MEDIOCREMOVIE.CLUB
  • Reviews
  • Side Pieces
  • Shane of Thrones
  • Podcast
  • About
  • Archives
  • Game of Thrones Fantasy

A Hijacking

12/4/2014

33 Comments

 

3.53
A-

"I never wanted to look away on this one." - Bryan
"This is a bold film in the way the Lindholm withholds the big moments from the audience." - Jon
"A Hijacking was great at establishing only what we needed to know." - Phil
PictureThe tension isn't created by what’s on screen, but rather what not on screen.
Scott Tenormon must die. It’s my favorite South Park Episode ever. It’s not just the audacity or the offensiveness, rather, it’s the reveal at the end. I thought I was watching an entire episode of Cartman getting screwed over. Instead, it’s revealed that Cartman is pulling every string all along and it’s nothing like I thought. A Hijacking makes me think of that episode. 

When I first started watching it, I though immediately of Captain Phillips, which is by all means a fantastic movie. But they movie couldn't be any different in its approach to the same subject matter. Unlike Captain Phillips, we don’t see the actual hijacking. We don’t see the rescue. The tension isn't created by what’s on screen, but rather what not on screen. (And director Tobias Lindbolm continued to masterfully create tension in the viewer based off of on-screen actions.) 

We also have no sympathy for the pirates, which I think was an intentional choice. This movie was already nearly 2 hours, to humanize the pirates would have taken much longer. I loved the decision to not give them subtitles. We don’t need to know their motivations. We don't ned to feel sympathy for them in order to get this movie. 

So really, I think, any comparison to Captain Phillips would be shallow. These are totally different movies about different things in different genres. 

Anyway, back to this film. We have 2 main characters. talking with Blair, her thought is we’re seeing Omar and Peter play off of each other. I respectfully disagree. I see this as a Peter and Mikkel story. At first, I assumed it would be a statement on class. The rich CEO is a crack negotiator who respects only the bottom line. Mikkel is the sensitive worker who shows us success isn’t always dictated by power and money. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the movie doesn’t go this route. 

Peter is the CEO. He’s good at what he does. He keeps control. The British consultant comes in and Peter wants to be the mouthpiece follows the Brit’s lead. He talks with Omar as coolly as he did the Japanese business men. But away from Omar, he talks about the men on the ship. One of my favorite scenes in the movie is after he thinks Mikkel might have been shot. He just gazes in the direction of Mikkel’s picture before walking away. I expected him to be distant and cold, but he’s warm and caring with the families. Sure, he has the right answers, but he’s sparing their feelings in the process. I was ready for a statement on class and I didn’t get it.

With Mikkel, I was expecting to see the sensitive, but resilient and warm survivor. Christ, when the fish scene happens, I feel happy for him. But that’s only a tiny peak. In reality, we have a man being completely emotionally beaten to death. Every happiness is taken away from him. His phone call with his wife. His cooking. His thinking the ordeal was over. Ever his warmth towards his daughter eventually. With Mikkel, I get something absolutely depressing and cold. 

I thought we’d see Mikkel overcome the working man odds. I thought we’d see Peter ego get the best of him. Instead we saw a more realistic intersection of those two things. Here is where Scott Tinnerman comes in. 

We see glimpses of the ending that are subtle as Lindbolm doesn’t want to hit you in the face with his message. Peter flies off the handle during a conversation with Omar and gets emotional. Looking at that scene alone, it seems like its concern for his men that is driving him. He won’t be threatened. 

We next see this from Peter during the final negation. Following a whim suggestion from poor Lars, he makes a proposal that seems desperate. He just wants his men back. He wants this over. They’ve all been suffering, right?

No. Here’s where Lindbolm really nails the plot. Peter is only frustrated because he is not winning the negotiations. In the first scene, he’s angry because he receives no counter-offer. In the second scene, he wants the negotiations done because he’s just been given a time-limit. Even if it started about the men, the end negotiation was about Peter. Peter gets to play the hero. And poor Mikkel has to watch his captain get murdered for sticking up for him. Lindbolm gives this information to us, but I think it’s easy to miss that this is the commentary on class that we were expecting. I didn’t even put it all together until we have our last scenes with our two main characters. Mikkel is just crushed. He’s so incredibly depressed that he can’t even interact with his wife or daughter. And then Peter, seemingly distraught, gets in his expensive automobile and leaves the garage, making a right turn into whatever he feels like. Peter had a rough few months, but Mikkel’s life is ruined. This is a subtle, but profound statement on class. If you’re the boss, shit gets tough, but you still get to live a comfortable life. If you’re the cook, when shit gets tough, your life is forever changed. 

