Reviews (49)

The Nazis come up with the "Final Solution" over lunch
"Conspiracy" is based on the original minutes of the Wannsee Conference held on January 20, 1942 in Berlin where the Nazi worked out "The Final Solution." The of this HBO production is something of a misdirection, because this hour long meeting that would result in the death of 6 million European Jews might have been secret, but it was not exactly clandestine. This is not a meeting where the participants made their plans in hushed whispers, but something that eerily smacks of a board meeting at a large company. These men were going to become mass murderers on a scale rarely seen in human history, but they seem more like bureaucrats than anything else, which is just another level of the horror involved here.

"Conspiracy" goes beyond the recreation of this infamous meeting for the 1984 documentary "The Wannsee Conference," both of which are based upon the lone surviving record of the gather of 15 Nazi officers head by General Reinhard Heydrich (Kenneth Branagh). Included in the group are Lt. Colonel Adolf Eichmann (Stanley Tucci) and Dr. Wilhelm Stuckart, Interior Ministry (Colin Firth), and within an hour they come up with their solution to the "Jewish question." However, this is a sense in "Conspiracy" that they are not so much debating what it to be done but being asked to sign on to the plan that Heydrich is revealing directly and indirectly throughout the meeting in his quest for "unanimity."

This time around the horror is in the details, as these men try to come up with the most efficient way of killing and disposing of that many people while one guy does the math. Given that we know what is going to happen what stands out are not those who cannot wait to start the killing as much as those who have "reservations." Stuckart, who wrote the Nuremberg codes, is aghast at what these new policies will mean for the rule of law in Nazi Germany, as the courts are filled with divorce cases separating Jewish and Aryan spouses. However, Struckart makes it clear he hates Jews as much as the next person at that table. Then there is Dr. Wilhelm Kritzinger (David Threlfall), Permanent Secretary of the Reich Chancellery, who obviously has misgivings on moral grounds, but ultimately can offer no more obstacle than a story, which serves as the final statement on the proceedings when related by Heydrich to Eichmann after the meeting.

The end of the film, where we are informed as to what happened to the participants, is particularly interesting. I was surprised how few of these 15 Nazis were actually executed for war crime. Several of them would die during the war while others would be imprisoned, but a surprising number were released for lack of evidence. I was also interested to find out exactly who failed to destroy their copy of the minutes, although there is nothing particularly insightful about the revalation beyond satisfying my curiosity. In terms of Holocaust films "Conspiracy" a footnote to the mass exterminations, but of interest for what it provide in terms of rare insights into what the Nazi bureaucracy was actually thinking as it launched the "Final Solution."

Stands up to its subject matter
An account of the Wannsee Conference, chaired by Reinhard Heydrich (Head of the Reich Security) on January 1942. This Conference was to be decisive in establishing the "Final Solution" - cause of the Holocaust. One copy of the proceedings was found by American investigators after WW2 and was made into two movies, "The Wannsee Conference" (a West German movie), and the American remake "Conspiracy".

Any movie where we watch people talking for 90 minutes stands or falls on acting quality. Kenneth Branagh, as Heydrich, is excellent - the texture of his role is slick and darkly pleasant. The other actors are efficient. The made-for-TV nature of the movie does become apparent in its low-budget production, but this kind of movie does not necessarily need a lot of fluff.

Watching nazi officers and officials discussing whenever half-Jews should be made infertile or killed is not an inherently desirable experience. But there are many things in life that are undesirable, but must be confronted.

Worth Watching
I had the opportunity of viewing Conspiracy during a Holocaust Education workshop for teachers. It is very accurate (from what I have read) and does show the inner-works of the Wansee Conference.

I believe that the film was either filmed on location or at a place that was very much similar to the Wannsee House. I had the opportunity to travel there this past summer with a group of teachers. I was struck by how much the movie prepared me to think about the house and it's importance in the creation and implementation of the "Final Solution". If you are thinking of showing it to students, you may need to explain to them how the conference was conducted and give them some background -- it has lots of dialogue and plenty of "under currents" that can be hard to follow if you are not familiar with the "power plays" that were going on at that table....lots of ego at that table. It is important to remember that many of these individuals were sent by the "major players" in the Nazi regime to attend the conference. By not attending the conference himself, Hitler and his administrative members could claim "plausable deniability" (so they thought) if anything were to go wrong with the plan. It is hard to believe that this beautiful house that is located on beautifully-decorated ground and of of a spectacular lake could have played such a major role in WWII. Chilling!

chilling and engaging
It is certainly true that this is not the most accurate of historical documents, but then any historian would tell you that all history is in the interpretation and so the movie is as useful as your interpretation. The performances are excellent, Branagh, in particular, is outstanding, he is every bit the portrayal of the chillingly pleasant monster. The message is powerful, the acting and direction cold, calm and calculated - within 1 hour the holocaust was decided upon; the moment where the topic of discussion is how many and how fast can they be culled? is particularly sickening.

