Directed by:
Nicolas Winding RefnCinematography:
Morten SøborgComposer:
Peter PeterCast:
Kim Bodnia, Zlatko Burić, Laura Drasbæk, Slavko Labovic, Mads Mikkelsen, Peter Andersson, Levino Jensen, Thomas Bo Larsen, Lars Bom, Nicolas Winding Refn (more)VOD (1)
Plots(1)
Frank is a pusher in Copenhagen and good at his job. He cruises the area in his fancy car with his partner, Tony. Routinely, they pick up deals for themselves and one of the drug lords of the area, the Croatian Milo, who in his own way sort of likes Frank. He even accepts that Frank now and then owes him money. Frank knows his streets. He makes money for Milo. Not very many - if any at all - reach the inner part of Frank. Tony is probably the closest. He is an underdog, who joins Frank for the ride as long as it lasts - or rather - as long as Frank wants him to! One day, Milo asks Frank to pay his debt, which is only about $10,000. Frank does what he's always done: he borrows some more dope from Milo in order to make a $60,000 deal and then pay Milo back. This time, however, his luck has changed. Frank gets busted, loses the dope - and then suddenly his debt is astronomic. Milo has lost his patience with Frank and sends one of his bad guys, Radovan, to scare Frank. Frank now has a fatal deadline in front of him and starts a desperate and humiliating hunt for some cash that can save him from the 9mm bullet with his name on it! (Accent Film Entertainment)
(more)Reviews (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.
()
Ads