I just didn’t expect all of that to come in the last ten minutes. All along Peter has viewed the crew as  commodity to be traded. An opportunity to win another negotiation. I didn’t want that to be the case, but it seems in line with modern day labor. The company is number one and the workers are white noise. They’re data. You want to be happy or satisfied, but that was ripped away from us. The movie spends the entire time successfully getting us to sympathize and pulls out the rug as we just silently watch him get into that nice car and drive away. This is our Scott Tenorman moment. This is when you realize what you just watched. 

Outside of our main character, there are some parallels. Omar and the Brit are equals. They both represent the bureaucracy of the event. They’re here to give us structure while letting Peter try to skimp his way through it while Mikkel actually suffered. Lars and Jan are both similar in that they provide support for Peter and Mikkel. They’re competent as numbers 2s, but they both really stepped up. Lars with the personal savings thing and Jan with that giant fish. 

To go with the subtlety in story-telling, I loved the minimalism of the movie. The shots were generally very clean and simple. They just gave a simple picture. The scenes on the boat ranged from beautiful and open to constricted and closed. But the shots were so telling that we didn’t need a verbal explanation of what was going on. We just knew that they were suffering below deck. We knew they were being paraded. With Peter, the sterile shots gave us a glimpse into his utilitarian mind. 

I also liked that Lindbolm kept us in close quarters. This entire movie felt cramped and claustrophobic. How much of a relief is whenever the sailors get to go outside. I felt cleaner just watching it. 

I’m trying to think of a negative, but I’m struggling at the moment. I could see how someone might find the pacing a bit boring (Hart Man, this might not be your type of movie I’m guessing), but I thought it built the tension effectively. So even there I can’t knock it. 

I originally gave this an A-, but I’m hovering over an A right now. Talk me up or down.


33 Comments
Bryan
12/5/2014 03:52:45 pm

Pumped to be #2 here.

Let me get the bad out of the way first - how did their beards not grow long after 4 months? And damn it Shane, you had to choose a subtitle following a subtitle. This club is exhausting.

I completely disagree about purposely not comparing this to Captain Philips. This is everything I wanted Captain Phillips to be - more dramatic, more intense. Captain Phillips was long and tedious. I never wanted to look away on this one. Every time Chel asked me a question there was time to answer and I wanted to tell her the story.

My personal disdain for our the United States' plutocracy had me hooked on this movie from the get go. Within the first 20 minutes the phrase from Dr. Khan's Finance 361 "A corporations main goal is to increase shareholder wealth." rang in my head a dozen times. What the hell does a multi-billion dollar corporation care about about $15 MM? Just pay the money (or close) and let these guys get on with their lives.

This may sound a little boastful, but as soon as the fish was caught I could tell Mikkel was broken. And as soon as the negotiations started I knew the the CEO, Peter, was going to get emotionally involved. It didn't take the whole movie for me to worry about these things. I spent 2 hours (it seemed much shorter) worrying about who was going to die. I was surprised it was only the captain.

I love that this movie was neither vulgar nor grotesque. I disagree with the R rating, as I think high school, maybe even junior high, students could handle this one. It would be thought provoking for them as well. Blair - thoughts on this?

This may be tied with Motorcycle Diaries for my favorite subtitled movie. A-

Reply
Shane
12/5/2014 05:00:25 pm

Sorry to break MMC rules...


But the beard situation bothered me as well. It's minor, but still stuck out.

Reply
Blair
12/6/2014 01:44:08 pm

I kept wondering why they weren't skinnier. I even went to far as to think that Danish actors didn't quite commit like American actors...and I feel like a dick for thinking that.

Jon
12/5/2014 08:01:32 pm

And Shane jumps out to an early lead for Review of the Year with that one. I admit to not giving this my full attention and was grasping for some kind of larger connection to the world through A Hijacking. I couldn't really think of anything, and in swoops our resident Esquire to absolutely crush it.

