I never considered Henning Mankell a bad writer, but if this movie was adapted from his books, then he's not good enough to be called one of the best novelists from Scandinavian countries, not in the least. It's obvious that Henning Mankell were not familiar with anything about China, because this novel clearly showed that he didn't know jacksh@t about China and the Chinese people, everything he wrote was just by hearsay and imagination. Then even more unfortunately, this TV movie was adapted by an even moronic screenplay writer, and then further messed up by an even worse director. The whole setting of this movie just looked funny, weird, outdated and contradictory. The era, the time sequences, the localities....what exactly was the time frame? Before 1980? Early 1980? Early 1990? Or early 2000? Because China had changed so rapidly, every decade after 1980 was totally different.But whatever you could come up during and after you have watched, simply felt contrite, stupid and exaggerated. The most ridiculous scenes were those to do with China and the Chinese, not just the Chinese in this movie speaking German. Almost everything in this movie related to China or the Chinese, just looked absurd and wrong. The shitty hotel, the crappy restaurant, the two brother and sister, and in that particular town were just laughable big jokes that just came out of the 19th century. The only thing I felt most a bit lucky during watching was about the novelist, the screenplay writer and the director, who at least didn't make the Chinese people still look like they were in 200 years ago's Chin Dynasty. Henning Mankell and the production team of this movie seemed to just follow Hollywood's stupidity and narrow mindness to ridicule everything about China, a permanent stubborn yet stupid stereotyped belief about China and the Chinese people. Even the bribery and the corruption of the brother looked silly and shallow, not even close.The movie had wasted lot of production budget and manpower on the mass murder scenes from the very beginning, then spent lot of money to shoot some weird scenes of Mainland China, but since the whole scenario and plot simply looked stupid and shallow, you just couldn't buy the dramatic mess at all.

I have no idea what the other reviewers were doing while this movie was on but none seem to have watched it. I have come to expect great things form the movies that Michael Nyqvist is in. This one is no exception. It deals with an event that is so believable, I'd bet it is a depiction of an actual event.The movie is a treatment of a single historical event that many of us did not get in school - the building of the Central Pacific Railway! Since I live near Truckee and Reno, it was really fun for me. The event took place over 150 years ago and is reaching its conclusion in this movie. Of course there are subtitles - it takes place on 3 continents! The casting is excellent, the costumes are accurate (or they look like it) and the plot is so amazingly complex yet simple. You can really sink your mind into it. Not one minute of boredom for me.They give you enough of a hint at the beginning of the movie so you are not lost. I always hate it when a movie leaves you wondering what the heck this is about and when you find out, you have to see the movie a couple more times just to figure it out. No in this one - I suspected what happened at the beginning and really enjoyed how it slowly developed - FOR 3 HOURS! Great rainy day movie - although it is snowing here.

This film is made up of spare parts, but it's still an improvement on the book. It appears that, in turning a book into a movie, it is possible to substitute good acting and production values for sloppy writing. The first 20-odd pages of the book were well-done, and that is replicated in the film. The first 30 minutes or so show a horrific murder scene, and introduce two good, well-acted female characters clashing over the investigation. Near the end of that sequence, the Chinese connection is made, and all credibility goes out the window. The evidence of a Chinese connection is frail & tenuous, but, OK, the scene shifts to Beijing, where we meet a comic-book Chinese villain who is, of course, ruthless, wealthy & powerful for no apparent reason. Actually, "ruthless" can be explained-for the story's purposes-by a violent, xenophobic assault suffered by his father when he was laying track for American railways in the 1860s. This wealthy & powerful guy is maybe 40-45 years old? You do the math. Fortunately,the filmmaker,who is Austrian, opted to omit the book's section set in Africa, which contained some real howlers, and he chooses to end it with the central figure, a Swedish judge, arriving safely back in Stockholm. One peculiarity of this film that can't be blamed on the book's author is the treatment of language. For the US print, of course, the subtitles are in English, but in spite of the settings, i.e., Sweden, China, and very briefly the US, every character on screen speaks German. The Chinese characters are dubbed in German, the lone American character actually speaks good German, and all the Swedes speak serviceable German. Maybe it was made for Austrian TV. Whatever the reason, it was jarring to see Chinese characters, in a subtitled film, delivering lines in German. Another good reason to avoid the scenes set in Africa.

The movie slowly but surely develops historic context. The historic context is of vital importance for the whole movie to make sense. Unfortunately, it is a big disappointment. The characterization is so simplified that the historic scenes are simply not believable. The characterization of the historic person is so black and white, it is child like. It is a simple vehicle for the movie makers to express their untempered hate towards Christianity.If you watch the movie, also look out for the probability of some of the characters to meet again later, or for the probability of the final act of the heroine, simply unbelievable. Not nuanced enough. Too simplistic. Disappointing.