Pusher II keeps the great acting and very good direction of Pusher, but it loses some plot-wise. Whereas Pusher felt like a story from beginning to end, Pusher II feels more like a collection of well crafted scenes.Also the director slightly over-establishes Tony's emotional state, in showing scene after scene how impotent he is, how unloving his father is and how everyone views him as sh-t. He does get away with it though, since the acting and directing overshadows it anyhow.As a sequel you might ask why it was made - but as for acting and direction, this is as good as it gets.

Nicolas Winding Refn's Pusher 1-3 is my favorite trilogy of danish film history. Pusher II (2004) is the best part of it. I have been a follower of Refn's work ever-since I saw his directional debut Pusher (1996) the first time. It had a great dynamic, it was brutally honest and it had a documentary-style (hand-held camera, great method-acting etc.) that gave it an authentic feeling.The story-line: Small-time gangster Tonny (Mads Mikkelsen) is released from prison, but quickly returns to the criminal underworld and gets hired by his father "Smeden" (Leif Sylvester): a big-time gangster highly respected in the underworld. But Tonny has a hard time earning his father's respect, and on top of that, he discovers that Charlotte (Anne Sørensen): a girl he once had sex with, has given birth to his child. Tonny has a hard time making the right decisions, and one day he agrees to help his friend Kusse-Kurt (Kurt Nielsen) purchase heroin worth of 80.000 danish kroner from big-time pusher Milo (Zlatko Buric), but since they are high off cocaine and paranoid they accidentally throw the heroin in the toilet, as they think a police-man enters the room. Now they have a big problem. They have to get 80.000 kroner very quickly...In 2004 Nicolas Winding Refn almost went bankrupt, because his previous film Fear X (2002) which was shot on a big-budget in Canada, did horribly in the theaters and at box-office. Refn knew that a sequel for Pusher would do very well (Pusher 1 was the most engrossing debut film ever of Denmark) and the universe of the film had lots of artistic possibilities - therefore he decided on making it a trilogy. And Refn very much proofed that it is possible to make artistically interesting films out of rather commercial interests.It could be argued that Pusher 1 glamorized the gangster/drug underworld at times. This is NOT the case in Pusher II. Although Pusher 1 did show the decay of a cold man in a cold milieu, we never really got into his feelings. In Pusher II we get to feel the pain and coldness (even when Tonny himself doesn't). Pusher II is a docu-drama based on realism (like Pusher 1), and only three characters are real actors. The rest of the cast consists of people off the street, and this very much adds to its authenticity. They do a great job! The second half of the film has a few very beautiful artistic scenes (almost dream-like) that almost pauses the film and gives its audience time for reflecting. In the scenes we see very dominant red colors and the music is almost ambient-like. A great idea that works very well - even in such a realistic film.Mads Mikkelsen, Leif Sylvester and Zlatko Buric do terrific jobs. They are (as usual) very professional and passionate actors. But the real surprise is the untrained street-actors. They add SO much to the realism and rawness of the film. Pusher II is shot on DV-camera with a hand-held style, but it's far from Dogme. Many scenes look terrific, and the playing with distinctive colors red and green works well. I also have to give credit to Peterpeter's great rock/80's synthesizer soundtrack. It really under-builds the scenes in a scary way.I highly recommend Pusher II (and the rest of the trilogy) to everyone! A perfect example of an artistic film that actually works for all audiences! 9/10

I've seen Pusher II during the Thriller and Film Noir Film festival in Cognac. It was a shock at the end. When lights were on, people don't say a word. The last time I was so mute was at the end of "once were warriors". The violence in Pusher II is so realistic, so close, so terrifying for the future of all the characters than we really hope there will be something, even very little, happy at the end to help us to breath. The main character seems to be a bad guy but he's a loser, looking for the love of a father. All his past, aka his friends, family, etc... are lost. i've met the director, he said this a real look on a way of life in his country; but don't think it's just outside : this story can exists everywhere. Some sequences are like nightmare without sleeping. And for the hero, the last hope in his life is a baby, his son, but for what kind of life ? Incredible, powerful, beautiful, PUSHER II mixes all these feelings to be one of the best movie of this year, a movie which marks your spirit like hot steel.

Pusher was a great movie no doubt so clearly i expected A lot from this one but i'm sorry to say that it does NOT and i repeat NOT at all reach the heights of the first one.it's generally boring and not so tuff and scary as the first one cause i can remember in some scenes from Pusher i was really frightened but not at all in this one.Mads Mikkelsen does a good job definitely but i really missed Kim Bodnia cause his role was far more intense and now i've heard that his not in pusher 3 neither is Mads! i hope pusher 3 goes back to the original environment from the first one and i'm glad to see that Zlatko Buric is back in this one cause he has only a very small role in pusher 2 and that sucks!!