Between this and Captain Phillips, I'm good with pirate movies going forward. Captain Phillips is all about the mindspace of being a hostage, the forces that push a man to be a pirate, and the highly procedural steps necessary to forcefully resolve a hostage crisis. A Hijacking is partly about the aforemetioned mindspace, but it's mainly about the steps necessary to get a peaceful resolution. It also feels more abstract and symbolic than Captain Phillips. What else can possibly be said about this scenario after these two movies? We've got the hostages, the pirates, the negotiators, and the military. There aren't any more sides to depict, as these two movies have done a very thorough job.

The act of negotiating was what intellectually grabbed me the most. It's a gutsy move by Lindholm to show CEO Peter bargaining down the pirates while still clearly trying to retain some sympathy for the character. I don't think they necessarily succeed at that, but if I can't have sympathy, I'll take interest, and interest was sustained. Initially depicted discussing the Japanese tsunami in terms of lost business opportunities, Peter's a hard-nosed businessman accustomed to getting his way. Insisting to the pirate expert that he'll be personally getting back 'his' men is a scene that can only go the way it goes. Though ultimately successful, it's clear this could have gone much better. Like Bryan, I don't understand why they couldn't just pony up for approximately what the pirates requested much sooner. I gasped when they countered with 900k after months of back and forth. Tellingly, the $15 million first requested is the same as what the company wanted the Japanese contract to be. That was about some nebulous shipping contract, while in the HQ, there are pictures of the crew on the walls, always in frame.

I was cooler on what was happening on the boat, but there's still some great stuff there. The tedium of being stuck in that small stinking room was overly communicated, such that I got what it might have been like many times over. Past a certain point, I don't think it added anything, and was simply boring. On the other hand, the fishing scene was my favorite scene of the movie, as everyone gives into this communal moment. The camaraderie curdles in an instant with that very abrupt gun barrel to the back of Mikkel's head, the kind of cruelty that I imagine to be the most cutting, such that it emerges randomly from a person thought to be an ally. I think the actor playing Peter had the harder job, but the actor playing Mikkel gave the more powerful performance. His outbursts and breakdowns and finally, his exhaustion were all raw and real.

This is a bold film in the way that Lindholm withholds the big moments from the audience. No action scene takeover, no emotional catharsis with the reunited sailors and their families, no punishment for the pirates. I have a lot of respect for those choices, rejecting the traditional arc this story could have taken. I'll be shallow and compare it favorably to Captain Phillips, such that both movies don't fully adhere to a suspense or action path. A Hijacking is the more cerebral movie, especially in the context of Shane's review, but I prefer Captain Phillip on the back of its finale. A Hijacking didn't hit me enough to get it out of the B's. I was at a B, but Shane's review gets me to a B+.

Reply
Shane
12/8/2014 11:25:44 am

I actually preferred the boat scenes. I think Peter frustrated me way too much, but that just might be my personal bias against business type people.I just hate formality for formalities sake

Reply
Bryan
12/9/2014 03:49:40 pm

The end of Captain Phillips was about as long as this entire movie. Way to drawn out.

Reply
Jon
12/9/2014 05:18:54 pm

It probably could've stood to be 15-20 minutes shorter, but the whole last act, once they're out in the smaller boat, was great, particularly the finale with Hanks and the aftermath. Singlehandedly raised the movie by a whole letter grade.

Blair
12/6/2014 01:42:36 pm

Right off the bat, I think this movie was really good. I could not, however, NOT constantly think about Captain Phillips (a movie that I surprisingly, did not know the ending to and that also not surprisingly, my mother, after a bottle or so of wine ruined...I'm not bitter.)

Some of the scenes are a little obvious, but I don't think that matters, the shots were amazing. The whole cook (I suck at remembering character names) catches the fish and all the characters kiss it, hold it - black and white hands on the fish, they cheer, get drunk together, etc is a pretty fucking awesome scene. And ends with a super tender Happy Birthday song to his daughter... which is great - it brings to the foreground again that this is shit and despite a great day of being outside they are still captors and being tortured.

I thought it was so interesting that we never knew what Somalians (did I make that up? / Pirates) were saying. We really have very little empathy for them unlike Captain Phillips....more on this in a bit..

