Opération Archangel

All the old clichés are rolled out early in this adaptation of Robert Harris's spy novel 'Archangel': surly Russians, an arrogant English hero, a garrulous American. There's also a certain amount of expository dialogue: in an early scene, a leading academic makes a speech to a conference in which he makes the dramatic revelation that Stalin was evil. 'Archangel' is certainly no 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy', and the thin characterisation makes the early stages tedious to watch. But in the middle, it improves greatly, as a conventional but tautly scripted thriller begins to take shape. Sadly, the ending can't quite deliver on this promise; both because of the risible suggestion that megalomania is an inherited quality, and also because it is surely not (as the film suggests) the worship of Stalin's image that is the real problem in today's Russia, but rather, the social circumstances which make such an absurdity possible. Still, it's always interesting to get a glimpse of the great Russian north on camera, and lead actress Yekaterina Rednikova looks very sexy smoking a cigarette. But overall, this is routine stuff.

As a big fan of history and Russian culture, I was excited to watch this movie but didn't expect very much from a TV production. Useless to say that this movie is a must seen for anyone who likes Russian history, society and lifestyle. But it is also easy to watch and understand for someone who doesn't know much about the topic because most of the sings are told in the interesting past sequences of the movie. I've travelled to Russia and seen and lived a lot of particular things there and must admit that the behaviours of the police, the military and the government in this movie are not a stupid cliché but quite close to reality. Even the locations chosen for the shootings remind me of the modern Russian post-soviet lifestyle even though most of the scenes have been filmed in Latvia.

Well, I got largely surprised as this movie is really intense and has a realistic scenario that makes you think a lot about nowadays's societies and ideologies. The movie is really entertaining and I have watched it several times without getting bored at all. The characters and the story are well and profoundly developed. The surprising element in the movie is not such a big twist but that isn't negative because the main idea is quite original and the maintain of the tension is always guaranteed in this movie. The movie's finale is dramatically and interesting.

The most positive surprise in this movie is the acting of Daniel Craig. I've always known him as the cool, emotionless and somehow mediocre James Bond actor but he is really convincing in this movie. He plays with emotions, with conviction and with an unknown diversity. The only time he played as well was in "Defiance" which you would also like if you like this movie.

I really can recommend this entertaining and surprisingly well done and produced movie even though most of the critics are actually too negative.

"Archangel" is a BBC production in three parts done in 2005 and starring Daniel Craig and Gabriel Macht (Suits). It's based on a novel I haven't read, so I'll say right off the bat I can't compare the two.

Craig plays Fluke Kelso, a British history professor in Russia. After lecturing about the evils of Stalin, he is approached by an old man who tells Kelso that he knows nothing. The man tells him that when he was a young guard, he witnessed the burying of a notebook that could change Russia forever. The man leaves before Kelso can talk to him further, so he goes looking for him and eventually meets the man's daughter Zinaida (Yekaterina Rednikova). When they track down her father, he has been murdered.

Kelso and Zinaida, hounded by a TV reporter (Macht), then attempt to track down the notebook, translate it, and learn the secret.

Actually filmed in Russia and Latvia, the scenery is amazing, and Daniel Craig is so good that one is willing to overlook an insane plot. It's very much like the DaVinci code but doesn't quite get there.

The script is okay but not great, and the characters are somewhat stereotyped, though Rednikova and Macht give good performances. Craig is a brilliant actor and does a wonderful job.

This film could have been a lot better, but as it is, it's interesting, well done, well acted, and holds one's interest. What more could one ask for? Well, some character development and a story that is a little bit less fanciful.

This one started out well enough with a certain amount of pace and intrigue. The plot has promise. It is adapted from a Robert Harris novel - a western researcher discovers a secret notebook from Stalin which dark forces are prepared to kill to keep secret. There are some awful movie clichés - e.g. our hero loses the scent, but finds matchbook from a nightclub which leads to club where he meets the sultry love interest.

The movie was shown in two parts and the second episode trailer promised lots of exciting action. So I was prepared to overlook its faults and sat down to the second episode. However this just seemed to drag on. There was no real tension and when the action finally started it was terrible, lacking real tension and full of deus-ex-machina escapes. This movie has very little to recommend it. I expected better from BBC drama.

Archangel

Set in contemporary Moscow and the frozen northern town of Archangel, the drama revisits the stark landscape of Communist Russia and takes place over four days in the life of academic Fluke Kelso. His fateful meeting with a former Stalinist bodyguard leads to the uncovering of one of the world's most dangerous and best kept secrets. He is led unwittingly through murder and intrigue towards his own personal "Holy Grail" - Joseph Stalin's secret legacy - a legacy that could change the face of Russian history forever.

'Archangel' is quite friendly towards those not familiar with the legacy of Josef Stalin, and is an engrossing mystery as a result. Unfortunately, there's also a lack of character development here. The people in this television film are just sort of presented to the audience, and then become pawns in the film's narrative. So it doesn't work very well as a thriller, and maybe an extra half an hour or so could have worked out this problem. However, Daniel Craig and Russian actress Yekaterina Rednikova give reliable performances, and the ending is definitely not what I was expecting (but in a good way). Not without its flaws, but worth catching when it's on again.

~ 7/10 ~