SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Stockholm

(8473) 6.1 92 min 2018

Stockholm is a movie starring Ethan Hawke, Noomi Rapace, and Mark Strong. Based on the absurd but true 1973 bank heist and hostage crisis in Stockholm that was documented in the New Yorker as the origins of the 'Stockholm Syndrome'.

Mark Strong, Christopher Heyerdahl, Ethan Hawke, Noomi Rapace
History, Crime, Comedy, Biography, Drama
Robert Budreau

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres History, Crime, Comedy, Biography, Drama
Director Robert Budreau
Writer Robert Budreau
Stars Mark Strong, Christopher Heyerdahl, Ethan Hawke, Noomi Rapace
Country Canada, USA
Also Known As Η Ληστεία της Στοκχόλμης, Síndrome de Estocolmo, Stokholma, Rapina a Stoccolma, The Captor, Die Stockholm Story - Geliebte Geisel, Sztokholm
Runtime 1H 32M
Description A semi-fictional account, including most of the names of the players being changed, of the event that resulted in the creation of the term Stockholm Syndrome to describe people who feel empathy and sometimes more for their captor(s) is presented. In 1973, a lone armed man, thought to be American, storms the downtown Stockholm branch of Kreditbanken. Ultimately the authorities, led by Chief of Police Mattsson learn of his at-gunpoint demand: $1 million US, the release of convicted bank robber and murderer Gunnar Sorensson, and a Mustang Boss 302 like the one Steve McQueen drove in Bullitt (1968) as a getaway vehicle for the two of them. By the time Mattsson gets Sorensson to the bank - unknown to the gunman, who is thought to be well known robber Kaj Hansson, Sorenson having made a plea deal with Mattsson for his cooperation against the gunman - there are three hostages at the bank, all the others that were in the bank at the time let go. Arguably the most lucid of the three is bank clerk Bianca Lind, a wife and mother of two preschool aged children. Ultimately she is able to figure out that the gunman is not Hansson as Mattsson suspects, but rather Lars Nystrom, what she knowing of his past crimes chief being his humane treatment of people he held at gunpoint. Beyond what Sorensson decides to do with his ultimate goal not to go back to prison, what happens largely depends on Lind, who begins to trust Nystrom more than either Mattsson or Prime Minister Olof Palme whose actions and decisions she believes from what she can see are more of a potential physical detriment to her and her fellow two hostages than that of Nystrom.

Top reviews

Thursday, 24 Sep 2020 05:15

For those who are seeking to change their lives and feel free to go against their preconceived notions, the film is a powerful reminder of how human life is so often better than what you may have heard or read. The film is divided into three different chapters. The first, covering the year 2006, focuses on the Berlin Wall's fall and the propaganda that followed. As the border was closed, the ease of moving people out of the city was reduced drastically. In the beginning, the people were moved to more remote areas, the middle of the movie, an old lady is moved to the countryside. The wall was a concrete barrier, the last day was the end of the night shift of the city guard, who is a communist, who is only motivated by the state, because he has to do so well. His job is to do as the state wants and keep the city orderly. His job is similar to the other communist guards who are only motivated by the state. During this chapter, we see how people are simply not happy, so they are not moved out. The second chapter, covering 2008, has a much better, and more interesting storyline. This chapter deals with the political conflict between the state and the eastern part of the country. The first scene shows that the East is filled with people that were peacefully protesting against the wall and the government. The second scene shows how some people are not happy that the Easterners will be able to have more freedom and that they won't be as humiliated by the State and the West. The third chapter focuses on how people are still suffering, which is after 2008, how the people of the East are suffering because of the West's attitude towards the East. This chapter deals with many subjects such as class and gender, and how the social situation is changing. The film is a great symbol of how the world is changing and what can be done about it. It is also a very good reflection on the way how the current state of the world is becoming, the way the world has been through the last decade, and how people are looking for a way out, in the same way they look for a way out of class and gender. In the end, the film shows how the state and the state can't control the situation, and people just live through the situation, and how people are just going to keep looking for a way out.
Friday, 11 Sep 2020 15:47

Well, what can I say about this film that hasn't already been said? Not much, really. I had read the synopsis for it a few weeks ago and it sounded interesting, but my attention was mostly drawn to the movie when I had gotten home from work the previous day. Not that I didn't like the book, or think it was good, but the movie left me with the impression that I should have been watching a play. When I walked out of the theater I was still in my head, thinking, "Was that all there was to the movie?" I mean, it's a movie. It is supposed to entertain you, so I think it is fair to criticize it for being overly long. It is also supposed to take some time to get to know the characters and their lives. This is one of those movies where you get lost in the characters and you just want to see where they go. You feel a little bit sad for the main characters, but then you feel happy when they get out. I liked the movie, it was definitely worth my time and I have recommended it to my friends. It was a great way to spend an hour and a half. I definitely think this movie has something to say about life, but you can't blame it on Hollywood. This movie just doesn't have any depth. It's about life and how the struggle of getting from point A to point B happens to all of us. It is not so much a movie about life and how it ends for us, it's a movie about life. It is about life and the struggle that we have to face. I just didn't find it compelling enough. It's not a bad movie, just a very ordinary one. And it's not a bad movie for that reason alone. It's not that it doesn't have any depth, it's just that it's not engaging enough to make you care about what happens to these characters. And in the end you just don't care enough. I didn't like it as much as I thought I would. I can't help it, I just thought it was a waste of time.
Wednesday, 12 Aug 2020 22:41

In a climate of immaturity, naivety and the absence of a conscience, The Life of David Gale is a piece of work that uncovers the psychological conflicts in an aging world. It doesn't always seem to work, but in a way it does, not because the story has to fit into a neat structure but because it is a strange, understated and beautiful film that calls to be seen and appreciated. The cinematography by Sebastian Burgess and the production design by Stephen Richmond are absolutely beautiful. The lead performances are also very strong. Matthias Schoenaerts has this magical quality that seems to envelop his characters and that of the film itself. He seems to have something in common with the lead character in Lars von Trier's Inglourious Basterds, and that is the simple and unemotional manner in which he presents the world. There is a mysterious quality to Matthias that can be both shocking and beautiful at the same time. All of the characters in this film are flawed, but they are all in a place where they belong. Some of the problems that the characters face in their aging is the death of their loved ones, which creates a sense of loss in all of them. The film ends with a complex statement, but the film never tells you why the events occurred and that is a huge failure for this film. It is a shame because I really wanted to understand the main character's situation, but the film never tells me why. It is sad to see a film where the leading character is not understood and instead of understanding the film asks us to figure out his own ideas and personal history. The story in the film is simple, but it is not straightforward. It tells you something about the past and why a person who has been in a position of power is always the one to blame, regardless of the circumstances. I am not saying that the film is without flaws. The slow parts are overdone and there is a slight sense of the film being a little weak in some scenes. It is not so slow that it feels boring but it does slow down a little in the latter half of the film. The film is a little too long, but this could have been avoided if the film could have been more fully explored. However, the film has a great look and a beautiful score. It is a great film, but there are some flaws that stop it from being the movie that it should be. 9/10

Write a review