Regie:
Nicolas Winding RefnCamera:
Morten SøborgMuziek:
Peter PeterActeurs:
Kim Bodnia, Zlatko Burić, Laura Drasbæk, Slavko Labovic, Mads Mikkelsen, Peter Andersson, Levino Jensen, Thomas Bo Larsen, Lars Bom, Nicolas Winding Refn (meer)Samenvattingen(1)
Frank is een drugsdealer die samen met zijn maat Tonny her en der in Kopenhagen zaken doet. Hij verstopt zijn drugs bij zijn vriendin Vic, met wie hij echter een twijfelachtige relatie heeft. Op een dag wordt hij benaderd voor een drugsdeal door een Zweed met wie hij in de gevangenis heeft gezeten. Frank benadert op zijn beurt zijn leverancier Milo, aan wie hij al een flink geldbedrag schuldig was. Milo gaat toch overstag, maar tijdens de deal grijpt de politie in. Frank dumpt de drugs noodgedwongen in het water, maar daarmee weet hij enkel uit handen van de politie te blijven. Eenmaal buiten het bureau moet hij snel keuzes gaan maken: uit handen van Milo en diens brute handlangers blijven, het geld ophoesten of zelfs nog drastischer maatregelen treffen... (RCV Film Distribution)
(meer)Recensie (6)
Pusher is the first film in the “Danish Godfather” trilogy, from which I expected a lot, but it gave me even more.
Scorsese’s and Coppola’s takes on the genre are epical in the American fashion while Refn offers European minimalism and
a much more direct approach. The first Pusher is a great story about a small-time gangster and his downfall due to
unforeseen circumstances caused by unpredictable secondary characters which, despite the little screen time they get,
are conceived in such an intriguing fashion that when they come into the spotlight in the two sequels, it is the ultimate
wish-come-true of every movie fan. A must-see trilogy and one of the cornerstones of the European gangster film.
()
Pusher feels almost incredibly civil and authentic. The protagonist is an unlikeable stupid asshole, which makes it feel more realistic than if the criminal (a street drug dealer) was a cool and nice dude that drops one wisecrack after another, something we know from other films of the genre. Very good début.
()
Searching for rhythm and a signature in long contact details and (apparently) partially improvised dialogues by a pair of delinquents. In the second part, when the film abandons the buddy movie model and begins to watch Frank's desperate struggle for survival, Refn's penchant for aestheticization of brutality and morally dubious characters is born in the neon light of nightclubs and bars. While at first classical red and purple lights are not used in a fundamentally symptomatic way, the magnificent final sequence gives birth to a director who uses his protagonists as projection screens of his brutal visions. A film on the edge between amateur cinema, the residual influences of Dogma 95 and the awakening visual monster.
()
I'm paradoxically reviewing the first part of the loose trilogy last. I saw it at the premiere and now I saved it for the end to confirm or refute my former impressions. Along with it, I actually account for the whole series and I give three stars for the overall image of the Copenhagen art gallery. Pusher does not lack energy and courage nor the effort to be authentic. The story is simple. After one botched delivery, the money and drugs are gone, and there's only an unpleasant debt with the customer, who has more than enough hands for dirty enforcement work. What brings Pusher down are typically Tarantino-like flaws, especially careless dramaturgy. The director is more focused on style and atmosphere than on storytelling. The pair of crooks drive through the streets for too long and spews out macho nonsense - I know that it's part of their character, but to this extent, it strongly smacks of self-indulgence. The behavior of the characters doesn't make sense in some cases. What in the world was the purpose of Frank's robbery with his girlfriend - at that moment, the director got him where he needed to, but it goes against the character and logic of the situation. I'm giving it three stars, but I'm not enthusiastic about it. Refn wanted to entertain and used music video elements so typical for the work of young filmmakers from the 90s. As a serious drama, it's too shallow and if I want to be entertained, Guy Ritchie doesn't play at having any deep exploration, but he entertains more effectively. I add a third star for the duo of big names in Scandinavian cinema - Kim Bodnia and Mads Mikkelsen. Coincidentally, I am currently watching the former in the series The Bridge from a few years ago, and it's an interesting comparison. Overall impression: 55%.
()
At times it felt like Pulp Fiction, but directed by Greengrass. Great actors, great characters and brilliant atmosphere.
()
Refn's debut is interesting in its depiction of how screwed the central character is and how he gradually gets into deeper and deeper shit. The stylization is mostly raw, simple, unremarkable, and feels almost documentary-like. The strong focus on the main character adds a fitting realism to the entire film. A pure counterpoint to the top Hollywood masterpieces from the mob setting, yet in its own way an original and profound insight into the Danish underworld.
()
Reclame