From an historical perspective i found the following very interesting: Hitler based his party structure on a chaos theory in that he had simple overlapping functions, so that his subordinates would always be engaged in in-fighting, instead of challenging him. It worked remarkably well. Here, in motion, the director shows the in-fighting, but on this part of domestic policy (internal to the Reich, at any rate) the decision was swift and unanimous, Heydrich alone held the power. Utterly intriguing.

What may make this more interesting for anyone, might be to read Hannah Arendt's account of Eichmann's trial in Jerusalem, which is published by Penguin.

Haunting
The Holocaust is one of humanity's greatest tragedies, and its mention brings up images of swastikas, death camps, mass graves, and gas ovens. It's some thing you can't talk about easily, and can barely joke about unless you have no heart. This film is about the Holocaust, and while you may see a swastika arm-band and hear a few Heil Hitlers, you won't find any violence or harrowing images; this film is only rated R due to the use of the f bomb a few times. However, this film can be just as gut wrenching as any Holocaust movie you've seen, because it's all about the people who planned it...and the fact they were just as human as you and me.

The fate of eleven million European Jews was decided over a meal by several higher ups in the German government (although not Hitler). Led by Reinhard Heydrich (played brilliantly, as usual, by Kenneth Branagh) and his aide (play brilliantly, also as usual, by Stanley Tucci) as they explain the plan. They explain it so simply, as if they're building a house, and in a very intellegent manner. In fact, it has to be explained at some point in the conversation that "deportation" is just a fancy word for murder.

Many of those present do not agree with the methods, but not because they have sympathy for the Jews. One somber delegate thinks the Jews should be removed from common society, but that murder is too extreme. Another delegate objects to the plan...but only because he feels the procedures Heydrich draws up will contradict his already enforced anti-semite laws. In the end, it is revealed how it will be accomplished: by none other than the gas chambers of the concentration camps.

Like movies such as "My Dinner With Andre" or "12 Angry Men" this movie takes a storyline built entirely on dialogue and proves it can be fascinating. These are characters that joke about sterilizing a whole race as if the Jews were animals, and the lack of music through out the whole thing (except for the ending narration) adds a good level of realism. I found myself watching this movie three times after I had rented it to closely study how the different characters interacted and treated this serious issue.

If you are interested in World War II, German history, the Holocaust, or you just like drama, then you will enjoy this movie. Some may not be able to watch it because of the subject matter, but it is definately worth your time. These are not propoganda style Nazis, nor are they charicatures of Hitler, but they are just ordinary people. ... Read more

Reviews (76)

A well done movie.
Many people criticize the lack of historical accuracy in this production, and understandably so. However, if you do not take a historical viewpoint and view the movie as you would view any other romance-tear jerker, you would realize that it is well done and the actors and actresses have done a superb job. It seems that by now people would realize that the last place you should go to for historical accuracy is a made for t.v. movie. Reading other reviews, I become slightly annoyed with other's disgust with Cleopatra. Their main argument was that, hisorically speaking, the movie was extremely off base and the characters were poorly portrayed. I would ask anyone watching this movie to keep in mind that the producers, directors, and actors who participated in this production were targeting a general audience. Unfortunately, the general audience is composed of people who merely want to be entertained, not educated. This movie accomplishes it's purpose, to entertain, which makes me believe that it is worthwhile. Congratulations to Billy Zane and Timothy Dalton for a job well done in portraying two of Rome's most famous characters: Marc Antony and Julius Caesar. Leonor Varela, while her Cleopatra was not the one whom I have come to know and love so well from history books and biographies, seems to have taken a lot of grief for her performance. I believe that she suffered from poorly written dialogue (the writers disregarded the real Cleopatra's intelligence and wit) and carried her part well. In short, I award this movie four stars. I enjoyed it thoroughly and would like to see the actors and actresses receive more credit for their performances, as they all did excellent jobs.

