OLD_ACCOUNT_skribb_Mk2 I was looking forward to watch a Swedish movie, which I don't do very often. The reason is that Swedish film is known to be.. it's hard to explain, but cringe-worthy is definitely one way to put it. Swedes are pretty awkward in real life, but on film we're even more awkward. A good example of this is to compare the original first Millennium film with the Fincher remake.I had heard that this movie was good, but it wasn't. FYI i have not read the books.The villain was disappointing in execution and anything but threatening. I didn't believe for a second that the world was in grave danger.The acting and dialog was cringe-inducing quite often, in typical Swedish fashion. The movie felt rushed and the lore of this universe was barely explained.I give it a bonus star for portraying teen life and goth fashion pretty accurately (movies from all countries usually fail at this).

ribbing This movie seems to presume that you have read the book(s) It follows the story really well but as always have to take shortcuts to fit in the time frame, even though it's allowed 2,5 hours. ...Of which the first 30 minutes is almost all about massaging you into Engelsfors, a small community in the modern world. The depicting of a teenagers life is rather good, even if it is cut short, it serves just as your massage in order to get to the point of magic. Some of these shortcuts feels to me that they would be totally incomprehensible if you haven't read the book, but I can be wrong.Nothing bad about the directing, it is good. And considering that all main actors are first- timers, they do a good job! To me it feels like well performed amateur theatre, but as a movie watcher I wish it had been better, I cannot get immersed in what's happening.And the worst: As always there seems to be no competent sound technician in Sweden! When watching the DVD version I find myself turning up the volume when someone speaks, and turning it down when there is sound effects. Even as a native Swedish speaker I have to strain myself to hear what they say. It shouldn't have to be this way, I really abhor it!As a plus I must add that the music is very beautiful, and as I inclined above it is no problem hearing it.All in all I think that this movie would do great if it was remade somewhat like "Let the right one in" -which by the way I think was equally good in both the Swedish and the US version.I do not hope for a part 2, I hope for a Hollywood version of the whole trilogy!

someday-69084 I am always sceptical when it comes to the movie version of my favorite books. They leave so many things out and you always feel like the parts missing are so vital to the story, it's a shame they've been left on the cutting room floor. This time they really put the movie business to shame! The casting, the soundtrack, the acting, the special effects...it was all on point. The actors really fit the images I had made up in my head whilst reading the book and the music gave it all an eerie feeling along with some creepy scenic shots of the ghost town of Engelsfors. Go watch it and be ashamed of the fact that you ever doubted people in the film industry will never make a good interpretation of your favorite literature.

AgentSniff After several years of development hell "The Circle" has finally hit Swedish theaters. So, as soon as Moviezine posted their negative review people where starting to talk about how it was destined to suck because it was a Swedish film. Swedes can't make movies. Well, I know that is a load of ****. I have seen a load of great Swedish films in all genres. And guess what? This is one of them.The plot is kind of a mix between F**king Åmol (which I honestly never liked), Sailor Moon (which I love), Paralax (plesant childhood memories) with a dash of Harry Potter (great books, botched film series). Orginiality for it's own sake is overrated, look at Ruben Östlund who kind of original but really can't make films. For me, it all comes down how well crafted a film is. If it is done well, I don't really care. My principle for reviewing is that you should judge a film based on what is does, not what it did not do. So what did "The Circle" do? What did it right? What did it wrong. Let's start with the bad things. First things first the casting of a few characters. Asp and Vögeli where miscast I think. The film fell victim to the common trap of YA-films and cast two bland hunks that you could not tell apart. Marcus Vögeli as Erik did not work at all. He was not good in the part and felt to much like someone acting. Also, he and Vincent Grahl who played Gustaf looked to much alike and I got them confused at times. Hanna Asp as Ida felt very unnatural, but that could be how she was directed to behave. Anyway, it did not feel right. Also, the writing of the villain and the casting of said villain did not work. It was really obvious who was the bad guy. The red herring character got to few lines and to little screen time. It seemed the character was in the film to little to be a real suspect. Another part that bugged me was the exposition. In a film like this, the exposition is a real mine-ground. Exposition of this kind need to be presented in words and that can not happen through images alone, which works against film as a visual medium. Here, it came off somewhat mechanic and even chaotic at times. Adriana Lopez became nothing more than Miss Exposition, which is never good. Other than that, some parts of the story feel really flat and could have been taken out completely such as Linnea's gun. Some dialog did not tick right with me and there is that really obvious cameraman reflection. Then what did "The Circle" do right? Well, the casting of the other 6 "chosen ones", save Ida was great. Gustav Lindh is in the film for 5 minutes as Elias and he did a terrific job (got to love that he got Yu-Gi-Oh cards in his locker). Josefin Asplund as Rebecka was good, even if the character was underwritten and like Gustaf had to little time on screen. Helena Engström as Anna-Karin impressed me a lot. She got some hate for not looking "fat enough". Can you believe that. Anyway, those people will be silent when they see her performance. Leona Axelsen as Linnea and Miranda Frydman as Vanessa really sells it and Irma von Platen is a fantastic Minoo, even if she sometimes, I don't know... Sound strangely adult when she says her lines? The problems with the characters stems more from the script than the actors who are nearly flawless. I will be open with the fact that I do not like Sebastian Hiort af Ornäs as an actor at all. He was terrible in both Sebbe and Broken Hill Blues and came of as mentally challenged in the later. That works well for his character in this film on the other hand and he is simply better directed and allowed to behave like a real person. And that is what I like about this film, (most) of the characters seem like real teenagers. I can count on my left hand the number of Swedish films the last 15 years where the teenagers seemed like real teens. I enjoyed Christopher Wagelin's Nicke a lot. He was pitch perfect in the part. Per Svensson, Jimmy Lindström and Natalie Minnevik shows up in the film as well but are little more than extras really.The cinematography was superb. There is a lot of riffs on the cinematography from David Fincher's films. However, it seemed the crew had run out of visual imagination towards the end. The special effects worked very well most of the time. There are a few that looks rather ugly, but most of the stuff is handled really competent, which is to expect from Kaj Steveman. The film is very well directed by Akin who relies on images to present the characters rather than dialog. I wish more people would do that. I was going to give this film 7/10, but what the heck! It's a well shot, well acted and well directed film. I give it 8/10. Catch it at the cinema as soon as you can. I am looking forward to the continuation.