Wordiezett So much average

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

thedocgerbil After watching the first two parts, I logged on to IMDb and preemptively rated it an 8/10. The third act's rododcuous script totally fumbles the story's arc and careens it into a generous 6/10. I'm not against deviating from the book, but this was a total rushed disaster. It dethroned the miniseries from "potential cult classic" to "recommended watching if you're a fan of Daniel Craig and period pieces." Fortunately, I'm in the latter category, so it wasn't a total waste - just a sore disappointment. I loved Daniel Craig's performances, and the cinematography was beautiful. It's always a treat to see the gorgeous Russian tundra.

blanche-2 "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.

Enchorde Recap: Fluke Kelso is an American historian giving a lecture on Stalin in Moscow. He is approached by an old man claiming to be the only eyewitness of head of security Beria hiding the personal notebook of Stalin. This being invaluable historical material, Kelso goes to retrieve the book. But he isn't the only on interested. FSB, the secret service, is suddenly very interested in his movements and communist party members want the book's information in the upcoming election. The notebook contains information leading to Archangelsk were a secret lies hidden that might threaten the fragile Russian democracy.Comments: Originally a miniseries of two one hour long parts that are put together to a movie. Starring is Daniel Craig, supported primarily by Gabriel Macht and Ekaterina Rednikova. Despite being "only" two hours it manages to squeeze quite a lot into that time frame. The story is a classical treasure hunt, with hidden clues that need to be deciphered and followed to another clue that eventually leads to the treasure, albeit is set in recent times in Russia. Kelso and his companions is always on the hunt for the next step, next clue so something is always happening. And in the end it is tied together quite nicely, even if it gets a little too predictable.Otherwise, quite a nice story about a alternative history that is close enough to the true one that it is plausible. Especially since the true history of that time is not very clear, and open to speculation. I actually had to check on some persons and events to see what was true, what could be true and what was fiction.If you're interested in recent history or political thrillers, this is probably something you might want to watch. Otherwise, you might want to check something else out, but this wasn't bad.6/10

dbborroughs Daniel Craig stars as a history professor specializing in the fall of communism in the former Soviet Union. A (not so) chance encounter on the street sets him off and running on the trail of a long buried secret concerning the death and legacy of Josef Stalin. Its a secret that many would kill for so Craig quickly finds himself in the middle of a hornets nest of well armed men.This was a multi-part TV movie based on a novel by Robert Harris which was trimmed slightly for DVD. As it stands now this is a good but still long winded telling of an okay mystery story. The problem for me was that once the secret is revealed (around the half way point) the film kind of has no where to go. Granted where it does go is logical but its neither as earth shaking nor as unexpected as one really needs with the build up it gets. Don't get me wrong as espionage thrillers go this is actually pretty good, especially in the first half, but in the end the story doesn't add up to very much.Worth a look on a rainy Sunday, but not worth searching out