SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

samuel_ronalds "Pusher" is a raw experience. Its strongest points are its writing and acting, and these two elements of film constitute the absolute basics of a standard narrative-driven piece. These are the elements central to theatre, yet cinema has the option of expanding these aspects into a unique space, wherein editing and cinematography also serve as crucial components. "Pusher" focuses most of its attention on the writing and acting, but doesn't neglect the cinematic aspects of its presentation. Hence, the result is a film that feels well suited to its medium. The narrative is centred on events surrounding a drug pusher, and the struggles he faces after a drug run goes bust. Unlike most crime films, the narrative is not centred on the plot. Instead, it is focused on the main character and the relationship between him and the other characters of the story. A prominent theme is the mingling of friendships with business partnerships, and as the film plays out and the main character finds himself under increasing stress, we witness the business side of his relationships cutting into the intimate side, and the result is erosion. His relationships - extensions of himself - are eroded and sacrificed as the story plays out, and as a result our character becomes more and more of a volatile husk as we progress towards the conclusion. When he is finally faced with the drug lord he's been desperately trying to appease, we witness almost physical erosion, as he hands over physical possessions of his with no resistance whatsoever - his relationships have been worn away until we are left with the man itself, and he is thus eroded to such a point that he has become a lesser presence. However, this transaction still fails, and we witness what seems to be the end result of his erosion: a reduction to nothingness - a blank slate. When it seems our character must flee the country, he gravitates toward the only supporting character who seems to be in the same state as he is, as though the erased are assimilated into one group, devoid of the individuality they once possessed. When considering where to flee, their choice is based on whim - they have no ties, and are free to reinvent themselves. This notion is further reinforced when it seems our main character may still be able to redeem the last professional relationship he clung onto, and he rejects his partner - he has no need to belong to the erased, as she does. The film's stark yet powerful writing is reinforced by acting that never strays over into melodrama - the characters maintain a strong sense of realism, which is combined by their presence within the script - well written dialogue ensures that every character feels like a unique individual, without a necessity to appear wacky or colourful. The subtle and insightful writing is paired with a raw aesthetic that evokes the DIY mindset of the Punk aesthetic. Camera work is entirely hand-held, and not graceful in any regard - instead, it appears immediate and essential, as though a documentary were being filmed. The only drawback of the film's hyper-realistic style is its insistence on filming only with natural light - while this does ensure the film retains a credible grittiness to its image, it also means many scenes throughout the film are doused almost completely in shadow, and the frames are left entirely opaque to the viewer; there's no point aiming for as genuine a presentation as possible if nothing can be seen anyway. At certain points during the film, there appear to be attempts at stylisation. A couple of these attempts seem like interjections into the film's uncompromising and grainy style, but fortunately these points are not desperate or obnoxious in any way. For the most part, they add little to the film, although the film's final scene, where our character seems left to accept a grim future, manages to evoke a beautiful sense of style that seems wholly appropriate. The ending is, perhaps, the most unsure part of the film. It is hard to discern whether or not it is to the film's detriment - the preeminent theme of interpersonal erosion seems to be hacked off, yet at the same time an ending depicting the two characters driving off to a future in Spain would seem uncharacteristically optimistic. Overall, "Pusher" is a fantastic film - although most of the plot involves a man attempting to solve his debts, it is done in a masterful way that seems entirely dedicated to the work itself, and not the individual mind of any artist behind its creation.