But, while I'm on Captain Phillips, I just have to say, WTF Denmark? I knoooow that Captain Phillips is over the top, but 'Merica!!! All I could think of was, where are the dudes that are going to rescue these guys and rehab them!?!?! All they have is ONE Brittish dude who suggests shit? And the boss just decides to do whatever he wants- there are no checks and balances. It was crazy to me. The last scenes of the cook totally devastated - wasted, minuscule hope of a happy life or future in front of him (where are the specialists who help this dude, the crew and their families!?) and then the boss leaving the parking garage. Another great image - the claustrophobic garage that we the viewers/ the crew are stuck in forever and the boss gets to leave out into the beautiful sunlight, leaving them/us to continue to rot.

Main characters... so I think that the movie set up for Peter, "the boss," as I've been calling him and Omar, the other boss as parallel characters. At first, Peter seems like a badass business guy, and Omar tries the whole, "I'm not a pirate!" thing...Both of them suck and both are in a place of power over the crew and their families (and again, we maybe could have been empathetic to the Somali crew, and maybe I should be, but I'm not - they are just one dimensional, cruel). The whole damn thing could have been done and over with months before, 15million seems a drop in the bucket, but their egos (more so Peter) and their wallets (more so Omar) wreck life long havoc on the crew and families and even take the captain's life!

Alright - so that's my review and now I'll read everyone else's....

In response to Shane: yeah, I think you are right, the story is really of Mikkel and Peter and your review is awesome. I do not think our reviews are mutually exclusive, however.

Bryan - Nope, I would not show this to middle schoolers at all. The depravity and hopelessness that Mikkel clearly feels (especially with the ending scene of the unnecessary death of the captain) is palpable and scary. 12 year olds could not handle that. High School, sure, maybe - but what are we teaching them? That CEOs can be shitheads and get to walk away? Don't grow up to be really rich and a dick! There's no connection with the pirates...and they would likely not picture themselves as Mikkel or the crew. I'm interested in your thoughts here!

That's all I've got! I give it an A-.

Reply
Bryan
12/6/2014 03:18:30 pm

Pastor by day. Sailor by night! Blair, I never knew.

I was thinking about the comparison to Captain Philips more after Blair's review. A few notes that need to be addressed - 1) Most European countries negotiate in hostage situations, the United States does not. 2) I've spent entirely too much time trying to figure out what even this movie was based on it. It's the 2008 Hijacking of the CEC Future. An airdropped ransom of 1.7 mm was paid. The crew was 13 and no one died. The pirate translator made $75,000 lol. Negotations started at 7mm. 3)The Maersk Alabama (Captain Philips) was a MUCH larger ship - 17,500 tonnes vs 7,000 for the CEC Future. 4) The Maersk company is the largest shipping company in the world (http://www.statista.com/statistics/197665/owned-and-chartered-ships-of-leading-container-ship-operators-in-2011/) . Clipper Group (recently aquired by Thorco) only had 40 ships to Maersk's 700. This makes me take back my statement on $15mm being a drop in the bucket. It's not an insignificant number to that company. 5) The CEC Future was hijacked in 2008, the Maersk Alabama in 2009. It wasn't even legal for the US (or any country) to send a navy ship after the CEC Future. However i "On 17 December 2008, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a tougher resolution, allowing for the first time international land and sea occupations in the pursuit of pirates." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy_in_Somalia

Reply
Drew
12/9/2014 01:04:25 pm

First of all, A Hijacking sets the standard for all foreign films. If another foreign film is chosen for our viewing, it needs to be at least this good.
Second of all, this film, like many of you suggested, reminded me of Captain Phillips. There were times when I thought to myself the Somali pirates need to say “I am the captain now.” Eh, whatever.
Third of all, I want to get into the discussion of class. Like Shane stated, it is not an upfront theme but viewers need the ability to read between the lines in order to understand it. That kind of premise is good and those films are challenging and more engaging than something of a slapstick comedy like Spaceballs.
Furthermore, Shane is correct. The negotiations are not taking place because Peter cares about the crew, cargo, and ship; rather they are about a business keep its assets away from desperate pirates. That is understandable but the class structure, the underlying basis of A Hijacking, is crystal clear once the viewer figures it out. Peter rarely, if ever, called Mikkel by his name – constantly referred to him as “the cook.” This may play into negotiation strategy but let us be honest, how much did Peter care about the crew?
As many of you know, I am as pro – labor as anyone comes, and an upcoming diatribe on management – labor relations could be on the horizon, but I shall surprise you. I will spare you that (you are welcome) but know this. There are several fake wars people claim. “War on Christmas,” “War on Guns,” “War on the Constitution,” “War on Christians,” etc…There is, however, a real war going on nowadays in many states that goes ignored and it is against labor. There…that is it.
My father, whom I love dearly, is by no means a scholar. He, however, would have picked up on the last scene. How Mikkel suffered from PTSD, and may become an emotional vegetable, and Peter gets to go home or wherever he wishes. We are not shown Peter’s emotions but one may hypothesize – correctly – how he had none toward the surviving members of the crew.
A Hijacking is incredibly smart and that gets high marks but one thing I lack to understand is why did the pirates keep the crew alive? They got their money, why not kill the crew? Sure, it might upset Peter and the rest but so what? The company lost its leverage when it gave up the ransom and relied upon the trust of pirates to keep their end of the deal? Completely naïve and irresponsible. If I was one of those pirates, I would have taken the money, killed the crew, taken the ship wherever I wished. I failed to understand why they kept their end of the deal. Lame pirates.

