on within the structure that I hardly noticed the climax of the story.

In all, to my surprise, I would describe this as a beautiful film, but with enough rock'n'roll grit to keep me riveted. We need more films like this.

I suppose that a film about co-joined twins who become punk rock stars in the mid-70's has to have something going for it and, indeed, this partially successful film did keep me gripped for most of the journey. As with most rock films, melodrama is the order of the day and this is no exception as the boys face physical abuse, drugs and rock star blow-out in the grand tradition of the likes of Hazel O'Connor in that other punk drama Breaking Glass.

There is much to like in this film including the stylised direction which veers away from the mockumentary format into more creative territory from time to time. There are some excellent ideas at play here; including scenes from an 'unfinished' Ken Russell film.

The problem is that this film is screaming out to be great little cult film but it never quite succeeds; perhaps its the lack of humour and the ease with which it lapses into cliché. Mostly though I think the tired 'mockumentary' format is what ultimately works against this film. Interesting and worthwhile but ultimately not the success it should and could have been.

When I viewed the catalog for the Cleveland International Film Festival, Brothers of the Head was the first film I decided I wanted to see. It had all the potential of being a great rock movie with an interesting twist. The film itself was not completely what I had expected. The storyline was interesting and unusual. The music was humorous. The acting was great. The cinematography was excellent, especially during dream sequences that appear throughout the story. The one problem with this film, which has the potential to destroy the entire experience for the viewer, is its faux-documentary style. The writing was obviously intended to give a third person narration of the boys' life so that it is more dark and tragic. In this way, it is absolutely effective, especially at the conclusion of the film. However, it slows the beginning and keeps the viewer from being pulled in at the start. Many viewers in Cleveland found that this kept them from enjoying the rest of the film. It is sad that such an unusual film may not meet its full potential because of not-quite-there writing.

Some people seem confused as to whether they are supposed to take the film seriously or not. Perhaps such people are going into it thinking in terms of the standard mockumentary format, satirical in an obvious form of comedy. That is, taking an idea to the extreme version of itself to point out the irony on the subject matter. This concept is certainly taken to the extreme as any good satire, but it does not rely on humor to get this point across.

The approach used in this film is fresh and unique, exploring human exploitation without actually exploiting anyone. I was forced to look inside myself and find my own values and beliefs in this unconventional story and I commend the filmmakers for giving me the opportunity to do so. The messages are more subtle and require more participation than most satirical portrayals, so perhaps this is something people are not ready to do with this subject matter. If you think you might like a challenge, set yourself outside your comfort zone and see this movie. Decide for yourself, don't depend on the unfair opinions of those unprepared for the experience for what it is, not what they think it should be.

There have been many self-destructive rock star movies over the years from "The Doors" to "Sid and Nancy," but what if said star was a 'twin' - a Siamese twin.

'Brothers of the Head' could more appropriately be titled 'Bros of the Chest' since that is where the twins are conjoined. As you would expect, one twin is docile and plays guitar while the other twin is more out-of-control but does manage to write some of the band's better songs.

The major problem with this movie is that the twins only produce three (maybe four) songs which leaves too much time for derivative rock star antics in between (re: drugs, alcohol, and groupies). Of course, the groupie thing gets a bit uncomfortable when only one brother 'scores' and the other bro is forced to watch from an all-too-intimate distance.

There's also the issue of identity as to which twin is in control as detailed in the song: 'Are you YOU or me?' Not to mention the film itself has its own multiple personality issues as it slides from insider documentary to Ken Russell adaptation (yes, the director is interviewed within the film). The Russell segments are few and far between and add very little commentary when they are injected between the pseudo-'documentary' segments (and yes, there is a film-within-the-film pseudo-docu director is interviewed too).

Overall, an extremely dark portrait of a freaks-gone-famous punk phenomenon that offers little solace for the audience and a scattershot approach to the mockumentary format that won't score points with genre fans.

Don't expect any laughs or a feel-good ending either, this is mockery at its most dour. Welcome to the dark side of mock 'n' roll.

