F-U-M entry by special “The Film Nest” guest contributor, Rob R. (Raging Rob in the Comments section)
Of all the films involving criminals and the drug trade most show us characters at the pinnacle of their game. Movies like Scarface, Blow and Layer Cake all show us characters who have worked their way to the top. As we all know, in real life not everyone makes it there. Pusher II: With Blood On My Hands is a story about just such a guy. Tonny is someone who nobody, in his circle of criminal and lowlife friends, respects. The fact that he bears a tattoo with these very words is the epitome of irony. Most of the people around Tonny detest his presence because despite his intentions, things just never go his way. It doesn’t help that Tonny is a drug-addicted screw-up content to just go along for the ride.
Pusher II is the second and most compelling film in the Danish crime trilogy by writer/director Nicolas Winding Refn, who’s latest film Bronson coincidentally, premieres here in LA in a few weeks. After the success of the first Pusher film in 1996, the sequel follows up with the story of Tonny, the partner of antagonist Frank from the original. This film picks up with Tonny having just been released after yet another stint in prison. Owing his ex-cellmate some money, he decides to seek employment from his father, The Duke.
The Duke runs an illegal car theft business and is also one of Copenhagen’s top underworld bosses. Tonny’s father, as we find out, has another son that is obviously his favorite and he only reluctantly gives Tonny another chance. It takes no time for Tonny to get back to his criminal ways, as he boosts a Ferrari as a gift to his father, only to be told how stupid it was to take such a “hot” car with nary an order for one. Tonny also finds himself mixed up in a coke deal gone bad between a local brothel owner and Milo, the Serbian drug dealer from the first Pusher.
As if all this wasn’t enough, Tonny finds out he might have fathered a child with Charlotte, the town whore. At first he wants nothing to do with the child, but soon he finds himself drawn to the infant. Pusher II is a study of a man desperately seeking the approval of his father. Will Tonny ever find the approval he is looking for, and can he give his own possible son the love he has never had? As Tonny is pushed to his breaking point, the film will leave you stunned at how far he is willing to go to save himself.
The lead performance by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen is truly outstanding. Mikkelsen is best known to U.S. audiences as the villian in the 2006 James Bond reboot Casino Royale. Here Mikkelsen’s Tonny is someone everyone calls a loser and an idiot. He seems to even believe they might be right about him. As an audience we start to sympathize with this character, and it’s a testament to Mikkelsen’s acting abilities that we begin to feel for such an unsympathetic loser.
The film is filled with gritty locations and shot with hand-held cameras in some very seedy parts of Copenhagen. The camera work by Morten Soborg has an almost documentary feel that puts you right in the middle of this very intense world. The film also features a rock/techno score that really enhances the films dark atmosphere. Brimming with realistic performances, Pusher II: With Blood On My Hands is a crime story about fathers and their sons, and redemption that is, if you might have missed it, well worth diving into.
Buy this Film U Missed here.





I am curious to know, do you need to have seen the first Pusher to get anything out of this film> Are they so connected that the viewer needs to see the trilogy or does this work well enough to stand on its own for someone who is coming in to the series? It sounds interesting.
Pusher II stands on its own very well. There are some references to past characters, but it works great as a stand alone feature.
This sounds like one of the best movies I’ve ever heard of! I have to check it out! Way to go “Raging” Rob!
So, I have seen both Pusher and this sequel and I can't say that I am overly impressed. This was slightly better than the first, but the scripts seem jumbled, the films are a bit vicious, and there isn't great cohesion. There are some amusing moments in both, and it is a genre I generally really enjoy, but these were not rewatchable films IMO. The funny thing is, I dont really disagree with anything you said in this piece Rob, I guess the films just didnt grab me. It hasn't quelled my enthusiasm for Bronson though.