IMDb > Battle of the Brave (2004) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Nouvelle-France
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Battle of the Brave More at IMDbPro »Nouvelle-France (original title)

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 26 reviews in total 

34 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

30 millions dollars gone away for this

2/10
Author: from Québec City
22 November 2004

That's the worst film I saw since a long time. Historic accuracy is totally non-existent. For example, James Wolfe, who his depicted as an anti-French Canadian, is shown in London during the summer of 1759. Natives are like Indians of a bad Hollywood movie of the 60's : They wear deerskin clothes and ride horses (The Montagnais had never ride horses). The film is taking place in Quebec City, but footage is set in Louisbourg, showing the Atlantic Ocean.

The original scenario was supposed to include the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, but the producers drop this idea saying that costs for uniforms and participants would be more than 4 millions dollars ! I think they never heard about re-enactment.

All the movie is planned to be a new Titanic : an impossible love during an historic tragedy (the fall of New-France). There's even a song performed by Celine Dion at the end of the movie (Yes, I stayed till the end of the movie, but I deeply regret). But the worst thing of all is that this movie cost 30 millions dollars. I just don't know how they spend all this money.

Sorry for my anger, but I'm just too irritated.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Melodramatic Tearjerker on Historical Tableau

Author: August1991 from Montréal
22 November 2004

Ultimately, this movie is a Brazilian soap opera. There are intrigues and billets-doux. The pop theme, recorded by an orchestra in Prague, is good but over-used. At least seven or eight crescendos cover various characters when they either grasp each other, look at each other or wistfully stare out windows while thinking of each other.

I didn't mind the historical and geographical inaccuracies. The need for financing seems to have motivated scenes of Pitt and Voltaire. (Was the inclusion of Franklin a failed attempt at American financing?) In fact, these scenes were not necessary since the movie used symbolism. The basic facts arguably fit the presentation. A case can be made that New France was abandoned by France, abused by the Catholic Church and strung up by England. Marie-Loup, get it? In the movie, she is illiterate but very articulate. Indeed, everyone spoke with modern international accents from mouths with white straight teeth. (So what! It's only a movie!)

Jean Beaudin made "J. A. Martin Photographe" which was both a beautiful and sensitive movie with Monique Mercure in the lead. She's in this one too but her presence only hearkens to the past. Despite its flaws, I enjoyed "Nouvelle France" but I'd probably enjoy any movie about the history of northern North America. If you have no interest in such history, this movie will be a convoluted Brazilian soap opera.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 43 people found the following review useful:

Film can't decide what it is and is bad at everything anyway.

1/10
Author: petitnord from NL, Canada
25 October 2005

Please, do not waste your time and money with this stinker of a turkey.

This is an over-the-top melodramatic love story set against the background of New France (aka Quebec in the 18th century). Or is it an historical saga of New France with an epic romance thrown in? I don't know, and at this point I don't care anymore.

There is a rich story to be told out there about the intrepid French adventurers, rogues and other assorted characters who settled Canada and parts of the US. This is not it. The characters are total clichés, the story is overblown, breathless and devoid of any charm, and before long all the viewer wants to do is get the heck out of the theatre, have his or her head checked, and get hold of his or her anger at being taken in by the hype.

This film was the biggest disappointment of my year in terms of cinema, especially since, as an historian and a French Canadian or Canadian of French descent (or whatever) I am a) a believer in the fact that the story of my people in this country has yet to be told as well as it could on film b) interested in this subject c) a film-lover who thinks cinema these days could do wonders with this grandiose and tragic story.

As I said, do not waste your time with this frustrating bit of claptrap.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 37 people found the following review useful:

Pretentious film

2/10
Author: jmlesfesses-1 (jmlesfesses@hotmail.com) from Québec
4 August 2005

This is the one major problem with this film, along with a good deal of québecois' biggest movies: Done in a pretentious way by pretentious people.

It's really sad, but "big shots" movie makers (driving Dodge Stratus...) from this province believes They Got the Thruth, They Know What the Little People Like.

We're not a rich province, every time a big movie like this (30 millions?!!?) is made, it's cutting off a lot of others who won't see their movie made because of lack of governmental help. So it generates mediocrity; only movies from "friends of the family" are going to be made.

I sound angry and I am. I went see Nouvelle-France expecting a journey in the lives of my ancestors, but i found myself stuck in a pool of inconsistencies: french accent (we gotta please our cousins, so f*** our québecois' language)and lack of historical research is only a few. Add a campy love story and the same music score playing again and again and dumb québecois' viewer is gonna open up and ask for more. I'm glad this pretentious piece of s*** didn't do as planned by the Dodge stratus Big Shots... It's gonna help movie makers who aren't in the very restrained "movie business" of Québec.

