input: Once in a while you get amazed over how BAD a film can be, and how in the world anybody could raise money to make this kind of crap. There is absolutely No talent included in this film - from a crappy script, to a crappy story to crappy acting. Amazing...

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

pos/neg ans: negative

input: Standard procedure for Swedish movies today seem to be to start by throwing plausibility out the window and continue down that path for the rest of the process. Ranarna is another fine example of a movie making very little sense.

Banks in Stockholm are being robbed by a highly efficient "military-styled" gang of robbers. Two police officers start investigating the case that soon becomes more complicated than it would appear at first.

As usual in Swedish film the cast is mostly made up of the same people you have seen over and over again. Mikael Persbrandt must be in every Swedish film from the last few years! But that's OK i guess since Persbrandt is one of few that performs solidly here (like he usually does). The problems with this film mostly revolves around the story itself. First of all the robberies feel mostly like background. Rather this is more a movie about a young policewoman fighting to prove herself in a male world (like that has not been made a thousand times before with a decent actress instead of Sofia Helin). Also there is a completely unbelievable plot twist near the end that seems about as plausible as Aliens landing. But still, i did think it was a quite nice touch considering i was half asleep right about then. It spiced things up a bit (and actually saved the rating from dropping another step).

In the end the main problem is the same thing as with most other Swedish movies of this kind. Simply that the action and suspense doesn't live up to the standards we are used to from other movies of this kind (mostly Hollywood). It feels cheap and rather weak in comparison. In my opinion Swedish filmmakers should try to focus more on plot and acting, and forget about trying to make "Hollywood-action light" like they do now. Because this becomes yet another forgettable effort from the Swedish movie-industry. I rate it 3/10.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

pos/neg ans: negative

input: Ostensibly this is a Z-grade DTV horror film.

But with lines like :

"It's easy to die, I have, many times"

and

"Why are you reading that book ?" "Because it makes the plot more interesting"

and

"You made your way in here, now you can make your way out again !" (after he leads a man into the basement)

(and take a listen to what they chant)

- it's not that clear what this film, made in the era known for post-structuralism, is actually about, or whether its just bad film-making. The acting is atrocious, but some actors I know, so are they hamming it up ?

An old house, cut obviously with a contemporary dwelling, is the site of murders. A (bad) film is made in the grounds and the story replays again.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

pos/neg ans: negative

input: This movie is very much like "Flashdance", you know that dance flick with Jennifer Beals. That film is probably the most boring film I have ever seen since it's not even bad enough to be funny. "G.I. Jane" is much better than that film, but that doesn't say much. Here Demi Moore sweats a lot and there's high music and we get to see her fight and everything, but it is certainly not very engaging. I really think the idea behind the film is kind of interesting, but the script is too cliched and Ridley Scott can't do anything about that. Well, like I said... It's better than "Flashdance"... (4/10)

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

pos/neg ans:
negative