All in all, I really liked the film but the bad piracy gets into the B range.

Grade: B+

Reply
Bryan
12/9/2014 02:37:52 pm

Making up criminal law here, but I would assume when you go from hijacking to mass murder you go from wanted criminal to almost war crimes.

Another guess is the law regarding pursuit of criminals on international waters. Ships are going to be insured so a country doesn't care much about the money involved. Killing citizens is not promising for ones future life prospects.

Reply
Drew
12/9/2014 03:02:55 pm

Yeah, I would buy that except they are pirates. They do not care about the quality of life nor do they have respect for any other life than their own.

What other future life prospects could a pirate possibly have? You think one will say "you know, I want to get into accounting?" Not everyone is Westley. :) When someone makes the life decision in favor of piracy, that's a definitive career move. There is no going back.

Also, when choosing piracy, international concerns are already made. They become an enemy of the state regardless of pillaging or killing.

One other aspect, a pirate killed the captain. Did that not transform them from wanted criminals into war criminals?

Bryan
12/9/2014 03:47:03 pm

Why do pirates not care about quality of life or for other people? They're people too. Living in Somalia probably sucks - just trying to make a living outside of subsistence farming.

10, $70,000 paydays and a Somalia could probably retire.

One murder does not equal international war criminal. Purposely killing entire crews on shipping vessels might.

shane
12/9/2014 04:35:06 pm

War crimes aren't just murdering a bunch of people. There needs to be an armed conflict of international or non-international character. I don't believe a hostage situation on a boat qualifies as either one of those.

You are right, however, in that this would be a war crime if you could establish this as an armed conflict. Hostages and torture (this was definitely torture) are against international humanitarian law.

Your instinct, however, is correct in that this is breaking international law. Piracy falls under universal jurisdiction and there can be no objection or legal appeals from the country the pirates are from or whichever flag they fly under. This means that if you attack an American ship, you can be prosecuted under American law and there's nothing your home country can do about it. Further, ignorance of American law cannot be a defense.

Bryan
12/9/2014 03:48:46 pm

How do we know Mikkel has PTSD? Maybe he's just sad for a few days and feels better. How do we know Peter went home - maybe he went to the bar and drank himself into a coma.

Reply
Shane
12/9/2014 03:49:57 pm

We don't, but we do know he's wrecked in that moment. And Peter turning into the sunlight while the camera is stuck in a cramped garage says enough.

Jon
12/9/2014 05:21:24 pm

I don't think there's any reason to think he doesn't have PTSD. There's going to be long-term ramifactions from this for him, just based on his non-reaction to his family.

Shane
12/9/2014 03:53:23 pm

Good call on him only calling him "the cook". I hadn't even thought of that.

The pirates keep the crew alive because they're not depraved human beings. They're in a business. And it's bad business to take money for a product and then wreck the product and ship it.

Bryan, I have to jet, but I'll have some crim law and int law commentary shortly. <3

Reply
Drew
12/10/2014 05:50:48 am

Bryan, I think you watched too many "feel good" movies that last eighty minutes - you know, so you are not bored. :-P

Yes, pirates are people too but that did not stop them from treating the crew inhumanely. Did you see any of them show compassion for the crew? I did not. They were terrorists looking for a payday and the company chose to negotiate with them. They got their pay. Why not kill the crew? Bryan suggests because they did not want to become international criminals but that is a weak argument. They have no respect for laws as they come from the failed state of Somalia. It is not like they are going to suddenly be afraid of the international community and flee back to Somalia for protection. They simply do not care. If they did, there would be some sort of hesitation shown by the pirates. There was no hesitation as they made their choice and reinforced it full force.

