MovieChat Forums > Pusher III (2005) Discussion > Buric's performance as Milo

Buric's performance as Milo


I liked the third installment of Pusher, but not as much as the first two. The main reason for this is the performance of Zlatko Buric as the lead protagonist, compared to that of Bodnia and Mikkelsen in the 1st and 2nd part respectively. Buric has a much larger role to fill here than previously, so it makes sense his attributes as an actor would be more pronounced this time around. Nicolas Winding Refn seems to let his main characters make up some of their own lines and comments to make the interactions look more spontaneous, which I think is really good and lends itself to the nature of films describing the metropolitan underbelly with the semi-literate criminals and whatnot (other European directors do this as well, e.g. Gaspar Noe). However, I do not feel this approach suited Buric. The storyline takes him from at least a somewhat-in-control dealer & distributor, to an insecure, rambling mess of a middle-aged addict. However, to me he seems confused & rambling from the very beginning. In fact, I got this impression from him in a few of the longer scenes he had in the 1st Pusher as well. Whereas Bodnia and Mikkelsen come off like the characters they are portraying, Buric looks like a guy trying to play his character, if that makes sense. Buric's face complete with the greasy hardo is good for a gangster at first glance, but the control he has over his expressions, and ESPECIALLY his voice acting is just plain unconvincing and bad for me. I would actually like to know the opinion of Danish & Swedish people who saw the film..? I think that Buric is somewhat redeemed by his apparently bad Danish, so my understanding is that his rambling and verbally unconvincing "style" is attributed to him being an immigrant & not a native Danish speaker. Is this about right? Just to clarify, I completely understand Buric is not nearly as experienced an actor as Bodnia and Mikkelsen are, but this is still part of a great triology, and just as the 3 films will unavoidably be compared to each other, so will the lead actors. Also, Buric was actually helped by the positively terrible performance of the actress playing Milena because he shined in comparison. On the other hand, I thought Radovan was very good, as was Mohammed, so nothing against amateur or semi-amateur actors getting the roles here...just Milo didn't quite get there for me, which is kind of crucial for the film overall.

reply

interesting post but personally i cant agree, i thought milo's performance was outstanding and very convincing, as the drug dealer whos not quite as big as he would like to be. how he cracks under pressure and goes on a drug binge and falls apart is performed without flaw. i really felt for this character. how human he is in the face of needing to try to act like he has it together. the empty pool shot at the end that shows how empty and decrepit the stucture underneath was a wonderful way to end this great film.

reply

I completely disagree. Buric is absolutely brilliant and convincing. His performance is devastatingly real to me and went some way in making this the best of the three.

ce n'est pas une image juste, c'est juste une image

reply

I too disagree. I thought he did a great job as well as the Milena actress.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

Something about Milena didn't seem quite realistic to me, but I wasn't sure what.

I also disagree about Milo. In the first two he is shown "hard", because he is talking down on characters from those movies, you never see him in his private time, which is half of Pusher III. I felt it really fleshed his character out, and showed that his ultra-tough appearance is little more than a façade, internally he is under incredible stress.

I loathed his character in the first two, and was surprised to sympathise with him in the third.

reply

Yeah, I thought focusing on him was a great way to conclude the series: showing what a lifetime amounts to in their world.

reply