Sprängaren

Colin Nutley is known for regarding Swedes in an English way, although he makes us recognize ourselves very well. He has always been fair to us. In "Sprängaren" he is telling a story about life on a Swedish evening paper. The plot, which begins with the bombing of the new imaginary Stockholm Olympic Stadium, isn't really interesting however. The values in this movie are to be find in the relations between the reporters.

Helena Bergström is here making her best part for quite long. According to Swedish journalists, this is how life is at an editorial staff of this kind. The problem is the thriller element. Mr. Nutley makes the final solution a little too easy and one asks oneself, was it really necessary to make a thriller at all, when you are making a movie about this kind of newspaper people?

Well, it's been a long time since I've seen a movie as boring as this one. It's a thriller but there are no thrills. There's no pace either, the film moves as slowly as a snail, and it is more a drama about a newspaper than a thriller about a murderer. I've read Liza Marklund's novel, upon which this movie is based, and I quite liked it, but it is obvious that it doesn't work as a movie. At least not when Colin Nutley's at the helm. I've never wanted to sleep at the cinema before, but this time I actually longed to close my eyes and take a nap (I didn't, though). I recommend this film if you're an insomniac in need of a cure... I mean, it's not even bad enough to be funny. (3/10)

It sucks! Not the film, that's quite good. What sucks is that there hardly exist a single Norwegian who dares to make good films - like the Swedes do. WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO LEARN???! When?` Sprängaren is a good movie, well worth an eight, but it could have been a little more fast-paced, like to book, and then it would have deserved maybe even a niner...

Well, what can I say. This movie is a slow, typical swedish crime story on the silver screen. As such, it's nothing spectacular. But since I'm a journalist, I can appreciate the many scenes taking place at the newspaper. They are good, if only a little too tame. If people only knew how cynical journalists really are, they'd be chocked. Sometimes reality's more extreme than fiction...

A few years ago, "Sprängaren" was one of the most hyped and popular movies in Sweden. Just like the novel the movie is based on was when it was released. So far I have only seen the movie, and after the impression it made on me, I doubt I'll ever get around to reading the book. But I can't say for certain.

The story:

Annika Bengtzon* is a middle-aged female journalist working for a Swedish evening paper, "Kvällspressen", her articles covering a series of bombings in Stockholm, starting with a recently built stadium, meant to be used in the upcoming Olympics. As any good journalist (Or any journalist?), she starts digging around a little, making some interesting discoveries. Before long, Bengtzon has the undivided and most unwanted attention of the bomber. And that's about it, should I tell you more about the plot, I might start giving it away.

My opinion, short:

"Sprängaren" is a movie worth watching, as long as you don't have to pay for it. I would never rent it on tape or DVD, or go see it at the theaters, but it's worth watching on TV. But it doesn't even come close to the hype surrounding it. It is not the masterpiece it has been promoted as. Rather a quite mediocre thriller of the kind you could expect to find as paperback in a local supermarket, or at the railway station or airport.

My opinion, long:

One of the most evident weaknesses is in my opinion the predictability. Nothing really surprised me, so to say. No twists, no mysteries. To a fairly observant viewer, the identity of the bomber will become evident quite soon. But not to this supposedly clever and competent journalist? I fail to see the logic in that.

As stated, I haven't read the book yet. And it's likely that I never will - The movie didn't impress me. Especially not after the tremendous hype that surrounded it when it was made a few years ago. Without this hype, I might have felt differently. But as it is, it was a sad disappointment.

I believe that there are three reasons for the hype:

1. The author is Liza Marklund, an already well known columnist and journalist at a Swedish newspaper/tabloid. The novel itself was basically considered and promoted as a masterpiece before the final print. - Without the background Marklund has, and the subsequent connections she has within the Swedish media industry, would this novel even have been printed? Would it have received those high ratings if the reviewers hadn't been her colleagues and co-workers?

2. Colin Nutley directed it. Nutley have previously made a number of movies that I consider very good. "Änglagård" is one example, arguably the best Swedish drama ever filmed. - This is a different kind of movie, that might require another kind of director with a different background and experience?

3. The lead actress was Helena Bergström (Nutleys wife), quite an accomplished actress with a long and successful career behind her. - Bergström absolutely shines when she stars in more conventional roles, but maybe this isn't her kind of role?

Since we don't have any really accomplished novelists/writers in Sweden at this time, I suppose the hype was inevitable. The most popular novel was picked to make a movie out of, the most prized director was put in the director's chair, which of course meant Bergström in the female lead***. Leading to very high expectations.

----------------

Footnotes:

* Annika Bengtzon is a more or less fictional version of Liza Marklund, who wrote the novel this movie is based on. The letter "z" in the names are a kind of link between them, since that letter rarely is a part of any of those names, where it replaces the letter "s".

** "Kvällspressen" is a fictional newspaper inspired by tabloids "Aftonbladet" and "Expressen", the word "kvällspress" is a slang term for "tabloid" in Sweden.

*** No matter the movie, plot or cast, Nutley always casts his wife in the female lead. A Woody Allen-ish policy that at times annoy me, especially when I feel that there could have been more suitable choices.