Pirates are not Robin Hood. They are terrorists and a constant problem for international trade.

Bryan
12/10/2014 08:03:15 am

Drew, this is like suggesting that people who rob a bank have no respect for any law. They're not terrorists, they're pirates. Terrorists' goal is to create fear, pirates are out to make bank. There aren't a lot of banks to rob in rural Somalia. Why not head for an unguarded ship slowly moving through the sea?

Bryan
12/10/2014 08:03:46 am

"They're in a business." Exactly!

Drew
12/10/2014 12:55:54 pm

Bryan, do you think the company will think twice about sending a ship into the Indian Ocean after that? I would. That hesitation is fear created by pirates, who are inadvertent terrorists.

I also wanted to destroy Skeletor and Cobra Kahn at one time in my life and look how I turned out.

How do I know they have no respect for any other lives than their own? When a group attempts a takeover, the last thing on their mind is quality of life. I highly doubt they think "you know, I should be nice to these people and treat them nicely." Please. The crew become prisoners and bargaining chips. Look at this figure from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12214905). Granted, it is three years old but does that really change anything? Look at this interactive map from the IMB Piracy Reporting Centre/ ICC's website (https://icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/live-piracy-map). Click on the map and read the reports and judge for yourself if the pirates treated the crew humanely. The language is very technical and does not describe the experience but one might be able to figure out what happened.

How can I hypothesize correctly what Peter felt? Did you see him greet Mikkel or his fishing companion once he returned? Did you see him ask what happened to Omar? Did you see him get upset when leaving the garage? No and it is based off those inactions, I can draw that conclusion.

Also definitive statements are opinions. If I say "Pirates have no respect for quality of life," it is my thought on that aspect. Writing "I think" or "I believe" in an opinion piece is redundant. :) Maybe someone else has a different perspective on that but that is me.

Shane, is your comment directed toward me or Bryan?

Bryan
12/10/2014 02:42:53 pm

"Bryan, do you think the company will think twice about sending a ship into the Indian Ocean after that? I would. That hesitation is fear created by pirates, who are inadvertent terrorists."

No, I don't. I think insurance raises their costs and private securities contractors are hired thus causing the price of goods to go up. But I don't think the cost of changing shipping routes is less than the cost of extra insurance and security.

"When a group attempts a takeover, the last thing on their mind is quality of life." Again, they don't kill the crew and they don't starve the crew to death. They're obviously not taking care of them, but there not completely disregarding human life. As Shane said, lives are a bargaining chip. Coal mining companies put their workers at risk every day for a profit. Same same.

"I can draw that conclusion." You can hypothesize what he felt and you can assume that's what he felt. But saying you're correct is a false positive.

The definitives things is from too many years of reading economics research. It's a pet peeve that will never go away, sometimes it bugs me more than others.

Bryan
12/9/2014 03:53:23 pm

I really want to pick fights about some assumptions made in most reviews here.

Shane - "Peter had a rough few months, but Mikkel’s life is ruined. This is a subtle, but profound statement on class. If you’re the boss, shit gets tough, but you still get to live a comfortable life. If you’re the cook, when shit gets tough, your life is forever changed. "

I've got a jump to conclusions mat I'd like to sell you.


"I could see how someone might find the pacing a bit boring (Hart Man, this might not be your type of movie I’m guessing), but I thought it built the tension effectively. So even there I can’t knock it. "

Curious as to why you say this. I thought the pacing was perfect. Good Will Hunting, Hoosiers, Major League, and Transformers are favorites of mine - none of which moves quickly.

Reply
Shane
12/9/2014 04:23:30 pm

I think the boring remark comes from you being the only person here just comes out and says a movie boring. The rest of us justify it while you cut to the chase. I could see where someone would think this movie is boring because the action happens off screen. I was wrong here!

Mikkel just watched a man get murdered for sticking up for him. Maybe saying his life is ruined is a bit much, but he's certainly going to be forever scarred. Maybe he's the type of person who can just shake off a murder like he's in Baby Boy II, but nothing in the film leads me to believe that. Not only is he a shell of himself at the end of the movie, but even on the boat for the last weeks he was wasting away mentally.