An epic of grand scale!
This movie was amazing, especially for being made for TV. Great, wonderful, awesome... all of the above.

Thrilling drama
Dramas based on history, usually are not historically accurate. This movie is not less historically accurate that Shakespeare's Julius Caesar or Anthony and Cleopatra.
The fact is that it is a thrilling drama, with steamy romance, gripping action and intrigue.
It is probably true from the evidence that Cleopatra was not an extremely beautiful woman, which leads some to fault the casting of the gorgeous Leonora Varela.
But it is totally unfair to fault Leonora as an actress. She is a fantastic actress, and it is great to watch her Cleopatra. Indeed, who could not fall in love with Leonora Varela's Cleopatra? So what if she is not Elizabeth Taylor (she is rather more beautiful than Elizabeth Taylor)

The truth is that Cleopatra in reality was, no doubt, an unscrupulous, and scheming woman, and if anything the casting of the lovely Leonora, in her very sensually charged portrayal of this role, makes me more sympathetic to her character.
I hope to see much more of Leonora, she'd make a great Osnat, the wife of the Yosef, the Hebrew who rose to become Prince of Egypt, Queen Esther of the Purim story, or Pocahontas.

Timothy Dalton as always, was his grand self and added the required force to the role of Julius Caesar, and Billy Zane knew how to do a great Mark Anthony.

I thought some particularly memorable scenes are where Cleopatra shows some skill with weapons in defending herself from would-be-assassins, the portrayal of the Roman Senate, the rally after Caesar's assasination where Mark Anthony swears revenge against Caesar's murderers and enflames the crowd against Brutus , Cassius and company , and the recreation of Alexandria.
Octavian is well displayed as a scheming, power-player, and whoever had the idea of him presenting Brutus' head to Mark Anthony in a basket.

And a nice role played by Kassandra Voyagis as Cleopatra's short lived sister Arsinoe. I was sad to see her go like that, and it certainly showed Cleopatra's cruel side.

Best "Cleo" Yet
This is the best Cleo on the market. Exotic sets & scenery, steamy love scenes. The script is sameoldsameold, but what can you do with this story? The beauty in the title role sends Liz back to Beverly Hills, & the acting level of these two stars is about even.

One Awesome Movie
I orginally saw this movie on tv but I missed a lot of it. I was really interested in seeing the entire movie so I bought the DVD. Trust me it was worth it. I love the costumes that they used in the movie and Leonor Varela isa great actress. She was perfect for the role as Cleopatra. I recommend this movie to everyone. ... Read more

Description

JUDAS recounts the story of the relationship between Jesus and the disciple who becomes infamous for betraying him.When Judas (Schaech) first meets Jesus, he is unsure what to make of this simple man whose words speak volumes.Upon getting to know him better, Judas decides to become one of Jesus’ twelve disciples and encourages Jesus to use his popularity to free the Jews.Jewish leaders later convince Judas of the greater good in betraying Jesus, and he decides to turn over his friend and leader to Caiaphus and Pontius Pilate who condemn Jesus to death. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Everything a mini-series should be
When I heard the words "british TV miniseries", I was admittedly not expecting much. I was very pleasantly surprised.

This miniseries had everything a quality production should have: good cinematography, an excellent script, fully-drawn three-dimensional characters, and a fine slate of actors. Pay particular attention to Jason Isaacs as Michael "Mickey" Ryan. Mr. Isaacs, and the movie, were outstanding.

An unusually rewarding miniseries
While never quite overcoming its origins as a British television miniseries, this movie is nevertheless an absorbing, satisfying crime drama featuring unusually strong performances, especially from leads Susan Lynch and the always mesmerizing Jason Isaacs.
Both convey their reluctance to yield completely to the life of crime that seems to have chosen them; it costs Maura her one true love, and Mickey any chance of self-determinism at all. Mickey commences his career as the youthful lover of an older boss, whom he regards with contempt and disgust.
While never excusing or romanticizing their actions, the story presents the Ryans as unusually fully realized individuals, and even at their most sociopathic, they are never entirely repellent.
As British productions in general seem to do, this one also projects extreme realism in the gritty environment and tacky costumes. The accents may prove somewhat challenging to Americans for the first few minutes, since those seem completely authentic as well.

