Easy Money III: Life Deluxe (2013)

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

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

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

The last instalment of the EASY MONEY trilogy is the least of the three thanks to its disjointed nature, but it's still unmissable viewing for anybody who's seen the other two. EASY MONEY III: LIFE DELUXE continues the trend from the first two films of containing beautifully shot scenes of characters struggling with the trials and tribulations of their criminal lives.Once again there's a wonderfully tense and wonderfully shot heist scene to enjoy, along with some involvement with a crime family that brings to mind the glory days of the gangster film, THE GODFATHER et al. Matias Varela gets the lion's share of the screen time as the small-fry bad guy still trying to make it big, although Joel Kinnaman fans will be disappointed that he barely has a cameo in this one. Still, there are plenty of involving sub-plots in EASY MONEY III and most of them are hard-hitting and intense, although with the extra complexity comes extra confusion, making this the least satisfying of the trilogy.

Outwith of the big budget heavily directed cinematic movies that clog up the cinema schedules, you'll find a good line of well produced and engaging films. TV box sets are all the rage, but there are still plenty of good films. The Easy Money trilogy is one of them.I found this set of films by chance on BBC 4, and gave it a go. Each film gave me a good taste for more. What we have is a film centring round the underbelly of Swedish society covering drugs, crime, pimping, immigrants and wealth.It's guns, it's gangsters and it's lowlife. Yet, it's more than that. It's a multi-threaded set of thrillers that leads us on a difficult and uncomfortable journey as we see the leads tip-toe around their peers, before trying to crush them. It's dark, it's grim and frightening, and very cynical in its outlook on humanity. Yet it's really honest and depressingly so, but that look feels like we are seeing a more honest view of the underworld. It's a fresh outlook that doesn't hide the truth.The film is directed and shot in a very frugal manner, and this works. There is no glamour and it's all quite base. That's the hook to this fine trilogy.I really wish there was more, but maybe halting at three films was the correct end for this. I was engrossed in following the characters in this set of films. It's one that I'll revisit, and one that I'd recommend most others to give a try to also.

The first two films (while a tad generic, in places) were entertaining and well-executed with some strong performances and impressive set-pieces. This one is diabolically amateurish by comparison. Nothing about it is believable and the dramatic tension dissipates in a jumble of hackneyed 'who-gives-a-shit' plot twists.The main character of pts 1 & 2 finds himself relegated to a flimsy subplot and is given approx 6minutes of screen time and four lines of dialog before disappearing without a trace. Inexplicable.Huge plot contrivances smack of either pure laziness or casual disregard for the viewer's intelligence. In a flashback scene at the climax of the film, Jorge is shown mucking about with his lovely big bag of cash outside an exploded car in which he apparently left a grenade... Except five minutes earlier we clearly saw him hopelessly pinned down in the driver's seat of the same car with machine guns pointed at him, his bag of cash nowhere to be seen...How did he get out of the car without getting shot?? How did he retrieve the bag of cash??? No one knows, no one cares. Including the writers and director, apparently!

I'm going to do this in English even though I'm Swedish.So, the third film of the 'Snabba Cash' trilogy. Before I start, I just want to say that I haven't read any of the books, only talked to a few people who have and the way I understood it was that the films don't follow the books in any particular order.It's pretty clear that the film is not focusing on 'JW', even though he was an important part in it story wise. But as for the film, I think Joel Kinnaman got maybe, 10 minutes of screening time? (Just a wild guess). I had absolutely no problem with this since 'Radovan' & 'Jorge' always interested me very much even in the previous movies. Boy did they step up their game - both character and performance-wise, especially 'Radovan'. Both of them completely steal the show and they do it very good. Swedish actors are very good when it comes to drama. Also worth mentioning, some solid performances by Malin Buska ('Natalie')and Martin Wällström ('Martin') who also had great chemistry.I loved this film and in a way, I would like to say that it's the best one in the trilogy. But the first one is still hard to beat judging by the main performance(s) and Espinosas touch. It feels as if this movie had more ground to cover and I think Jens Jonsson did a great job at doing that even though I did feel that the film was jumping back and forth too much for its own good. I completely understand why that is since the first and the second movie didn't cover much ground at all if you compare it to this one, and they also did not follow the books which I think made it somewhat harder to tie things together for this one. It was beautifully shot with great compositions, sometimes shot too great for the sake of the film (if that makes sense). The shots were sometimes so beautiful and well put together that it felt like they couldn't go on with the scene without "ruining" it aesthetically, as if they didn't know what shot to put in because they just had a great one. There was a dolly-zoom that came absolutely from nowhere and didn't fit in at all, but it was still a great dolly-zoom. Also why I think the robbery-scene was so fantastic because most of it was all in one entire take. Keep in mind that the only reason that I'm mentioning this is because this was a really beautifully shot film, and I mean it in every sense of the word.The robbery-scene was probably one of the best things that have ever happened to Swedish cinema in a very long time. The problem I had with this movie was that whenever there was a great action set-piece, it was great and did what it was supposed to do, but, where there could've been great set-pieces - they just edited them out and jumped ahead of the film. One segment that comes to mind is the scene in which Radovans daughter is going to murder one of his close friends (can't remember his name at the moment). And what they did there was that we just see her stabbing him, and then it's all over - we see her and Martin (the police) just freaking out and some flashbacks of what just happened, in other words what could've been another fantastic set-piece. I personally think that if we would've been shown the whole segment from the beginning to the end it would've added that extra suspense, the same exact suspense that we got during the robbery-scene. Fantastic.A very good and solid finish to the trilogy of 'Snabba Cash' which has become very popular in Sweden. It also makes me proud.