Reply
Bryan
12/10/2014 08:19:41 am

I agree that his life is probably ruined - I just don't want to see reviews become a series of definitive statements.

“We are not shown Peter’s emotions but one may hypothesize – correctly – how he had none toward the surviving members of the crew.“ How do you know you are hypothesizing correctly?

“They do not care about the quality of life nor do they have respect for any other life than their own. “ How do you know this?

“When someone makes the life decision in favor of piracy, that's a definitive career move. There is no going back.” I wanted to be a pirate once – look where I am now.

“Peter is only frustrated because he is not winning the negotiations.”
I read his emotions completely differently. There was one conversation where his first concern was if the cook was alive. Maybe he doesn't care much for the crew’s general well being, but he’s not a monster willing to sacrifice their life.

Shane
12/10/2014 11:08:39 am

If the crew member is killed, then he's losing a bargaining chip. It was purely about the negotiation.

Phil
12/15/2014 03:32:03 am

After reading the discussion and watching, I’m pretty mad at myself for being so far behind on A Highjacking. I’ll just quickly comment on what I’ve seen already and present one point that I’m somewhat surprised was not brought up earlier.

The main thing I thought the entire time was one of Shane’s main points: the tension is built by what we do not see. It’s tough to have an omniscient point of view and still hide so much from the audience. Later in the movie, when we are only seeing Mikkel, we have no idea how many other crewmembers are still alive. Very well done in that respect.

I also loved the opening. We don’t get a lot of exposition, but we didn’t need it. We only needed to establish a couple things: Mikkel is a jovial and likable dude, and Peter is a great negotiator who doesn’t back down. Perfect, now get to the plot. I hate over-exposition, and A Highjacking was great at establishing only what we needed to know.

The captain being killed for sticking up for Mikkel was such a kick in the nuts for lack of a better word. They were out! It was over! Why put the ring back on? If anything, that’s what will screw up Mikkel forever if he is forever affected by PTSD. It goes hand-in-hand with the class aspect, showing the different bargaining styles of upper-level negotiators and the “commoners.”

Now, the thing I read that I’m kind of surprised that wasn’t challenged. I feel like I saw multiple people suggest to just pay the $15 million and be on with it. I immediately thought that would be the worst possible option for Peter and, really, everyone involved. I’m going to make a couple assumptions here. First, the company probably relies on Indian Ocean trading a fair amount. Second, pirates like Omar are not 100% random in their targets; if they know a particular company and their policies well enough, they may or may not target them again. Let’s say Peter caves and pays the $15 million on day two and Omar heads out. How long does it take Omar and crew to look for another ship from the company? Or how long until the pirates tell other crews to look out for this particular company? $15 million now could turn into $150 million quickly. It could also become so bad that the company would have to discontinue operations in that area. Now, after this situation, what are the odds Omar comes back? Pretty slim if you ask me. The current situation was terrible, but the disincentive to highjack another ship like the Rozen caused by this ordeal may prevent future highjackings.

I have to admit this frame-of-mind caused me to completely miss the class themes brought up by others. Instead, I took the story as a sacrifice of those now to help pave the way to a better future. Of course, when these asks come to people, it is the lower-class who suffers more, as the lower-class is essentially on the “front lines” of the “battle,” so the class aspect exists even in this version of the story.

Overall, I thought it was a very well done movie. It was a well-done movie using a minimalist style. I thought every character was well done, and I thought Mikkel in particular was really well-acted. I have to admit things dragged quite a bit for me though. I understand why it did, but that doesn’t mean I enjoyed it any more. Great pick Shane.

+ Builds tension well
+ Lot of great themes to explore here
+ Mikkel was a really good character
- Dragged in the middle by design, but bored me nonetheless

Grade: A-

Reply
Bryan
12/15/2014 03:55:43 am

"Second, pirates like Omar are not 100% random in their targets; if they know a particular company and their policies well enough, they may or may not target them again."

I wonder what percent random it was in 2008? All a ship has on it is the name, maybe a company, and a flag. I would think the only thing Omar knows is that it's a Dutch ship and Europeans will negotiate.

Reply
Phil
12/15/2014 05:52:02 am

It's a fair question. I'd say the number is high, but not 100%. I would think that "smart pirates" do some profiling and pick up on specifics. Omar might be an asshole, but he seems like a guy who would look for clues about who to go after as well as learn from others.

