While watching this film I kept thinking of the Forbes journalist Paul Klebnikov who wrote about political and economic matters in Russia and got very close to the inner circle of Oligarchs and then was eventually assassinated.He was the editor for Forbes in Russia and was shot while leaving the office one night. Transported to the hospital in an ambulance with no oxygen, upon arrival the elevator broke down while being taken to surgery.Though the main character played by Craig in this film is not shot, he comes close to getting assassinated.This is a very interesting film if you are into the political history of Russia. But it is slow at times and everyone is a bit too aloof, so the character development is shallow.But it's a good film in other respects. Seven stars.

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

Travel in past. A new old Russia and its ghosts, mysteries and a hansom professor. A kind of Da Vinci code, soft, nice and with some drops of tension. Stalin and his shadow. A son and a dark legacy. A notebook and the lost life of a young girl. Nostalgics and Secret Services. Pieces of a thriller. Nothing new, in fact. Superficial, like any East story in the eyes of an American, half -truth and classic recipes. Victory of good guy and the failure of evil. But interesting in that case are the roots. Russia is a mystery, part of its history and Bovary's land. His dreams are fruits of an one era. The leaders are masks of a single Master. The present is more small for the desire to be a Power.And the time - a notebook of a young girl lost in an era's memory.

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