I'll tell you why so serious

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

The Christopher Nolan remake of "Insomnia" surprisingly enough isn't well liked by everybody but generally speaking it is being regarded as one of the best crime-thrillers of recent years. I wonder how many people actually know it's a remake of this Norwegian movie, that was released 5 years earlier. Just like most people, I saw the remake before the original.And the the invertible question which on is the better movie; the original or its remake. In this case I really have to say Christopher Nolan's. It does a better job at capturing the atmosphere and the sense of insomnia, that the main character is suffering from. And no matter how great Stellan Skarsgård is, he of course ain't no Al Pacino! Biggest or most significant difference between the two movie is, is that the remake is a longer movie and for some good reasons. It takes its time with its buildup, which enhances the movie its tension and mystery.But it's of course not fair and perhaps even a bit silly to compare this movie to the remake because it of course got released first and is the original movie, which the superior 2002 got based on. And you could say it's pretty much a scene by scene remake, with only a few additions put into it. But I'll just judge this movie for what it is and pretend like I have never seen the remake.When doing so, you'll have to say that "Insomnia" is one original movie within its genre. It starts off like any other typical genre movie, in which a policeman is flown in to solve a murder case. The story however soon starts to take some twists and it starts to become apparent that this is not going to be an ordinary case, in which the main character is the perfect, righteous hero, who'll solve the case cleanly.The story is definitely the movie its biggest strength. It lets the movie distinct itself from anything else and its were all of the movie its surprises are coming from.But what also helps are its cold, depressing, looking settings, in rural Norway, that set the entire mood and atmosphere for the movie. It adds to the whole mystery of the movie as well, though it isn't really the mystery or the murder that plays the most significant part in the movie. It more relies on its other dramatic developments and its characters, which all makes the movie a surprising and tense one at times.In the end it doesn't really matter whether you have already seen the original or not and it also doesn't really matter that I consider the remake superior to this original. The movie simply remains a more than great and original watch within its genre.8/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Jonas Engstrom is not enjoying his business trip to northern Norway. Several problems plague him, he can't sleep because of the 24 hour daylight, the murderer he was brought into apprehend is steeped in police procedure (damn you CSI!) and he accidentally shot his partner and good friend and left him to die on a foggy, barren ice field. That last thing really put a damper on the trip. To really enjoy the film, you have to keep in mind Engstrom is a remarkably smart detective and ignore the fact that had he just requested to move to a hotel room without a window and been upfront about the accidental shooting (which even the murderer points out to him) everything would have worked out fine. The film feels like it gives you a lot longer than its 96 minute run time to practice your suspension of disbelief skills yet somehow after the last cheesy special effect that ends the movie you feel like you watched an episode of a British detective procedural rather than a theatrical release.

Two Swedish policemen, one of them Stellan Skarsgard, arrive in northern Norway to help solve the murder of a high-school girl. The killer is almost trapped but escapes into the fog along the shore. By mistake, Skarsgard shoots and kills his partner. He invents a story in which the girl's murderer shot his partner. Later he's invited by the girl's killer to meet at an isolated place. The two agree to pin the murder on the dead girl's boyfriend, an obnoxious kid anyway. But Skarsgard, plagued by his conscience and the midnight sun, has been unable to sleep and makes an attempt to capture the killer. The killer clobbers Skarsgard and then accidentally falls to his death. A Norwegian policewoman has figured out roughly what went on but contemptuously allows Skarsgard to go back home where, it is fondly hoped, he'll be able to sleep again, although we are left with grave doubts about that. The final freeze frame is of Skarsgard's face and everything fades to black except for his eyes, which are wide open and glow in the dark like an uneasy animal's.Stellan Skarsgard is just about perfect for the role of the insomniac cop. He always looks half asleep anyway. He slouches around, placid, bookish, as if his mind were elsewhere, maybe in wonderland. You can't ruffle him. When the murderer shoots off his shotgun into the plaster ceiling over his shoulder, Skarsgard simply moves his head to the side with an expression of mild distaste. I show more animation when the dentist says, "Turn this way a little." It's a slow film though, a story of intrigue and character, rather than a who-dunnit with a lot of ancillary action. What I mean is that it's quite different from the American remake that starred Al Pacino. Pacino is equally good at projecting exhaustion but in a very different way.The logic in this film isn't as clear as that in the remake. Here, Skarsgard can have absolutely no motive for shooting his partner of more than a year. In the remake, Pacino's partner was about to squeal on him for some irregularities to Internal Affairs. And here, all it takes is a single phone call for Skarsgard to agree to meet the killer. Pacino had to listen to Robin Williams sympathize with him about his insomnia. And Pacino's hallucinations were far more vivid -- a massive truck bearing down on him in his lane -- while Skarsgard's are more subtle -- a glimpse of his dead partner's face staring through a window. The remake is palpably "American". It ends with a shoot out that Williams' heavy has never shown himself capable of. Shotguns and pistols bark. Seaside fishing shacks are blown to smithereens. So is Williams, while Pacino dies after a few parting words. The European original ends with a dying fall and an ambiguous hint of things to come. (Those glowing eyes.) Neither film is a masterpiece. They both fit nicely into the generic frame of the guilty cop movie. And in some ways I prefer the remake. It's pace is faster and the characters' motivations are explored in greater depth, and finally it makes more sense. But that stupid final shoot out works against it and it is, after all, not the original, so it gets no bonus points.

I watched the 2002 remake of "Insomnia" with Al Pacino when it came out. I found it to be an excellent thriller, not least because of the powerful performances from the actors (especially Robin Williams). But also because of the very unreal mood throughout the movie. Something correlating nicely with the story of Pacinos sleep-depraved cop on mission in Alaska, not coping with the around-the-clock sunlight very well.It was a lot more difficult getting to see the Norwegian original movie. But finally they showed it on TV so that i could record it. Comparing the two versions is unavoidable, deciding which one i prefer is a lot more difficult though. I can say however that watching the original has made my appreciation of the remake even higher. Christopher Nolan is an intelligent director and his remake is great proof of that. He has successfully captured the mood and essence of the story, keeping the most effective scenes from the original and adding other scenes that fit well into the story and help adapt it to the US instead of Norway.The acting in the original is generally good. I find Robin Williams performance as the killer hard to beat though. When it comes to the lead, Skarsgård is even more fit for the role of the haggard and worn-down policeman riddled with insomnia than Pacino. Skarsgård sometimes feels like the actor who gave the expression "haggard" a face.In the end i guess most people in the American audience, and also perhaps most other parts of the world, would prefer the remake of this movie. The pace is slightly higher in the remake, the style more modern and the actors of course more recognizable. This movie also feels a little less polished, but in my opinion it has just as much to offer. And if for no other reason, the original is worth watching because it highlights why the remake is such a feat. Recommended.7/10