Rent Cruising Bar instead and have a real good time.

PS: I'll never forgive them for ruining such an awesome title.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Misleading title; wonderful love story

8/10
Author: kanemorin from United States
29 December 2006

I am NOT a Canadian historian but I am a lover of romance in film and I found this to be a touching, heart wrenching love story, well acted with breath taking scenery and, as background, an interesting look at Canadian life in the 18th century. I have visited Louis Bourg in Quebec with my family and was thrilled to see it "come to life" on the big screen. Whether or not the film is historically accurate is, I believe, unimportant since I believe the history touched upon was more or less for ambiance and was not the focus of the producers/writers. It is, instead, most definitely a love story, and viewed in that perspective, I found it to be brilliantly and sensitively acted. Perhaps I had the advantage of not hearing any "hype" in advance before I sat down to watch it. It was recommended to me by my aunt who wrote that I "had to see it". I'm very glad I did. Melodramatic....perhaps a bit. But, in the end I felt emotionally satisfied and that's worth a little melodrama in my books. And my French-Canadian husband enjoyed it as thoroughly as I did.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Well, could have been better...

5/10
Author: Jean-Sébastien Poirier from Montreal
19 November 2004

This was supposed to be one big hit but the result is somehow nebulous . One big problem of this movie is the excessive emphasis on the tragic love story . The historic context is very nice and the war that is going on is just the background of what is happening with the main characters even if one of them is actively involved ( just a little, though ) in the political events . Even for those who might appreciate this tragedy, and believe me it's a real one, the movie will seems never-ending and slow-pace . The acting is pretty good ( the little girl is marvelous ! ) but too theatrical .

There was a battle going on in Quebec city but it was greatly reduced in the editing process . Some of the best scenes were just cut off as well . The photography was nice for that kind of movie and the visual research was very realistic and interesting .

It could have been better though...

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

A beautiful tear-jerker

8/10
Author: seawall runner from Vancouver BC Canada
14 December 2004

Beautiful film to be enjoyed for what it is - a lovely way to spend an afternoon at the cinema. Sweeping vistas of the province of Quebec, beautiful shorelines, spectacular forests and yes there's a love story in there as well.

There are some historical inaccuracies, true. If you want a documentary, look elsewhere.

For pure entertainment value, the film delivers. Beautiful costumes, a nice story, good acting, a number of tears at the end of the film.

Beautifully done. A nice 'first date' movie, or a nice mother-and-daughter film.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

Probably the worst film I've seen this decade.

1/10
Author: film-218 from United Kingdom
19 April 2005

A film about an interesting and sensitive period of history, filmed in beautiful surroundings, managed to present an appallingly trivial and clichéd production, grossly clumsy script, poor continuity, intrusive slushy music, sugary casting, and pallid acting.

It was a toss up between the script and the acting as to which was worse. The script probably won - the historical background, backstory and character descriptions were spelt out in painful detail in the dialogue. .. actually words can't describe quite how bad this film is.

In a pre-release screening there was a massive exodus from about thirty minutes in. At about an hour many of those who remained were laughing loudly. I should add I am a Francophile, I am fascinated by Canada, and love historical film. This really was a one off.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Beautiful film, great acting

10/10
Author: bjeancoq from United States
4 January 2007

This movie starts out slowly, building the plot carefully. The filming is wonderful, the scenery is beautiful, and the actors are believable. Gerard Depardieu is at the peak of his powers, and gives a commanding performance, even though he doesn't play the lead. Set during the period when England seized Quebec, the storyline covers a fascinating era. The costumes and interiors of the British and French ruling class contrast with the simple clothes and homes of the early Canadian settlers. And in keeping with the times, the French are portrayed as friendly with the local Indian tribes. The historical details are accurate. However, in the final analysis, the plot's the thing, rich in drama and romance, tempered with comic relief, and building to a magnificent conclusion. Well worth seeing.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

What a waste..

2/10
Author: (lupin_le_vorace@yahoo.ca) from Canada
20 February 2005

It's really a shame to see so many talented people involved in what's happen to be a very waste of talents. The plot is cliché. The directing is too self conscious and the characters are almost caricatures. One of the most disappointing aspect of this film is Gerard Depardieu's performance in the English version (this movie was shot in french and English at the same time). Although he is one of the best actor in the film, he gives the worst performance of them all. I must say that Bianca Gervais come very close though...

On a more positive note I must say that the newcomer Juliette Gosselin gives an amazing performance in both version. Unfortunately that the only good thing I remember about this film...

By the way I must apologize for my not very good English...

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history