I have to say this was an interesting and dark movie. I think anyone who is a fan of punk or hard rock will enjoy the music. There is plenty of it. This movie is very dark and sad in many ways in the way it looks into the hardship of these Siamese twins. A main theme in the movie was the fact that their punk band was a freak show which is the reason people actually went. WEll I think this movie was a freak show. It's not as bad as that dumb comedy about the conjoined twins a few years ago but in a sense this movie is a one trick pony riding on the freak factor and mediocre music. I have to give the movie makers credit for making this one of the only movies to feature punk music but the singer is border line terrible and the whole movie lacks that extra spark that could have made it fantastic. Despite all this the acting was fantastic especially from the two twins. This is not a must see but an interesting and intriguing movie of two conjoined twins in the wake of the 1980's punk movement. I would go see this movie.

One of the most realistic mockumentaries to ever hit the silver screen, Brothers of the Head boasts its high production value with a big head. This film pours its soul into the authenticity of the circa 1970's ambiance and climate, and never looks back, or forward at that. This film about a pair of conjoined twins that become a British rock group, is simply too difficult to absorb. The twins played by real-life brothers Harry and Luke Treadaway, could be the one redeeming quality of the film, besides the amazing authenticity, which keeps us guessing if this is a real documentary or not. Unfortunately the music in this film lends to the authenticity of Brit-rock at the time, and is just obnoxious and at no point catchy. Along with the annoyingly loud and incomprehensible music is the unnecessary dream sequences meshed with flashbacks of the two young twins. Keith Fulton and Louis Pepe, directors of the film, simply do not re-create the magic they had in Lost in La Mancha. Although this is a very noble and heartfelt attempt at showing the exploitation of the entertainment industry, it simply is too bona fide for its own good.

Directors Fulton and Pepe get full marks for the rare feat of making a film where the fake-verite style is not a distraction and takes a back seat to the story and characters.

The film is very deftly crafted, especially considering the subject matter. After all, the film is about conjoined twins being sold to a music promoter who wants to make them into pop stars. (The mind boggles at the heavy-handed way such a story MIGHT have been told.)

And, yes, there is an actual meat and potatoes story here. The fact that these brothers are conjoined is key to the plot, but mercifully, it is NOT a one-note gag that the whole film is hung on.

The directors made many interesting and ultimately daring choices, such as shooting the film in a verite style. Unfortunately, this will beg obvious (but ultimately irrelevant) comparisons to other fake-verite films with musical themes.

Another interesting choice was shooting the performance scenes in what appear to be live takes, rather than having the actors lip sync to a studio recording. This seems like an insane choice because of the extra casting and logistic hassles. You'd have to find actors that could actually play, get them to practice together and then who knows if they'll be a decent band. But they pull it off. The music is authentic-sounding pre-punk--an undeniably raw and vital soundtrack. (I'll buy the soundtrack for sure. They could even put this band on tour and I'd go see them.) So, here's to insane choices.

There are modest, surreal sequences between some scenes, but the directors know when to say when on this. The art-house crowd (and the stoned) are thrown a bone. But normal people will not be left rolling their eyes or checking their watch. These parts don't feel like art for art's sake.

The casting is amazing. Using two different actors to play the older and younger versions of certain characters is yet another interesting choice. A few of the actors bear such a striking resemblance to one another that you may find yourself scanning the credits to see if they're related.

This is the first narrative film by these two directors and I wholeheartedly encourage them to make many more films.

