Don't often say this


but the remake, Contraband, is a better film - interestingly, the lead guy is one of the producers of the remake!

reply

I didn't think so. I thought the original was much tighter. Contraband had too much filler in my opinion (an extra and unnecessary 21 minutes worth), and hit the viewer over the head with some things. E.g., why ruin the joke about the painting? (I suppose a possible reason is that most of the audience wouldn't recognize the painting, or know that it was worth serious money without being told.)

reply

I thought the original was much tighter.
I tend to agree with the OP. Contraband wasn't a great film by any means, but at least that 21 minutes you mention was used to better develop scenes and characters than we see here. This film just seemed to be in a rush to conclude, with abbreviated scenes just tumbling in on each other and which don't always make huge sense.

On top of all this, apart form the language, there's nothing much to really identify the film as Icelandic. The way it is shot is just so (disappointingly) generic.🐭

reply

spookyrat1:

On top of all this, apart form the language, there's nothing much to really identify the film as Icelandic. The way it is shot is just so (disappointingly) generic.
This didn't bother me. This just makes it more realistic. Not everyone there is running around in a lopapeysa, eating svið, and listening to rímur all the time.

reply