Big game

Well... When the screenwriter set the action in some particular country, IMHO, he has to get general ideas about the location he is describing... Isn't he/she? I understand that 95% of the American public has no idea where Finland is and how does it look... but... Probably, the rest 5% knows that Finish landscape is pretty flat and mostly consists of lakes and swamps

In 2010 Jalmari Helander delivered one of the oddest but simultaneously most ingenious and refreshing horror movies of the new millennium with "Rare Exports". The success of that film was clearly big enough for him to get noticed in Hollywood and take a shot at making a large-budgeted blockbuster with A-listed actors. We see this happening a lot, by the way: young and creative non-American directors are plucked from their native countries after barely one hit and lured to Hollywood where their careers usually obstruct quickly because they are only allowed to direct lame remakes. But this is where it differs with Helander! Instead of going to Hollyood, Helander brought Hollywood to his beloved Finland for what is one of the most enjoyable, straightforward and unscrupulous action/adventure movies of the '10s. The story is simple yet delightfully far-fetched and over-the-top: 13-year-old Oskari is in the middle of performing a traditional Finnish manhood ritual when Air Force One gets shot out of the air on its way to Helsinki and crash-lands near the boy's hunting turf. Oskari rescues President William Alan Moore from his escape pod and swears to guide him back to civilization before his assailants find him and finish the job. "Big Game" has a couple of strong trumps, namely the chemistry between young Finnish actor Onni Tommila and veteran actor Samuel L. Jackson (in another fresh and surprising choice of role), the magnificently breath-taking Finnish filming locations (although largely filmed in Germany) and the purity of the screenplay. I love how Helander doesn't dive too much into themes like terrorism or overly convoluted conspiracy theories but opted for good old-fashioned and pulpy spectacle. Jackson's portrayal of the US President is also phenomenal. They are basically after him because he's an indecisive and cowardly leader. President Moore's toughest anecdote is a story about urinating in his pants and, in a way, undergoing the bravery ritual is as relevant to him as it is to Oskari. Obviously, there are several flaws in "Big Game" as well, notably how quickly everything and everybody gets tracked in these supposedly giant and impenetrable forests, but you'll gladly accept them. Thanks to the fast pacing, the compact running time and the thrilling special effects, "Big Game" is a massively enjoyable popcorn action flick that comes with my highest recommendation.

I saw this movie with my wife, she was jiggling all the time,i had 2 dusins of good laughs, even though there are so many actual fact flaws on geography and politics. the plot is fine and the acting ok but most of all its damned good fun and impecable special effects and explotions,so dont hesitate watching this,its childish but great entertainment even for an old grumpy guy as me.

So Samuel L. Jackson is the President of the United States and is shot down in Finland where the men and real men and the 13 year old boys are out in the wilderness trying to prove that they are real men.

The President of the US of A is just a foil for this Finnish story about Oskari who, on turning 13 must go out into the wilderness to bring back some game. His grandfather killed a bear at the same age, but maybe Oskari is not up to the task?

But then the President of the US of A turns up while being hunted by terrorists and Oskari is there to prove that being strong is not about muscles but about willpower.

So finally we get a story where the US is not all powerful, but seriously doesn't Finland have an air force that could scrambled to search the area? When the US armed services get permission to operate on Finish territory and why wasn't any killed by being hit by a Nokia?

So the verdict. Every stupid moment in this film is brilliant, and most brilliant moments are also at least a little stupid. It works and is worth watching.

What the movie is about is that if you go into the forest it will give you a gift that is meant to both test and reward you.

I can't understand all the haters out there hating on this one. It brings the cinema back to life the way other gratuitous movies like Armageddon, Goonies and The Rock did. It's a mix of Spielberg and Roland Emmerich. It's big, it's fun, adventurous and endearing, total adventure escapism, the way good movies should be. The cinematography is beyond astounding, and 1/2 the acting is really good. But, 1/2 the acting is really, really bad unfortunately, especially Samuel Jackson and his entourage. I kind of feel bad for Samuel Jackson in a way. It's only been recently that I haven't wished for or expected him to say some pulp fiction gangster lines in every scene. Somehow he looks depressed in this movie. Maybe because he can't say some bad-ass gangster lines? I would kill to see a pulp fiction spin off of his character, maybe roaming the world like Cain from Kung-Fu and, like the A-Team, doing good things and saving people. Or, glorious abandon, his pulp fiction character meeting up with the A-Team? Only in my dreams.