Watch Crime and Punishment For Free

SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Disturbing yet enthralling

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Kaurismaki's formal debut is a straight-faced drama set in moody Helsinki that is not however particularly engaging and save for a few inspired moments doesn't really have something to recommend it to the casual viewer. The story revolves around a socially disassociated, aloof man working in a meat factory, who one day shows up in the doorstep of an upper class businessman and simply explains that he's there to kill him then shoots him dead. The rest of the film combines a detective thriller (thriller in the mildest sense of the term) and a psychological drama and is largely okay in both departments.I find Kaurismaki's very basic approach to film-making to be refreshing compared to the cynic, gimmicky cinema of our days that is more content to wink at the audience than take the material it presents seriously. The dialogue is as sparse as the plot is thinly stretched and everything in 'Crime and Punishment' has a very minimalist feel to it. It's rather short, clocking at almost 90 minutes, but after Kaurismaki gets done with the setup and motive and general background of the killer, and this happens around the half mark, he just doesn't have a whole lot of places to go with the rest of the film.As a debut and an exercise in film-making for the young director it's impressive, but it's also monotonous and very one-note and just not very interesting.

This was the first film from idiosyncratic filmmaker Aki Kaurismäki, and already some of his more recognisable themes and preoccupations are being developed in preparation for the more iconic films still to come. I wouldn't go so far as to call this particular adaptation of Dostoevsky's landmark work a classic - as there are obviously a few rough edges and an overall feel of the generic European sensibilities familiar from television drama occasionally getting in the way of Kaurismäki's typically broad, deadpan approach to moments of drama and emotion - but I'd still recommend it as a worthy experience, especially to anyone familiar with Kaurismäki later work, as a chance to see how his unique and entirely personal style has developed and evolved.In a particularly impressive stroke of direction, the film opens with a close-up shot of fly crawling across a blood-splattered plinth in some anonymous Helsinki slaughter house. A cleaver comes down and cuts the fly in two. Immediately, ominous music begins to play and we are subjected to an onslaught of emotionless, repetitive slaughter; as drab, impassive young men in overalls clean meat from bone, saw through sinew and hose down the pools of blood collected under a procession of strung-up pig carcasses. With this kind of introduction we see Kaurismäki setting up the images of cold-hearted murder and stark, unglamorous brutality that will follow on into the subsequent scene. It also works as a skillful introduction to our central character Rahikainen; a former lawyer turned butcher, still haunted by the loss of his fiancé some several years before. There's also a stark sense of humour being developed here too; with the juxtaposition of over-emotive, melodramatic music with the completely disengaging, repetitive use of action and design - and the robotic, soulless way in which it is carried out - all setting up the broader ironies of murder so central to Dostoevsky's original tome.As with the book, Kaurismäki's interpretation of Crime and Punishment looks at the attempt made by the central character to "kill a principle", as well as the conflicting notions of righteousness and guilt. In this respect, the film calls to mind director Krzysztof Kieślowski's A Short Film About Killing (1988), which not only shares the same thematic preoccupations of the desire for murder and the psychological and spiritual complications that it can conjure up, but also a certain cold, peculiar approach to the direction, structure and actual mise-en-scene. This is obvious right from the start, with the scene in the slaughterhouse setting up the continual atmosphere and broader elements of interpretation found throughout. This means that by the time we finally see Rahikainen go to the office of a seemingly random, middle-aged business man and shoot him dead, the lack of emotion and cold robotic calculation present in his body language and personality is like an echo of the scene in which he killed the fly or carefully broke the ribcage from a slab of raw beef.While Rahikainen sits in silent contemplation - thinking about his actions as his victim lies dead on the floor - a young woman enters the room and triggers a chain of events that will force the character to think more carefully about why he chose to commit such a crime, as well as casting elements of doubt on his notion of murder as being - once again - about the killing of a principal rather than a man. Obviously, there are much deeper shades of drama presented here, with the subtle notions of loss, loneliness, listless desperation, the desire to escape (not only from your circumstances but also from yourself) and the central, titular ruminations on crime and punishment and what they mean to the individual. These ideas are given further weight by the truly grand performances, with Markku Toikka creating a completely believable character whose true beliefs, feelings and intent remain vague and enigmatic, while Aino Seppo as the girl presents the more hopeful, tender aspect of the drab, grey and claustrophobic world that the character inhabits. There is also fine support from Kaurismäki regulars Esko Nikkari, Olli Tuominen and Matti Pellonpää, who here plays an early incarnation of a character he would develop further in the subsequent Shadows in Paradise (1986).Though the cool irony and wry humour of Kaurismäki's later films is perhaps less formed than it would eventually become, there are still traces of it beginning to take shape. Regardless, this is still a fascinating insight into Kaurismäki's creative mind, his vision, and his sense of sardonic ambition in even attempting such an adaptation for his first feature film. It is perhaps worth watching first, before you see any of his subsequent films, and then returning to once again after having seen the extraordinary developments he made through films like Calamari Union (1985), Shadows in Paradise, Hamlet Goes Business (1987), Ariel (1988) and Leningrad Cowboys Go America (1989). Regardless, this is an impressive first film from an incredibly talented filmmaker.

Normally, a filmmaker doesn't choose to adapt a literary classic for his first feature, as it might prove to be too hard. Aki Kaurismäki, on the other hand, did an excellent job with his directorial debut, a modern-day version of Dostoyevskji's Crime and Punishment.At the beginning, we're guided through a slaughterhouse. This is where the protagonist, Antti Rahikainen (Markku Toikka), works. This particular environment suits the film, as it prepares us for its subsequent tone. Rahikainen takes the rest of the day off and breaks into an apartment. Once there, he kills an old man. Unfortunately, there's a witness: Eeva Laakso (Aino Seppo), who however refuses to turn in the murderer, thinking he will himself confess the crime eventually.Of course, that doesn't happen. Police inspector Pennanen (Esko Nikkari) is dead certain of Rahikainen's role in the story, given there's a motive and all (the victim accidentally killed Rahikainen's fiancée by running her over with a car). But with no evidence and no collaboration from Eeva, there are few chances the killer will be arrested.Kaurismäki has done a remarkable job on his first film, mostly because he nails the mood: he shows us the murkiest sides of Helsinki, and almost everyone depicted in the movie is cold and unemotional, a factor which adds to the unsettling nature of the story. There's little room for humor, with only a few exceptions: Rahikainen's best friend Nikander (Matti Pellonpää), struggling with English lessons, and the straight, serious delivery of some dialogue, most notably the first conversation between Rahikainen and Eeva ("What's wrong with him?" "Nothing. He's dead." "How did he die?" "I killed him.").An excellent human drama, and also the beginning of a brilliant career. Those interested in Finnish cinema should give this a look.

This film was a positive surprise, compared to the general style films are made these days. It follows Dostoyevsky's novel's lines in a modern environment. The people were mostly very minimalistically and unemotionally potrayed, but still their thoughts and emotions could be read from their eyes and the way they stood, moved and paced their speech. The general feel of the surroundings is very oppressive, almost if seen through the eyes of the two main characters. Simply put, the film prunes all the extras away and concentrates on the ideas behind the story.The plot had even some surprising twists, and the ending is done so, that it made me wonder that maybe Kaurismäki has some personal experiences of such feels of guilt and isolation as the main male character. This film, even if it's done nearly 20 years ago, is more than fit to make us think about our current world, and the direction we are heading.