Showing posts with label nicolas winding refn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nicolas winding refn. Show all posts

12.19.2012

50/50 Review #49: I'm The Angel Of Death: Pusher III.

Time to wrap up the trilogy. In this review, I'll talk about the film alone and then give my thoughts on the trilogy as a whole. But first, let's look at this. This film follows Milo (Zlatco Buric), a drug boss in the previous tow films. He's trying to kick the habit of using drugs, but it's becoming incredibly stressful due to it being his daughter Milena's (Marinela Dekic) 25th birthday, and he has to cook for 60 people. Unfortunately, after a misunderstanding with a drug trade, Milo ends up with about 10k or ecstasy instead of heroin. While waiting for his heroin to show up, he decides to entrust the ecstasy to Little Mohammed (Ilyas Agac), who says he can sell it quick. But when he doesn't show back up with the money and makes no contact, Milo gets into trouble with the other guys and has to make a deal... with some disastrous results.

Unlike the other two, I really had to think on this one. When it ended, I wasn't sure what I thought or felt. This film, while so similar in structure to the other two, feels different. It's more personal. Milo was the villain of the original film, so to have you sympathizing with him here and wanting him to succeed was an interesting maneuver. Fortunately, Milo is also a pretty great character, and I loved him in the first film, as well as his brief appearance in the second film. Radovan, Milo's partner in the first film, also makes a rather memorable appearance in this film--which is pretty cool considering he's probably the best character in the entire trilogy. But still, while the film was equally as gritty, the personal feeling of the story made everything that much more gut-wrenching (no pun intended... if you've seen the film).

But in the end, I do believe it's probably tied with the first film to me, ranking-wise. The characterization here was superb. Milo is such a complex character that you do kind of feel for, so that makes the overall film that much more depressing and difficult to watch as he just continues to lose it and slip further and further out of control. And everybody just pushes him around, from his colleagues to his spoiled brat daughter. The dangerous, in-control drug lord from the first two films is only a glimmer here, instead replaced with an old man caught in a transitory period where he wants to better himself and is failing.

It is a bit of a slow burn, though. The first 50 minutes, I found, were quite slow, and I checked the clock a handful of times. But the last hour it definitely worth the wait. Like the first film, the slow build of drama until things start spiraling out of control is needed, and the spiral itself is both suspenseful and hard to watch. The entire segment with the prostitute deal was intense, and all I wanted was Milo to snap and beat the crap out of some people. And then the final 20 minutes or so with Radovan was crazy and disturbing (and if you have a weak stomach, beware). And the way it was filmed--in Refn's style of "calm, nonchalant violence" (as best as I can describe it)--is used perfectly in the film's climax.

To briefly discuss the trilogy as a whole, it's one of the most solid trilogies out there. It's not perfect, but it's really dang good. I did prefer the first and third to the second, though I still thought the second was good... just in a different kind of way. I like the complex characters these films present, and I like how all the movies are at least loosely tied together in the characters they share. And what might feel like a flatter character in one film will be expanded on in another, which will give entirely new meaning to that character in the other film. All the films have an open-ending, and they all have different emotions that they leave you with. The first film ends almost as if it's to-be-continued and a sense of dread. The second film ends with a glimmer of hope. And the third film ends rather depressingly--empty and hopeless. To me, my favorite ending was ironically the second film, as it wrapped up things with the story, the character, and theme while still leaving it open to what actually happens. The ending to this one (the third) is currently my least favorite, as it just ends on what's pretty much a symbolic shot. It's not bad... it's just not my favorite type of ending. It's an open ending, but unlike the other two, I didn't leave the film asking (at least too strongly) "what happened next?" And, ironically, that's what made me have to think about my feelings on the film more than the other two. So perhaps that means this was the strongest ending, and to that I can easily concede. I just preferred the other two (particularly the second).

