Headhunters

Hunters of heads is such a, slightly different northern region than I am used to. A bit towards France. It forces the actors to squeeze out everything within their mental and physical strength and throw them into a story that doesn't seem at first, but over time it brutally twists and evolves at an absolutely unbelievable pace. But I have to say, I enjoyed it. (16/01/2012)

I admit that my concentration was not at the level that such a renowned Nordic film deserved (when I get a text message from my dream girl, perhaps only Stanley Kubrick has better chances...), but I can defend my three stars. I didn't like the way the story was conceived and constructed, how the director forced me to explore and enjoy the mostly physical suffering of the main character, for whom he could generate almost no sympathy at the beginning. Moreover, the plot scheme seems unnecessarily complex, contrasting sharply with the straightforward, atmospheric and suggestively violent second half, which, on the other hand, is exactly what I was looking forward to and what even Americans are not so skilled at – an entertaining, formally chilling and at times almost black-humoured whirlwind of playful and, above all, functional script tricks and naturalistic imagery, whose only weakness remains its sheer coldness and emotional detachment. It's like watching a beautiful football match, filled with goals and great action in the second half, but between Tanzania and Zimbabwe – I'll be satisfied, but I won't care how it ends :-D 65% (14/10/2015)

Aksel Hennie was born for the role of the slippery Roger and the polished charisma of Nikolaj Coster-Waldau suits the film, but unfortunately, the originality was somewhere else. For every well-constructed idea or bizarre joke, there is also one wasted. I enjoy both the dramatic introduction and the chilling development of the thriller, but in the end, due to some minor simplifications, there is a lack of more satisfying twists. The Jo Nesbø source material has more lightness in it. (12/12/2015)

I finally understand why Jo Nesbo is considered a master in the field of crime literature. Based on such great source material, the screenplay is well-written and the film is well-directed. However, it must be noted that neither the screenwriters nor the director made any serious mistakes. For about three-quarters of the way, I was convinced that I was watching a 100% five-star film. Typical Scandinavian madness, pitch-black humor, crazy situations, absurdity - even if I didn't know the country of origin, I would immediately guess it's from one of the Nordic countries. But then comes the last quarter, delimited by Roger's encounter with his wife, playing on strong emotions, and the previous atmosphere starts to crumble a bit. When the finale arrived, I thought to myself that the screenwriter had indeed made two logical somersaults. Although the first one was saved by the final credits, the second one - how can a man in the main character's situation believe a woman and bet everything on one card? That really doesn't make sense to me. Nevertheless, Headhunters cannot be denied its originality, pervasive tension, captivating characters, and impressive ending. Despite some minor reservations, I lean toward a 5-star rating. There aren't many films like this, where it is a joy to follow the development of the plot and not be deceived by screenwriting shortcomings. Overall impression: 90%. Although I'm not a moralist, I definitely wouldn't let a 12-year-old child watch this film. After all, it is a quite bloody mess, not commonly seen in today's cinema. (18/08/2013)

After watching it, I’m somewhere between three and four stars. Sure, the unique Nordic style is undeniable, and I enjoyed how the film’s darkly comedic tone felt like it could have been handled by the Coen brothers (I haven’t read Nesbø's book). The acting was absolutely top-notch; the lead duo, Aksel Hennie and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, fully embraced their roles, and I can’t find any faults there. As for the plot, the creators had it meticulously planned out until about halfway through, with everything on screen not being predictable but rather revealing the cards of both sides flawlessly. However, the final third felt a bit over the top. As many reviewers mention, there were a lot of coincidences, and it seemed like the writers were paving the way to the final catharsis... which was good, though. So, it’s a well-made film, but it’s missing that final edge to reach the very top. I give it a solid 7.5/10. (29/07/2022)