brillmongo Fatherland is a simple movie, it doesn't touch on particularly deep themes and there's not a whole lot of depth or subtlety to the plot, but therein lies the charm.Seeing Fatherland reminded me of Threads (another made-for-TV film from a decade earlier) in that they're both simple films that somehow manage to have more coherent scene structure and pacing than many films released today.Isn't it lovely when what's shown on screen makes a bit of basic sense?The overdubbed child actor and heavy handed third act does bring down the overall impression however.

Prismark10 Fatherland is the adaptation of the Robert Harris bestseller which takes place in an alternate history where the Nazis were triumphant in the second world war.The story begins in Nazi Germany in the run up to Adolf Hitler's 75th birthday. The plot follows detective Xavier March (Rutger Hauer) investigating the suspicious death of a high-ranking Nazi. March meets with Charlie Maguire (Miranda Richardson) a visiting female US journalist who is mixed up with another murder and is determined to investigate the case and teams up with March. It looks like the victims were high ranking Nazi officials who decades ago were involved in planning the Holocaust.Rutger Hauer and Miranda Richardson are good in the lead roles. There is a roll call of British character actors in this HBO film from Micheal Kitchen, Peter Vaughan, John Shrapnel and Jean Marsh making a chilling cameo. Some of the actors are wasted in their brief roles.The film was shot in Prague and there were special effects use to make it look like a triumphant Berlin. The adaptation gets rid of some of the nuances and side plots of the Harris novel such as Nazi era European Community and becomes very much a staid thriller where someone wishes to keep the secrets of the past a secret.In doing so what makes the book standout has gone and what we have is a standard, made for television thriller, well made well acted but nothing out of the ordinary.

Mark Hale Robert Harris's other novels have made a good transition onto the screen. "Enigma" worked well because of its top-notch cast and careful recreation of WWII England. "Archangel" was an above-average TV movie because of its compelling subject matter. "Fatherland" fell flat because it was poorly cast and made on a microscopic budget. Despite their pedigree and talent, many of the cast are clearly uncomfortable in their roles. Rutger Hauer and Michael Kitchen should have swapped scripts and Miranda Richardson should have called for a taxi. She's a very good actor but completely fails to convince as an American journalist who dresses like a 60-year-old whore.The plot is edited down to its bare bones and loses a lot of its impact in the process of being filleted. The screenplay spends far too long looking behind the shiny Nazi facade, creating an expectation of bad things about to happen far too early in its running time. Bled of all its suspense, "Fatherland" limps toward a predictable climax, robbing the story of any historical relevance or impact.There are strong similarities between "Fatherland" and "Archangel", with their stories of past events influencing the present and old ghosts that refuse to lie still, but "Fatherland" has "EPIC" stamped all over it. A story about an enduring Nazi Europe in the 1960s can't be told against a backdrop of dodgy mattes with approximately 30 extras for the crowd scenes. If ever a movie deserved to be recast and remade for substantially more than 50 quid, "Fatherland" is that movie. The Hollywood Suits should hang their heads in shame for not recognising a fantastic story and giving it to someone like Steven Spielberg.

claes-bertilson Fatherland by Robert Harris is truly one of the best novels ever written and I did find myself thinking "this could be a great film one day" many times while reading it. I was therefore delighted to see it made but disappointed with the result.Most of the actors work for me - this is a film that should be cast with Europeans - especially Rutger Hauer (ever growing in stature as an older statesman) as Xavier March. But one big flaw is the lack of chemistry with Richardsson.But this is a book that deserved the big screen and a well known director. Lets hope for a re-make.It must also be said that one of the most disappointing facts about the movie is how the film never really portrays the Berlin and Germany of a victorious Third Reich well enough. The monumental architecture that is so well described in Harris's book (taken from the historical facts of Hitler and Speer's plans) never really gets a fair showing. Just imagine what Industrial Light and Magic could do with this.