I just finished watching this on TV. The story is about several weeks in the lives of three bothers. Circumstances (what they are is unimportant) have caused the two younger bachelor brothers to move in with their older married brother and his family. The script explores the relationships between three loving Irish Catholic American brothers, each with a distinctive personality, and the relationships each has with the women in their lives. It's about real love and romance (not the sappy romantic comedy type), fears of commitment, and the twists and turns these men go through in dealing with that aspect of their lives. Their Catholicism has a lot to do with the story. At one point Patrick says to his Jewish girl friend, "I go to Church every week; you go to Temple only once or twice a year." She replies, "Yes, but your religion is crazy." Although the most religious of the three, Patrick, goes against the Church's teachings in that he uses condoms; but, he worries about going to Hell should he commit other serious sin. Marriage to all of them means a life-long commitment. Their mother's life set the standard for them. She had lived 35 years in a forced, loveless marriage until her husband passed away. That freed her to go to the man she had been in love with when circumstances caused her to marry the boys' father. Abortion was out of the question, as was divorce.Ed Burns is credited with writing and directing the film and he also is very credible as the middle brother. While the entire cast made their characters seem real, the actor who in my mind stood out is Mike McGlone, who plays Patrick, the youngest brother who has a kind of altar boy personality. Perhaps Ed Burns' choice of camera angles gets some of the credit for making his performance particularly memorable, but McGlone brought something special to that part.

Barry and Patrick move back into their old house owned by their third brother, Jack. They each deal with true love, marriage, and infidelity respectively. Whenever you see that dreaded buzzword "highly acclaimed" or worse "darling of critics", you'd be best advised NOT to get your hopes up. If you do you'll be let down time and time again. Such is the case with this film as well. If however you go in expecting a mediocre movie you're still be let down but not nearly as much. This starts off OK, but gets too long winded. And whenever a character has an internal monologue it becomes laughably bad. Overall I wouldn't want to spend time with anyone in the film. So in that way it's like Seinfield, but minus the laughs. However, it still is good for an indy film.My Grade: C+ Where I saw it: Starz Classics

I'm a big Edward Burns fan, since he's shown time and time again that it's possible to make an interesting film on a low budget that simply focuses on people and their relationships with one another. I always feel that the best movies are ones that I can most relate to. The reason why I don't even have a slight urge to see any of the "Lord of the Rings" films is because what is there to relate to in those stories? How am I supposed to connect with characters who are saving the world from monsters? However, I can relate to the characters and situations in Edward Burns's films. I feel like I'm part of their lives. And most importantly, they talk like REAL people! Burns has a knack for sharp, yet realistic dialogue. The movie was shot on an extremely, and I mean extremely, low budget. I learned a lot from Burns's DVD commentary and he gives a lot of confidence to aspiring student filmmakers like myself. Most of the locations are either in someone's house, in the park or on the sidewalks. There ya go! No permits, no shooting within private property--yet is it sacrificing the integrity of the film? Not one bit. The film stock itself isn't the best of quality, but that goes to show audiences that a movie doesn't have to be "visually spectacular" to be good. Good script and good actors--that's what you need.End of story! Burns could've shot the whole movie on an old video camera, and that wouldn't have made the finished product any less effective. Now, onto what didn't work about this film. Low-budget doesn't exactly translate to low quality, but there's usually at least a few sacrifices to be made. For example, some of the acting in "The Brothers McMullen" is wooden. What surprised me was that Jack Mulcahy is the only actor in the cast with previous experience, and he's the worst of the bunch! He delivers his lines with hardly any emotion and rarely changes his facial expression. Maxine Bahns, who basically was hired because she was Burns's girlfriend at the time, isn't a great actress and proves that she's not much more than a pretty face. Mike McGlone gives the best performance, as he seems the most natural and comfortable with his role. People tend to criticize Edward Burns as an actor, and he's no Robert DeNiro, but at the same time he's good at playing an extension of himself. Some actors, or performers I should say, are good at playing one type of role and there's nothing wrong with that. "The Brothers McMullen" is not a brilliant film, but it's very good for its budget and serves as a fine escape from all these corny special effects extravaganzas.

'The Brothers McMullen', written, directed by and starring Edward Burns (on an extremely low-budget), invites us into the cosy relationship between three Irish-American brothers and their own relationships with God and members of the opposite sex. It is a conventional wisdom that a good story needs a beginning, a middle and an end, yet 'The Brothers McMullen' seems to be all middle - and engagingly so. Burns gives us a glimpse into the lives of these three brothers as they struggle to find their way through personal emotional turning points and re-evaluate their belief systems. The film is dominated by perceptive, sensitive and realistic dialogue throughout. The dilemmas of these three brothers are instantly recognisable to anyone in their twenties or thirties, their inner conflicts easy to identify with. This film is beautifully acted, and particularly likeable is Mike McGlone as the youngest brother who desperately tries to hold on to what he believes is his genuine Catholic conviction whilst searching for 'true love'. Burns' script is witty, warm, honest and wonderfully unpretentious. Burns himself turns in a great performance of the ever-maligned man who is 'afraid of commitment', yet somehow manages to remain intensely appealing and prevents his character from appearing to be a cliché. A rare gem among contemporary movies - one which is fuelled by words and not actions. Refreshing.