Critics’ reviews

Brother Bear (2003)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 45: 2 positive, 2 mixed, 7 negative.

Back to our review of Brother Bear

45
Positive
2
Mixed
2
Negative
7

Most critics find Brother Bear warmhearted but too familiar, with praise clustering around its hand-drawn animation rather than its storytelling. The reviews repeatedly admire the rich colours, expressive movement and detailed landscapes, even when they find the film dramatically thin. Reservations centre on a formulaic story, sluggish pacing and characters who struggle to engage; occasional charm and emotional warmth do not persuade most critics to recommend it.

The spread is wide, however. Empire finds delightful family entertainment despite the darker material, while Eye for Film enjoys the friendship between Kenai and Koda, with reservations about ideas younger viewers may struggle to follow. The songs divide opinion more sharply: Variety praises their percussive appeal, whereas The Guardian finds Phil Collins’s power ballads grating. Slant Magazine’s objections go beyond familiarity to the film’s sexist implications and simplistic treatment of Native American spirituality.

Empire
1 January 2000 · Natasha Aitken
75*

Aitken finds it delightful, entertaining family fun, despite a story that can feel unusually dark. She especially praises the rich colors and visual beauty of the spirit world.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
64*

The review text is unavailable, so its verdict cannot be determined. No specific praise or criticism can be verified from the page.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
24 October 2003 · A.O. Scott
50*

The review treats the film as an earnest but uneven animated fable. Its headline singles out the story’s reversal, in which humans appear monstrous to a grizzly.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
25 October 2003 · Kenneth Turan
40*

Turan finds the film warmhearted but too conventional to fully embrace. He praises its rich, fluid, painterly visuals while faulting its familiar story and lack of dramatic originality.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· TCh
40*

The review finds the film watchable but uninspired. It describes the animation as old-fashioned, without singling out a specific element for praise.

Read the full review →
Total Film
5 December 2003 · ★★ · Total Film
40

The review finds the film formulaic and uneven, though it still has occasional moments of charm. It praises the hand-drawn animation and singles out Joaquin Phoenix’s voice performance for its emotional impact.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
18 October 2003 · ★½/4 · Ed Gonzalez
38

Gonzalez pans the film as a dorky, schematically moralizing Disney feature. He particularly criticizes its sexist implications and its reduction of Native American spirituality to a simplistic spiritual spectacle.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
4 November 2003 · Keith Phipps
30*

Phipps finds the film gentle and visually splendid but lacking energy, with little to offer beyond its animation. He praises the expressiveness and beauty of the hand-drawn animation, while criticizing the subdued songs and sluggish story.

Read the full review →
Variety
19 October 2003 · Todd McCarthy
30*

McCarthy finds the film underwhelming, with a recycled feel and characters and story that fail to engage. He praises the handsome, detailed animation and the appealing percussive qualities of Phil Collins’s songs.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
5 December 2003 · Peter Bradshaw
25*

Bradshaw finds the Disney animation tame and weighed down by cultural assumptions and its soundtrack. He particularly criticizes the Phil Collins power ballads, which he describes as grating.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
4 December 2003 · Angus Wolfe Murray
70*

The critic finds the film sweet and enjoyable, despite familiar Disney conventions and some hard-to-follow ideas for young viewers. They praise the breathtaking scenery and the friendship between Kenai and Koda.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate