Nightcrawler

Los Ángeles de noche con las ambulancias iluminadas, una carrera jugada duro, la crueldad sensacionalista y el atractivo Dodge Challenger. Comienzo más lento, el final más fuerte. La esencia de la película es el excelente actor Jake Gyllenhaal, que madura como el vino. (07.04.2015)

Nightcrawler is the best date movie for tabloid journalists. At the same time, it is a film that uses the withering television news industry only as a basis for addressing more universal themes with bitter cynicism – the ideology of self-improvement, extreme individualism and careerism in the conditions of market capitalism (which requires giving meaningful-sounding titles not only to meaningless jobs, but even to murder, for example). It also works superbly as a mirror held up to a rotten society, thanks to the fact that Gyllenhaal’s nocturnal predator, with his “Zelig-esque” ability to blend into any environment, lacks a stable identity (it’s no coincidence that one of the film’s final shots quotes the climax of The Usual Suspects). He cold-bloodedly and remorselessly imitates others from the beginning (he is clearly unaware that such things as morals even exist). He didn’t come up with a quick way to achieve great success himself, but learned it by watching and listening (from, among other things, television and online courses). He understood that what sells best is continuously stoked-up fear and that every person and every unfortunate event can be a monetizable commodity. He simply takes what he wants, even if he has to kill for it or create the desired reality himself. I consider the brilliantly escalated development of Lou’s alteration of reality in front of the camera to be the strength of this return to the aesthetic (from which Michael Mann similarly draws) and narrative straightforwardness of the 1980s. From rearranging the photographs on the refrigerator and concealing certain facts, Lou’s path smoothly progresses to repositioning corpses and telling lies that can be lethal. For Lou, the whole of Los Angeles becomes a computer game (GPS map, completing missions within a time limit) in which anything can be done without any major consequences (for the guilty). Related to this is another timeless level of the story – the loss of one’s ability to distinguish between what is real and what is merely conveyed to us in a world lived through media (for example, Lou’s comment that the background in the television studio looks so real, his attempt to communicate with a reporter on the screen). The film itself plays with this boundary between fiction and reality when it takes on the “action” method of news photography, even in shots that are not filmed with a television camera, thus essentially letting the protagonist become the director of what we see. Apart from his inability to distinguish between what is real and what only seems to be real, however, Lou is not that different from people who live only for their careers. Because of that, Nightcrawler could continue to elicit unpleasant chills long after the television news industry has been supplanted by internet journalism. Or something even worse. 80% (02.02.2015)

Nightcrawler was exactly what I was expecting it to be, which is basically the only complaint I can have. It was missing at least one moment of bigger surprise or shock. Basically, I thought that Gyllenhaal’s self-confident sociopath (all the good things that’ve been said about his performance are true) would go a little further in his quest for career advancement. It’s a critique of an awful era and the lack of morals, where only viewership numbers have value and ethics are pushed aside. “I will never want from you anything that I wouldn’t do myself.” Impressive, dark, captivating, but I think Lumet’s Network cuts deeper. 9/10 (20.12.2014)

The emotions are about as warm as a winter morning. The characters without a personal story may evoke viewer antipathy, but the economical handling of characters who have sold out to ratings numbers works a treat because these stalkers remain something detached for most of us, coming to us through spicy TV shots, even in ordinary reality. Also, Gyllenhaal's sleazy character works so well that you don't really care which way you're supposed to view the protagonist, which emerges in the end as the main trump card of the creative narrative, and you sort of even accept the pre-credits finish at its mercy. 4 ½. (01.02.2015)

I was afraid that Nightcrawler would disappoint me just like the movie Southpaw (it came out in the same year), where Jake Gyllenhaal was also starring. In the end, I was completely misled, because I got a very solid thriller. Nevertheless, I have to confess that I couldn’t imagine any possible course of the story and in the end, I was even surprised by the interesting development of the character itself. Jake is portraying such a psycho that even a certified psychiatrist wouldn’t know what to do with him. You can see the madness in his eyes, which scared me throughout the whole movie and I still have to think about it even now. Nightcrawler is definitely one of those movies that draw from an interesting idea and a brilliant acting performance. Well, and you don’t actually need anything else for a quality movie experience. (08.11.2015)

It's like an episode of GTA, from which someone removed the humor and most of the perspective. Unfortunately, Jake put on his "lose weight and get an award (consolation)" costume in a full retard style and the result is a perverted Forrest Gump character. It would have been possible to sit through if Dan Gilroy had not sought to show a perversely serious image of media hyenism. A few humorous moments make it better, but it's hard to balance a number of places where Gyllenhaal adds gas deep under the floor, resulting in a grin instead of freezing. I also have a problem with the structure. The first 2/3 is largely based on trying to engulf the viewer with the neon darkness of LA, but the combination of characters beyond the edge of believability and repetitive situations is not hypnotic, but instead rather annoying. Shock and derailment somehow don't get out through the photogenically overexposed night sets. The last third gets going thanks to the plot, but I rather inadvertently found myself watching Nightcrawler with a similarly shallow interest as reality cop shows (I don't care what happens to who, just that it's simply happening), while Gilroy's material is far cooler, lots of angles, gaps, music and so on... if this film is supposed to be a seductively distorted picture, it really failed. Because in the end it seduces the viewer into dull staring rather than a deep critical reflection on the media snuff. The sexual arousal of Jake and his lady friend at the end is perhaps the falsest moment of Nightcrawler, who stalks with commitment, but he misses the essence of the composition. Hardworking? For sure. Enchanting? No chance. (31.01.2015)

According to a certain scientist, unsuccessful psychopaths fill prisons, while successful ones become bosses of multinational companies, industrial conglomerates, and respectable institutions. Lou is somewhere between these worlds. Without a formal education, but with high determination and an absolute absence of moral restraints and emotions. In the beginning, he is introduced as an absolute loser, but soon seizes an opportunity and starts his own business in the sale of videos, which journalists with ethical restraints cannot stomach. I cannot help but compare it to Fincher's successful drama Gone Girl, which, despite the director's undeniable craftsmanship, felt somewhat artificial to me, especially from an area where the topic has already been extensively explored in the past. I didn't believe in the story in Gone Girl, while Nightcrawler has an unpleasantly realistic undercurrent, and I never doubted for a moment that people like Lou are among us, waiting for their chance. Jake Gyllenhaal is a reliable actor and delivers exactly what his character requires. The direction is brisk and the camera works wonders. I did not regret my visit to the movie theater in the slightest. Perhaps only the script could have been a bit more restrained, as it is noticeable that Dan Gilroy wanted to depict his anti-hero in the most repulsive light possible, and the tools he uses for that purpose are somewhat direct. On the other hand, similar films often tend to partially sympathize with such a character, which fortunately does not apply in this case. Overall impression: 90%. (01.02.2015)

That’s why I don’t watch the news. Modern retelling of the American dream and one of the films of the year. Dany Gilroy hit the nail on the head in an original reflection of today’s society which is precisely what Nightcrawler intends to be. Perfect self presentation when looking for a job, learned universal truths, recklessness, hypocrisy, hatred toward others = today’s model of a successful person. Neat camerawork, great atmosphere and perfect Jake Gyllenhaal. He’s dead. Come and film! (05.01.2015)

Neon LA at night vs. a phenomenal Jake Gyllenhaal, who could convince a corpse that he can play almost any kind of character and emotional creation with utter brilliancy. The pacing is slower in both the plot and the formation of the protagonist's persona. Gradually, however, it gains steam and the escalating finale boldly ranks among the most thrilling moments of the year, and the whole thing is utterly unpredictable. (10.11.2015)

An intimate thriller whose greatest asset is the perfect performance of the lead actor – we haven't had such an unreadable, dark character going on his own without firearms for a long time, and together with the dark atmosphere of nighttime, crime-ridden L.A., especially in the end, it brings the emotional experience of the story to the level of the best we could see in 2014. In the final analysis, the film feels more like a small intro into the sick soul of an obsessive careerist, and doesn't make much of an effort to link his immoral actions with the commentary on criminal justice (the ending almost feels like an ode to investigative "snooping"), but that doesn't detract from its quality. 80% (09.07.2015)

A sophisticated provocation of a sociopathy so thoroughly developed that you wouldn't lend Jake a cobblestone to look after here for fear he might somehow hurt it. The only problems with this ambitious debut are the partial lapses in logic and the scenes that are already a little hysterically bizarre. The biggest value-add is the constant provocation. Both formally, when we see most of the juicy stuff through the digital camera's perspective and then feel ashamed when we complain that we want to see more, and content-wise, when the protagonist actually mixes a catastrophic inability to empathize with the qualities that are every HR manager's dream come true (purposefulness, teachability, adaptability, courage, instant understanding of the laws of the market). The result is basically a completely simple thesis where we watch someone who deserves to be hated, but on the other hand we want to see the products of his work, which wouldn't be so interesting if he wasn't such a bastard. That's what viewers of Louis' work in the film have in common with actual viewers of the film. (22.05.2015)

Me recordó a Crash, pero mientras en ésa Cronenberg se desata, aquí seguimos a una hiena humana, un ser repugnante del que no sabemos demasiado. Aunque el papel principal está bien interpretado, el personaje de Jakob me resultó extremadamente antipático y toda la película me pareció morbosa. Al final, la tensión aumentó y el final solo acentuó mi desagradable sensación con toda la película. Brrrrrr. (10.12.2016)

An excellent film that stands well on its own, it could work as a short story or a novel, but thanks to good directing and especially Jake Gyllenhaal's brilliantly portrayed character, this truly is an intense spectacle that once again answers what lengths a journalist is willing to go to in order to have the best possible news, or in this case, a cameraman. At times, it's so absurd that it's hard to believe, but as a harsh critique of the media, "Nightcrawler" works perfectly. (10.12.2014)

One of Jake Gyllenhaal's most positive roles ever. Lou is just an absolutely irresistibly likable guy. Otherwise a confirmation of the old adage that a fanatic needs someone like-minded on the other side to reach his peak. I generally like to dissect character development, but here I think it's a different kettle of fish altogether. The main character doesn't evolve in any real sense (this simply isn't development), he just gradually tightens the threads more and more and gives vent to the very lowest of human instincts. An extremely impressive and poignant satire of the limitless possibilities of the media world. (26.04.2018)