Boundless

Department Q is one of my favourite series and it has been almost 11 years since The Keeper of Lost Causes was released. Hanging Girl / Boundless is the sixth movie adaptation of Jussi Olsen Adele's books. I need to be honest I loved the first four adaptations with Nikolaj Lie Kaas and Fares Fares. The fifth adaptation was with a different cast and Ulrich Thomsen and Zaki Youssef became the main cast. For me the fifth movie (Marco Effect) was good with Thomsen and Youssef. However, I cannot say the same for Hanging Girl / Boundless. The cast changed again Thomsen is with Afshin Firouzi and I can tell you that he doesn't fit into the role of Detective Assad. Nevertheless, Ulrich Thomsen is a great actor and you like watching him as Detective Carl Mørck and that was the only reason why I was able to finish this episode. The ending was easily guessable and there are plot holes. The acting is fine but there are unlogical scenes in particular at the ending. In short, I can tell you that this is weakest episode among all 6 Department Q movies. Still give it a try if you love the series. I give 6 out of 10 points.

On an island in Denmark where the sun seemingly always shines, a young girl is found dead on the roadside. Years later a chief of police shoots himself in the head due to some inner demons created because the closed case was never solved. Huh? It turns out that absolutely nothing can justify this overreaction, but I guess the story needed some kind of shock opener.

This movie is based on a book from overrated Danish novelist, Adler-Olsen, who somehow got away with penning one of the dullest protagonists ever created, detective Carl Morck, who feels compelled to reopen the case, but just ends up witnessing things, as he strolls along from point A to point B, always speaking in very short sentences and in the end doesn't solve a thing, because all answers are just handed to him (and the audience) along the way, without him doing the slightest effort.

Seasoned director, Ole Christian Madsen, at least tries his very best to make this run-of-the-mill story come sort of alive with a pacing that makes sure you don't fall asleep. But when your protagonist is the least interesting character, there's isn't a whole lot you can do to avoid it ending up as somehow of a mess.

Once again, the lead actors in the movie have been replaced with some new ones. Rose has become more hardcore and less charming. Not sure if it's part of wokeism.

The movie contains a completely irrelevant scene where a janitor harasses Rose and she practically rips his balls off. The scene has nothing to do with anything.

This movie is the worst in the Department Q series. I miss more twists and surprises, and I miss more investigative work in the film. If this is the standard for the upcoming Department Q films, then I won't be looking forward to the next ones in the series.

"Fasandræberne" is still the best Department Q film.

Unless there's anyway we can eject author, Jussi Adler-Olsen (from further involvement), and reinstate Zentropa, and, more specifically, Nikolaj Arcel, to Department: Q's cinematic universe again... then this'll probably be my last one.

Adler-Olsen is churlish and triflin; like Stephen King when he didn't agree with Kubrick's interpretation of The Shining (1980).

Afshin Firouzi is an improvement over their last Assad -- even if he's little more than an exposition-absorbing sidekick here; But now it's as if Ulrich Thomsen has realized these new D:Q installments won't live up to their predecessors, because whatever progress Thomsen initially demonstrated in 2021's Marco has faded and is just lackin now.

Really, Rose (Sofie Torp) is the principle sidekick here, since she's allotted the most screen time/dialogue (after Thomsen). She performs ably, but her arc is pedantic and at times antithetical (to her character development).

There are at least two characters whose development is marooned to the film's first half.

Most unfortunate is the story: the premise is intriguing and ultimate-reveal is equally appealing, but the execution is hopelessly rote (they're plainly trying to pantomime Fincher with only Joel Schumacher swagger). The first four films easily demonstrate some of the best procedural facets (of the sub-genre), while still facilitating convincing cold case thesis or agreeable whodunit subplots, but the author has gone out of his way to wipe the slate and insist on cinematic universe-dover (with these last six properties). Unfortunate, these later entries aren't worth your time (and hopefully won't be here for long).

• - - - - -

It's only appropriate Netflix is distributing Adler-Olsen's US adaptation, because these (Marco Effect, and now, Boundless) definitely aren't worthy theatrical exhibition (unlike his first four films, e.g. Under Arcel's pen and Zentropa's oversight).

No pun intended - many ways to interpret it - I am going to go with one explanation for you ... I really do miss the duo that was responsible for the author (of this and the previous movies) to make them successful ... I assume this was a novel too first. I have not read any of them, but this kind of leaves me similarly cold as the one before.

Don't get it twisted, the movie (and the one before that, where we got the cut and didn't get our crime fighting duo) are good movies overall. Especially if you are into crime movies ... into the drama, but also the suspense and the guessing game ... who done it and all that. And where are they ... so there are things to love ... question is: are they enough for you? You be the judge (hopefully not jury and executioner as well - no pun intended)