Dogmatically realistic mockumentary observing the bizarre life and times of Tom and Barry Howe, conjoined twins who take a ride to punk rock stardom in mid 70's England, is quite the mixed bag. On the one hand you have a completely unique character study(s), aided by unfettered realism, even tragically punctuated by the two amazing twin leads (twins themselves). The moments actually trying to make an emotional statement feel quite profound, the boys we're simply amazing in their required roles. However, these moments become few and far between around the mindfully conceived, though flawed majority of this overextended what-should-have been-a-short. Despite the introduction of many characters and several different perspectives given coverage throughout, this still cannot shake the vibe of being a one-trick pony. Although short for a feature, it clearly does not have enough juice to make it through to the finish line unscathed. With the (period appropriate) documentary-style filming abound and all of it's horrible aesthetic ramifications, the interesting approach does succeed at becoming an item of half-truths in the improvised grandeur and supreme realism of it's ways. Unfortunately the majority of on screen time pervading this realism does not translate all that well to film, and only when the brother's inner spaces are illuminated in the film's keenest moments does the movie hint at the true appeal that will be lost on the majority of viewers unable to connect with the pretty inaccessible subplots and overall style. If not for the little, but riveting emotional substance to be mined from this movie, mainly I can see no other reason for the indulgence in this soon-to-be-cult-but-likely-for-no-one-else oddity, except for old school, Sex Pistolesqe, punk rock fans who will likely froth at the mouth through a good half of the footage dedicated to the band's assault of their songs, as all other viewers feel assaulted in their ears. The nasty homage of a soundtrack that fuels this fictional band does have some fittingly manic style, a dash of intelligence, and attitude to spare, but becomes immediate second(if not third!) fiddle to the sole saving grace throughout the interesting experiment : How real, Howe's were

I saw this film at the 2005 Toronto International Film Festival. Based on a novella by science- fiction author Brian Aldiss, this film attempts to tell the story of Tom and Barry Howe, conjoined twins who are plucked from their family by an impresario in order to form a rock band.

Almost deliberately gimmicky, the film is also too clever by half (if you'll pardon the pun). By mixing genres, styles and moods, the directors (whose previous film was the excellent documentary Lost In La Mancha) lose their way pretty quickly. I was never sure whether I was meant to take it all seriously or not. Flashbacks, dream sequences, it was all just a bit much. Plus, the promised rock and roll just didn't move me. I was reminded a bit too much at times of Hedwig and the Angry Inch, a film I found original and moving. But in this case, the songs just weren't as good, nor were the main characters sympathetic. A more unfavourable comparison would be the similarly disappointing Velvet Goldmine.

Just got back from the screening of "Brothers of the Head" at the Atlanta Film Festival. What can I say about it? To tell the truth, I don't know what to make of the movie. It's really hard to tell if it's a comedy trying to be a drama, or a drama trying to be a comedy. It's mainly a drama, which has some funny moments. But to me, it felt like a film with an identity crisis.

Maybe it's because I was expecting it to be a comedy coming into it, but it just didn't work for me. I heard comparisons to Hedwig and the Angry Inch but those should be thrown out as the two movies are nothing alike, save the music.

The film was well done, I'll give it that, and it had excellent performances from the actors, especially the love interest (played by two different ladies for two different time periods) and the manager. But I found myself laughing at parts that a first played for comedy, then become deathly serious. I didn't know what was acceptable to laugh at. What starts out as a joke morphs into abuse at one point, in another one you start laughing, then you realize your laughing about a tumor.

It is a challenging film, and maybe if I went into it fresh, knowing it was a drama, I would've enjoyed it more. I did enjoy the music, even if it was rough around the edges. I wouldn't be opposed to picking up an album from "The Bang Bang" if it was well produced.

Well, conjoined twin rock stars... a drama... who'da thunk?

A mockumentary based on a Brian Aldiss book from the 70s, this is SO 70s. The band the film is ostensibly about is headed by a couple of conjoined twins. It's all so twisted and sort of vile, like threads of evil. There's the father, the promoter, the keeper, and the boys and their public - everybody using everybody - but only just.

An incredible debut by Harry and Luke Treadaway, who steal the show in a pretty distinguished cast. I can't imagine better casting - the directors can have scarcely believed their luck.

Excellent music, well-performed and never false or embarrassing. If Chryssie Hynde voted for this movie as a judge at some film festival (Edinburgh?) then it shows the music works well.

Brilliant cinematography by a master of the art.

Some of the interviews with doctors (and the girl journalist, who is otherwise pretty good) felt a bit contrived; the American doc film-maker too doesn't quite ring true. Ken Russell, on the other hand, is completely believable.

It's not the greatest film ever, but it's very well worth seeing, and not just for that remarkable debut by the brothers.