Christopher Nolan's Insomnia

MakeEmLaugh

I re-watched Christopher Nolan's Insomnia on Netflix tonight (it's currently available on the UK/Irish Netflix, and not the US one - who said US is always better?!).

I hadn't seen it in several years, and though I don't think it's one of Nolan's better films, it has a lot going for it. Pacino, for the most part, curbs the excesses that have hindered many of his performances post-1990.

It transcended its somewhat generic setup by having a genuine anti-hero for its protagonist, someone who

deliberately kills his partner when he suspects the former may inform on him to Internal Affairs

.

That said, there are plenty of problems with the film. Hilary Swank's role was of a somewhat clichéd character, the young up-and-comer who idealises her new associate (Pacino) to the point of quoting things he had previously said on other cases.

I also wonder if the film would have been improved by ending about 15 minutes earlier. As those who've seen it will know,

it ends shortly after Swank discovers the shell of the bullet which Pacino used to fatally shoot his partner. The murder of a teenager girl, which Pacino was drafted in to investigate, has been pinned on the girl's ex, despite Robin Williams being actually responsible. Pacino is set to return to LA, knowing that his now-deceased partner will be unable to testify against him, and so his reputation is intact.

Had the film ended there, it would have been more ambiguous and satisfying. Instead,

Nolan opts for a more generic conclusion in which Williams and Pacino shoot and kill each other, and police sirens can be heard arriving at the scene.

Incidentally, I've never seen the original Norwegian version with Stellan Skarsgård, but I understand it's quite similar. If anyone here has seen it, what are your thoughts, and which version do you prefer?

Looper007

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

I re-watched Christopher Nolan's Insomnia on Netflix tonight (it's currently available on the UK/Irish Netflix, and not the US one - who said US is always better?!).

I hadn't seen it in several years, and though I don't think it's one of Nolan's better films, it has a lot going for it. Pacino, for the most part, curbs the excesses that have hindered many of his performances post-1990.

It transcended its somewhat generic setup by having a genuine anti-hero for its protagonist, someone who

deliberately kills his partner when he suspects the former may inform on him to Internal Affairs

.

That said, there are plenty of problems with the film. Hilary Swank's role was of a somewhat clichéd character, the young up-and-comer who idealises her new associate (Pacino) to the point of quoting things he had previously said on other cases.

I also wonder if the film would have been improved by ending about 15 minutes earlier. As those who've seen it will know,

it ends shortly after Swank discovers the shell of the bullet which Pacino used to fatally shoot his partner. The murder of a teenager girl, which Pacino was drafted in to investigate, has been pinned on the girl's ex, despite Robin Williams being actually responsible. Pacino is set to return to LA, knowing that his now-deceased partner will be unable to testify against him, and so his reputation is intact.

Had the film ended there, it would have been more ambiguous and satisfying. Instead,

Nolan opts for a more generic conclusion in which Williams and Pacino shoot and kill each other, and police sirens can be heard arriving at the scene.

Incidentally, I've never seen the original Norwegian version with Stellan Skarsgård, but I understand it's quite similar. If anyone here has seen it, what are your thoughts, and which version do you prefer?

I liked Nolan's version but prefer Skarsgard version cause it's a far darker version and Skarsgard character. He plays a swedish police working in norway. So we have him speaking swedish, while the rest of the cast speaks norwegian, which adds an element of alienation which was not really present in the remake

One good illustration of the difference between the two versions are the main characters: Al Pacino plays Will Dormer, while Stellan Skarsgård plays Jonas Engrstöm. They are both distinguished cops, although this is played up a little more with Dormer, and they both fall upon a path of corruption that quickly starts to spiral out of control for them. The difference between them, however, is that while Dormer does questionable things, he still has enough remedial qualities to be considered a good guy. Engström, on the other hand, seems to go from a rough cop who does things his own way, to a man who is just as bad, if not worse, than the antagonist of the film. He also seems to lose his sanity more than Dormer ever does, but this change it played in far more stuble strokes than it is with Dormer

Nolan's film is a far easier watch while the original is a film that you need to be in a specific mood for. It gets a bit difficult to watch at times, mainly because of the feel of it getting very gloomy and oppressive at times, but it's minimalist style, meditative pace and subtle themes does make it a worth while film to watch. Just be ready for the ending to leave you with a desire for closure.

Warper

I really liked this film, the whole setting was brilliant. Alaska is such an open and wild terrain and the film depicts this perfectly. As the line goes from the film "there are only two types of people in alaska, those that where born there and those that are running from something"