Overall, though, this third installment was very good. The acting was really good. The writing--especially the characterization--was fantastic, as it was with all the films. The direction was tight, especially when it came to any of the violence. I love Milo and Radovan, so seeing more of them is always a good thing to me. I do recommend the film, though you'll want to start with the first one. It was explained to me that this is a trilogy experience, and it really is. You don't need to see each one for them to make sense. They all stand alone. But they work best when you watch them in order, as the character connections and expansions are what make this trilogy such a treat. They're good alone. They're great together. But as for this one on its own...


A Keanu 'Whoa'

12.05.2012

50/50 Review #47: Pusher.

I learned last year during my 60/60 Project that when it comes to crime films, the ones centering around drugs typically interested me the least (Hell, even with Pulp Fiction, my least favorite part is the Uma Thurman section). I didn't know what it was about them, but I just could not get into them for some reason. But now, after watching this, I think I've figured it out. The film follows Frank (Kim Bodnia), a drug pusher with incredibly bad luck. He's already in debt to drug lord, Milo (Zlatko Buric), but he takes one more favor and gets a lot of drugs to pull off a deal with a guy Frank was in prison with. But the deal goes bust when the cops show up and Frank loses all the drugs in a lake. With seemingly the world against him, Frank is running against the clock to get the money he owes Milo before it's too late.

I realized while watching this that the reasons I typically can't get into drug-related films are 1) The characters aren't likable or relatable to me and 2) the focus of these characters is usually either gaining power or looking to make their next score. And character is really important to me in any form of fiction. Even if you have a non-existant plot, if you have strong or interesting characters, I can overcome the former issue. Fortunately, Pusher doesn't fall into those problems.

What I noticed first off was that these characters are human. Their entire existence isn't drugs or power or any of that. Frank and his best friend, Tonny, goof around and act normal on their down time. They have some great dialogue together, and the first 30 minutes of the film is really there to make you feel for these characters and the relationships they build with each other. Even later it discusses the lives of other characters, like Frank's kinda-girlfriend, Vic. Even more than that, there's a great scene where Milo's right-hand man, Radovan, is talking with Frank about wanting to open up a restaurant and get out of the business. But what I loved about that scene was how it wasn't like every other "This is my dream to get out of this bad business" scene in these types of films. Instead, it was just a normal, lighthearted conversation. In other words, this film builds some good, realistic characters who I can really get behind and sympathize with.

Frank in particular is incredibly easy to root for. I mean, he's a drug pusher and isn't the greatest person in the world, but he has some of the worst luck ever. Things just get worse and worse for the guy, one thing right after the other. And it's not like he really did anything wrong (in his world) to be put in this situation. It was just a combination of terrible timing and the luck of Job (biblically speaking). And when he gets betrayed by people, it hits pretty hard since the film builds up relationships very well.

Like Refn's other films, there's a lot of sudden extreme violence. And while the film might not be as artistically or stylishly made as Drive--or even Bronson--you can see that same cinematic eye beginning to come together. It doesn't linger on the blood or make a big deal out of it. It's just part of whatever is going on at the time. And I think not stylizing it or glorifying its use like practically every other action or thriller film adds a layer of gritty realism to the film.

All of that being said, the movie isn't perfect. It feels about 20 minutes too long and could have been trimmed down a bit. I felt it right before the third act (where he has about 2 hours left). There's a chunk of the movie that focuses on him and Vic that just kinda goes on for a while and could have been cut down. Yeah, it's building up their relationship, but it does so for just a wee bit too long and slows down the pacing of the film.

But otherwise, I think this was a good start. I think Netflix knew my aversion to drug-related films and scored it low, but this is one of the rare instances where I think I'd score it a star higher than suggested. It's a really good little thriller, and as it's the first part of a trilogy (which, of course, I will be watching this whole month), it ends with a to-be-continued kind of feel to it (and aspects of the story feel incomplete). So if you're going to check it out, you might as well prepare yourself to watch a trilogy rather than a solo film. I don't know how worth it the entire trilogy is just yet, but the first film, at the very least, is pretty good.


A Keanu 'Whoa'