This is an interesting film about a real-life heist in Denmark which has some really cool aspects to it but also is a little confusing due to its commitment to a particular style of filmmaking. The best part of it was really great, unfortunately it was also the opening scene.

So this movie starts with an incredible opening scene that is so up my alley. It’s a really different way of approaching a heist, not from the point of view of the robbers or the cops. It’s really effective. I wish the rest of the movie were as good as that opening scene.

That’s not to say the rest of the movie is bad; it’s not, it’s just not as good as some flaws, which I think can be broken into two categories.

But first, I do want to say that I mostly found it quite compelling. I didn’t notice the length and was mostly engrossed even if there were too many scenes of the star just thinking (or yelling and beating his chest). It doesn’t really waste too much time despite how unconventional it is as a heist film.

I should note, if you are looking for a classic “heist film” this is not that. I like how it subverts or completely ignores heist movie tropes and conventions. This is based on a real heist so it has to as a matter of course but the film could have taken its liberties in the direction of a heist film rather than how it does here. And there are some really nice aspects, like how we never truly know the result of Kasper’s big fight – we suspect, but we don’t know for sure. And there are other things the film dances around that a less interesting film would spell out in great detail. A couple of times I thought “Oh that was really cool” or “Oh it definitely zagged there.” I think there is artistry behind this film and a lot of thought about how to make this a unique thriller that doesn’t feel like another movie – as there are so many heist movies out there.

My first major quibble is a stylistic one. I am the audience for naturally-lit or poorly lit scenes and shaky camera. Used judiciously, I can fall in love with a film. However, this film goes completely over-the-top with both, especially in the heist itself, to the point that I think most people in the audience had no idea what the hell was going on. I bet if you broke this film down in film class, there would be a bunch of shots in the heist scene in particular that couldn’t be justified because it was just headlamps and masks or, worse, someone’s coveralls and boots, you think. I generally like films that use these techniques, however, so I don’t personally think it’s fatal. I just think 25% less of that stuff would have made the film a little more watchable and would have made the natural-lighting and shaky camera stuff work better.

The other issue both of us had is that there isn’t always enough information. This is one of those movies where characters absolutely do not tell you what’s going on most of the time and it usually works. But there were a few times where some more information would have been helpful, such as why the original plan – which we never learn – had to be abandoned. A little more context there would have been helpful.

But still, this is a pretty cool movie that tells the (mostly) true story of a heist while avoiding most of the genre’s clichés.

7/10