2018 var året då två filmer om terrordåden i Norge nådde filmdukarna. 22 July av Paul Greengrass är den svagare av dessa. Greengrass har erfarenhet av genren från bland annat filmen United 93, som handlade om WTC-attackerna. 22 July är mycket lik den filmen, och är även en väldigt traditionell verklighetsbaserad thrillerfilm med Hollywoodvinkling.

22 July är visserligen en realistisk och verklighetstrogen skildring av händelserna i Oslo och på Utöya och filmens första halvtimme är dess största styrka. Greengrass visar själva dådet från början till slut med säker hand. Men sedan skiftar filmens fokus: vi får ta del av den efterföljande tiden, några överlevares vardag samt rättegången mot gärningsmannen. Det som började som en thriller blir et ganska urvattnat och klichéfyllt drama. Greengrass försöker aldrig trixa till det i sin regi, utan håller avståndet och låter filmen tala för sig. Därmed känns filmen realistisk, den väcker känslor och ger åskådaren viktiga lärdomar.

De norska skådespelarna gör ett bra jobb men tyvärr tar filmen skada av att de tvingas prata engelska - när handlingen annars utspelar sig i Norge. Vissa av skådespelarna bryter ganska kraftigt och engelskan sticker ut lite för mycket ibland. Det känns samtidigt som i synnerhet de unga skådespelarnas prestationer hämmas något av språkkravet.

Det mest problematiska med Greengrass version är att den är så övertydligt producerad för en internationell publik, att den faller för de flesta av genrens klichéer. Rättegångsdramat mot slutet av filmning är uppriktigt sant inte speciellt intressant och onödigt mycket fokus sätts på själva gärningsmannen. Dessutom känns filmen en gnutta för lång, i synnerhet då tempot saktar ner avsevärt efter den första halvtimmen.

Loved it. First I wasn't sure, I was going to give this an 8/10 because I had issues with the second part of the movie. I still have issues. It lost momentum. It's fascinating to think how you can tell this story. Is the second part of the movie really necessary? I feel it was too long and it could have been shorter. Instead of showing the aftermath that much (especially giving the terrorist a platform), show the beforemath. Show the victims in their normal lives doing things for 20-30 mins. Then show those people that we followed and got attached to, perish. It shows the inhumanity. To show that it's not only the background characters that die. This is how you feel in these movies, the protagonist always survives and overcomes the tragedy but it's not always the case. Other people died, they are not background characters.

At the very end something happened that it completely won me over and I forgot all these questions. The lawyer did not shake the terrorist's hand and when he said I would have done this (terrorist act) again, the lawyer said, I'm paraphrasing "Then we will fight you, we will beat you. My children and their children.". Such an important line, especially because that the lawyer who defended him says it. It summarizes well the essence and the core of the movie.

On 22 July 2011, a far-right terrorist killed 77 innocent people including children. He did this to wage a war against religion and political views he did not agree with. Seven years later, Paul Greengrass created this potent film to tell the aftermath.

The film starts with the terrorist preparing for the assault and also shows the summer camp on the island of Utøya. The tension begins rising until the Greengrass shows a very detailed Utøya massacre and the Oslo bombing. The terrorist surrenders when the police reach the island. From here the story branches in two ways. We are shown the courtroom proceedings of bringing the perpetrator to justice and we are also shown the struggles of the survivor, particularly of Viljar Hanssen, an 18-year-old boy who is critically wounded with bullet shrapnel lodged in his brain.

Paul, who comes with the background of the Bourne series in the past, could not completely dial down the action sequences of the actual attack and his re-enactments are intensely shot. However, he focuses more on the trial and tries to understand the vile thought patterns of the terrorists which led him to pull the trigger on young children.

The courtroom scenes are played out in detail, and we are also given the statement of the terrorist. What works well is how the terrorist's testimony comes broken in parts of the editing and how Viljar Hanssen's statement comes towards the very end of the film. This goes on to show what should be rightly in the focus despite the horrible attack.

This is made with local Norwegian actors, and they have performed really well. Anders Danielsen Lie, who plays the terrorist makes a mark by showing his commitment to his demented desires. Jonas Strand Gravli as Viljar is believable and sincere. Even Ola G. Furuseth as the prime minister remains in your memory with his shaken psyche but committed presence on screen.

Paul's camera remains somewhat shaky to retain tension and to keep the narrative simmering at the right temperature, but I am not personally very fond of this technique.

For non-jingoistic, down to earth handling of a tragedy, as well as for keeping the nation and humanity at the heart of it, this movie is worth a watch.