Levottomat 3 - kun mikään ei riitä

Good start to mid , but it gets stupid and really bad in the end. and i think only END made the movie worse. because its not satisfying . because instead of taking this issue to morality / reality / Logical , it turned into feminism. like woman suffer from desire , she fulfilled her desire in forbidden way , she is a victim , she regret it and she is the winner in the end. so that makes the movie worse.

if there is a logical ending then maybe people would like it. because "Adultery / cheating always ends bad" it destroys any relationship , no matter whats the excuse or reasons. it never repair the trust.

----------spoilers----------------

the worst part in the end was, when she got kicked from house by husband, instead of regret or remorse , she goes for another one night stand, thats a really stupid idea here.

and another idea or flaw in movie. when wife said to husband in hospital" oh yeah i banged many men and every night But i still love and i always have been" wtf is that mean?

that dumb husband should dumb the trash and move on with kids. that would be better ending.

I am a huge fan of European film making, and it is often hard in the UK to see some of the great films that are doing the rounds in Europe. I was lucky enough to catch this film on DVD as it was recommended to me by a friend. I am really glad that I did, I totally enjoyed it, yes it has flaws but I think the subject matter was innovative and new - how many films can say that? Bravo for tackling the theme of sex addiction from a women's perspective! Solid well written script, great acting (if you can ignore the therapists performance) and quiet beautifully shot (if you can ignore the rather tacky TV show snippets at the end credits) I highly recommend this film - but I guess it's just one of those films that you will either love or hate - thankfully I can say I LOVED IT!

I have to say that I saw the movie again after about 10 years, as I do this time with my various old DVDs, and I decided to express my opinion. When I first saw the movie seemed okay. There is no bad acting, especially from Mi Grönlund and Nicke Lingell. Re-watching the film I noticed, despite the nice try, a rather pell-mell written script with many flaws, and an only executive summary of the disease, not overall. Let me post a few. MARITAL RELATIONSHIP A woman with compulsive sexual behavior doesn't avoid her partner. As much as he learns to keep it secret, for certain many times the symptoms on bed are evident. Nothing about that. MOTHERHOOD No mention about the effect of the disease on children. Almost impossible, and a simple infidelity has. Usually kids always tell the truth. TREATMNET Only group therapy is mentioned and then happy end. It's not the key part and there's a lot more and most crucial for aiding recovery. No mention. How to say there is a happy marriage with no simple love scene between them, not explicit, showing no such a problem in marriage. On the contrary, we see him workaholic, avoiding her and not give in to her desires (love, trips). It refers more to desperation than addiction. Only to say she loves him? Only sudden passion? Cliché are also not avoided. The husband is "stupid", he always finds out it in the end. His "revenge" is use of force (mid 20th century). His has no time for retaliation (too many ways, not extramarital affair, etc) and with a few words he easily believes forgives and trust. Really degrading. Does a marital argument last a minute or two? Does a confession last less than a minute? If they lasted longer, they could show a lot more about the disease. Any case is individual. The scenes between the heroine and the richboy look like two lovebirds. We see someone who says is careful and never meets anyone twice and finally dates only one person for a long time, without seeking anything else, gives phone number, yearn to meet him, avoids husband, ready to follow him everywhere and risks anything, without any feelings of remorse or guilt. It's deliberate infidelity. They must kidding with "It disgusted me, but I still did it." Before the treatment has been successful? Fake confession, fake happy end. With the sudden leap to end anyone can be of the opinion that the end is a tribute to female craftiness, not cure. Pity, because an initially promising film ended in disaster. I don't know about production financial or time issues that might have been a brake, but they should achieve better presentation. The result is an erotism film, not presentation of the disease, not drama and not romance (is there?). No message is getting across. And I agree a lot with the poor end. I believe that the producers had a hand on this destructive jump to visual effects end. Perhaps they thought that they gonna earn their money back with explicit scenes only. Personally, I wouldn't care if there wasn't one. From all these I don't disagree with the low rate. Mine is 4/10, only for the promising beginning. There are more flaws or what could be added or removed for a fuller plot, but I don't like to become tedious. However many well done to Mi Grönlund, who I believe did her best despite the shortcomings in the script. That she didn't reappear enough the next years and was made by her own choice then fair enough, otherwise the star system...

I disagree with the previous reviewer's comments on the script. The film is well written; the dialogue simple, real and without ostentatiousness. It's a personal drama and the script reflects that. It's not the kind of film to throw in twists for the sake of plot interest. It's an exploration of one woman's descent into her addiction: slowly, gradually, and with full knowledge of where she's headed, we watch her life disintegrate. That's what happens with addiction. The low-key nature of this film is what makes it so good. The direction is stylish yet simple, and complements the script very well. How much worse to over-dramatise what is already highly dramatic subject matter?

Kieslowski's colour trilogy must had been some sort of an inspiration to all the unattached trilogies we're having these days. Producer Markus Selin is one of the most influential producers in the Finnish film scene and is often credited as the man who brought Finnish commercial cinema back after some 40 years of absence in late 1990's.

The so called Restless-trilogy was meant to be a series of films directed by young directors about the state of the young adults in Finland. A great subject and a great idea although one could see the commercial aspects of this money-making early 30's demographics shine through.

The first part of the trilogy "Levottomat" (Restless, 1999)can be seen as a huge success for Finnish cinema being controversial, sexy and very much tapped into the moment in time as well as the subject. The second part "Minä ja Morrison" (Me and Morrison, 2001) was slightly dimmer success as for some reason it wasn't marketed as the second part. The film and acting were good, though the story ended a little suddenly and the deeper aspects of modern young adulthood were more absent than in "Levottomat".

The third part i.e. "Levottomat 3" (Restless 3, 2004) was a complete let-down of the trilogy. Huge skin-deep marketing, poor acting, poor dialogue, poor story and safe and "pop" choices in casting made sure that the audience felt sick about the whole trilogy. It is told that screenwriters resigned throughout the project and in the end it was just pure bad luck that the last one's name ended up in the credits. Whereas the earlier parts got their young directors to a beginning of a promising career, this one must had been the worst call-card for the poor director who obviously didn't know what sort of a money-making machinery she was getting into.

Sure I should write something about the film itself. Well, dialogue in "Oxford Finnish" is the first thing to take you of the mood of getting into the story. The story itself about sex-addicted young mother getting de-railed for her ambitions has a certain contemporary touch to it but the solid numb acting between her and his husband and her and the new lover of doom leaves everyone stone cold. The plot shows how things get from bad to worse and then a shimmering happyish ending.

I think the only positive thing in this film was to tie it to the contemporary Helsinki scenery at the time when the nations biggest building project (Kamppi commercial and traffic centre) was being built right in the middle of the city. Well, that's about it.