I think it's also fair to assume Omar isn't the only pirate out there doing this sort of stuff. I would imagine that if a company does business in the Indian Ocean, this is bound to happen, and you have to make a stand eventually or the attacks would continue.

Shane
12/15/2014 10:40:31 am

All ships have to fly under a flag. It's illegal not to. It's a good point that they'd avoid certain ones.

Sean
12/15/2014 05:13:34 am

Hi everybody. I love reading the comments when 2 people get into their own little argument.

I'll stick to a couple high points from your comments and mention a thing or two I haven't seen yet.

First, was I the only person who didn't see Captain Philips? If it was on Netflix right now I probably wouldnt even add it to My List because I'd know I would rather watch a dozen or more other things before it.

Onto A Hijacking. I feel like I have a much different take on Peter than the rest of you. I do think he is emotionally affected by the crews lives. When Lars is briefing the crews' families and Mikkel's wife asks if they even know they're alive Lars is shaken by the question and steps in and gives an emotional explanation behind the logical reasoning why he believes the crew is alive. I also didn't take him deciding to handle the negotiations as an ego driven reaction but rather an emotional reaction. Negotiating big deals is part of his expertise, if the negotiations failed and the crew was lost and he simply delegated that responsibility he couldn't handle that. When his wife visits to support him he angrily sends her away because he feels like he is losing control emotionally and needs to regain his composure and with her that guard is down. Everyone hates him because he gets in his Mercedes and drives home at the end? What the hell do you want him to do hang himself in his office, I actually thought he was going to pull a gun out of his glove compartment and he was going to shoot himself.

Phil's right about paying the money, it's basically what the hostage expert (you all had him British, I thought Aussie) explained in the beginning. I was shocked they went THAT low with the initial offer and how long it took but still.

More than the beards, the malnutrition shouldve been apparent in 100+ days, that bothered me too.

Bryan and Drew fight I declare Bryan the winner. I don't think they kill everyone when they get paid because then the target on their back is larger. Killing the captain was a fuck-up by one pirate.

The fish scene/celebration was by far the best scene in the movie. In that moment they weren't pirates and captives they were starving and trapped together and were experiencing a joyous moment within extreme circumstances.

Runner-up is the scene Mikkel slaughters the goat which somehow hasn't been mentioned above. This is the moment he loses hope, the moment he feels like if this continues either he or one of his fellow crewmates will become the goat for slaughter very soon and the actor nailed it.

How much for the Jump to Conclusions mat?

Overall I didn't feel crazy attached to the movie. It didn't suck me in and hold my attention very strongly and I don't know why. I would've liked more behind the scenes boardroom action where they discussed the strategy more and why they were picking the numbers to offer that they were.

Since it didn't hold me I'll say B+



Reply
Shane
12/15/2014 10:42:00 am

Five minutes on the numbers themselves would have been really interesting, though I think the mystery just adds to the ambiguity here. And I think the ambiguity is a strong part of the film.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Authors

    JUST SOME IDIOTS GIVING SURPRISINGLY AVERAGE MOVIE REVIEWS.

    Categories

    All
    2017 Catch Up Trio
    80s
    Action
    Adventure
    AI Trio
    Author - Blair
    Author - Bobby
    Author - Bryan
    Author - Chris
    Author - Cook
    Author - Drew
    Author - Joe
    Author - Jon
    Author - JR
    Author - Lane
    Author - Phil
    Author - Pierce
    Author - Sean
    Author - Shane
    Author - Tom
    Best Of 2016
    Best Of 2017
    Best Of 2018
    Best Of 2019
    Best Of 2020
    Best Of 2021
    Best Of 2022
    Comedy
    Culture Clash Trio
    Denzel Trio
    Documentary
    Drama
    Foreign
    Historical
    Horror
    Internet Docs Trio
    Mediocrities
    Movie Trios
    Musical
    Podcast
    Romance
    Round 3.1
    Round 3.2
    Round 3.3
    Round 4.1
    Round 4.2
    Round 4.3
    Sci Fi
    Season 10
    Season 2
    Season 3
    Season 4
    Season 5
    Season 6
    Season 7
    Season 8
    Season 9
    Shorts
    Sports
    Thriller
    Western
    Women In Men's Worlds

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014

    Click to set custom HTML