Giallo Fanatic This is one those movies that grow on me with time. It is a simple movie with a simple story, simple plot and a main character who is a simple man. Yet I feel it is one of the strongest and most honest movies I have watched. I never get tired of this movie, I have watched it many times but each time it feels like I am watching it for the first time again. The reason why is because of how honest I feel the movie is. It is not the kind of movie which try ingratiate its audience with escapism. It is a movie with both feet solidly planted on the ground and it is not afraid of getting ugly and gritty. But it never went over-the-top and that really astonishes me. Especially being Nicolas Winding Refn's directorial debut. He did an extraordinary job. He is one of the few directors who makes me feel humbled. I basically love all of his movies. Now Kim Bodnia as Frank, well, let's just say I can't imagine another actor playing as Frank. Kim Bodnia did such an outstanding job. So did Mads Mikkelsen. They both made their characters look so human. The other actors did an outstanding job too.Like with most of Nicolas Winding Refn movies the movie's main theme is morality and desperation. Now Frank is not an evil man, he is just an ordinary man caught up in a corrupt world. I could relate to his desperation. He is not stupid he is just not aware of his possibilities of living outside the criminal world and he only does what he knows to do. Yes he is a criminal, a pusher but that does not make him any less human. The extraordinary talent director Refn has is he simply do not make good vs. evil movies. There is no good guy or bad guy but he lets the evil show through the relationship between the characters. Like with real life, evil does not come from a single person but it rises between all humans. If you are alone try to notice that problems do not rise unless you make them up, but when you are with other people problems seem to come out of nowhere. This is where Nicolas Winding Refn has a keen eye. I dare say this movie is one of the few intelligent movies and quite an honest portrayal of a man driven by desperation. Simple yet a strong movie.

fritzgagi Pusher is the first part of Nicolas Winding Refn's trilogy of the same name. We get to know Frank (Kim Bodnia), who is a full-time drug dealer in Copenhagen's seedy underground. He runs drug deals and drives through the streets of Copenhagen with his good buddy Tonny (Mads Mikkelsen). From time to time Frank drops some of his drug load at his girlfriend Vic's ( Laura Drasbæk) place. The two partners seem to be moderately successful until a heroin deal goes wrong and Tonny rats out his friend Frank, who now owes a great deal of money to the people he initially got the heroin from. From there on things progressively get worse: Frank is in desperate need of money, as the guy who owes it to (brilliant: Zlatko Buric) can change his mood from friendly to psychopathic in a second. So Frank goes on his journey to scrape chunks of money from either past business associates or even his mother. He reaches his first low when he kills Tonny in a violent rush. It's the first time something disgusting happens on screen. And from there on it's one big downward spiral into the madness of the brutal underground.Nicolas Winding Refns trademarks haven't changed in the sixteen years that have passed since he made Pusher. The things people loved about Drive are already present here. The portrayal of a cold ruthless underground world. The long follow shots over the shoulders of someone walking fearlessly with their hands in their pockets. The love for detail and the spot-on depiction of the way these people talk, act, the way they elegantly exchange drugs on the streets, trained by years of experience. As in Drive the very graphic violence serves the purpose of confronting you with the brutality and ruthlessness of that world, after initially deluding you into thinking it's inhabitants are in some way cool, at the same time making you feel bad for thinking so.As things get more sinister for Frank, you are glued to the screen and hungry to know what the other two films in the Pusher trilogy have to offer.

TermlnatriX So in essence, this is a film with true grit. Possibly the grittiest I've seen, literally. Come to think of it, it reminds me of Harlan County, USA documentary, it's dirty, grungy, and perfect for a film with a subject matter this film possesses. Truly, it's as if Nicolas Wending Refn assembled a small crew and started following a real pusher, who gave you an inside look into a week of his life, took you to the seedy, dirty, nasty, harsh (and whatever other synonyms you can throw its way) underworld of the street life so everyone could get an idea of what's it all about and why you probably shouldn't ever get involved. Certainly not a new concept an average man now understands, but it's the way it's all presented that really made me love this film. As I mentioned earlier, the documentary feel of this makes me think Refn had it in his mind when he set out to make this film. The vibe and mood of the film is top notch for the film of this caliber, but really it's the character of Frankie who was fleshed out the most and in the end made me really dig the guy despite essentially who he was, and his profession - though he makes a point later in the film which gives food for thought. What makes it memorable for me is that it isn't devoid of depth, and you get a quick look - which was enough - into each character's life by ways of genuine conversations they're having between each other, which felt like they were ad-libbed, but that's what made it genuine for me.