Enjoyable British mini-series
Enjoyable British mini-series relates the story of 20-year-old Maura Ryan, who, after discovering her family's criminal past, teams with her brother to take control of their illegal interests. Together, the pair rule London's underworld...until an unexpected challenge threatens to destroy everything they've built. ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Very Historically Accurate and Well Done English Film!
For students of medieval history, this English version of Robin Hood is a VERY accurate re-telling of the classic Sir Robert Hode, 4th Earl of Huntington (a real person) legend. Reminiscent of the swashbuckling classics made in the thirties and forties, this film transports you back to 12th century England, when the mighty Normans ruled with an iron hand. Sir Robert Hode (Patrick Bergen) is a Saxon nobleman who insults the sinister knight Sir Miles Falcanet (Jurgen Prochnow) and is branded an outlaw. Clever and quick witted, he changes his name to Robin Hood and a legend is born. Robin becomes an outlaw hero, celebrated across the land for his dashing heroism. He ambushes the tax collectors of the greedy Baron Roger Daguerre (memorably played by Jeroen Krabbe), and gives the money to the poor. Then with his true love, Maid Marian (Uma Thurman) about to be married to Falcanet, Robin and his band of loyal men embark on their boldest adventure yet, to storm the Baron's castle and rescue Marian from a fate worse than death. Well written and adapted for the screen, expertly cast, (too many memorable performances to mention here) and superbly directed by English director John Irvin, this relatively low budget production has never received the accolades it deserves. This movie is a thrilling medieval adventure filled with action, romance and humor. If you saw the disappointing "Hollywood formula" American version with Kevin Costner, but prefered the original with Errol Flynn, and missed this one, give it a try! It is an opportunity to be transported back to another place and time, to see an accurate glimpse of medieval history come alive on film. A must see film for all history buffs... Excellent!!!

The best version of "Robin Hood"
Some people enjoy the Kevin Costner-Alan Rickman version of the Robin Hood legend, with its treehouses, American stars (faking horrendous Brit accents), Sean Connery cameo and even a wicked-witch-in-the-cellar. I am not one of those people.

This Bergin-Irving "unknown" version was released a few months before the Costner version. Sadly, it aired only on television for fear of competing with the star-filled, "event" film. And yet, this smaller film is vastly superior to the big-budget Costner "epic" on every single level.

This is a somewhat different version of the legend than what you saw with Costner and Disney. The political background to this tale matters: the uneasiness between the two peoples of England. It involves the Saxons, who had held power for centuries, and the more recent arrival and comeuppance of the French-based Normans. Basically, the Normans are now taking power in England and they're not being too nice to the displaced Saxons.

Early in the film we meet two noblemen who are friends: Baron Daguerre (played superbly by Jeroen Krabbe of "The Fugitive") as the Norman lord of the local province and Sir Robert Hode, a Saxon landowner. Soon, however, Daguerre's aide-de-camp, the brutal knight Sir Miles Falconey (Jurgen Prochnow in another great performance) gets into a tiff with Hode. Hode openly rebels against his former friend (Daguerre) and what follows is a neat retelling of the Robin Hood legend - replete with cross-dressing Uma Thurman as Maid Marian.

This film is beautifully scripted and wonderfully shot. The costumes, acting, and sets feel gritty and authentic. In other words, this is not a Hollywood production. It is simply a great film that nobody saw. I am ecstatic that is coming to DVD.

Far above Costners
This film is one of the best RH films done it certainly is far superior to the joke that Costner did!
I do have a correction that is pretty important, there is no Sherriff of Nottingham or Guy of Gisborne in this version. The Director chose to use the conflict of Norman Vs Saxon as the stronger plot drive and instead had two noble Normans playing the heavys. While it was a surprise to me the first time I watched the film I understood the choice. It makes it much easier for veiwers to see what was the actual conflict of Robin Hood, and not have too many people thinking of Alan Rickman or Basil Rathbone's potrayals of the heavys from the two more well known versions of RH.
Worth seeing, far more historically acurate than either of the other films and Uma's Marion could go head to head with Oliva's and totaly wipeout MEM from Prince of Thieves, or as I call it Robin Hood: Dances With Arrows.

Great action packed movie!
Man oh man this movie is just so great beyond movie borders. A must see!

Sweet!
This is a great movie in all the areas it could be. It is kind of a love story between Robin and Marian and a war between Robin and the merry men against the Normans. This is a great movie and isn't just a little bit boring. A masterpiece! ... Read more

Amazon.com

The chemistry between Leonor Varela, who stars as the bewitching queen Cleopatra, and Billy Zane, as the steadfast Marc Antony, is undeniable. Their love scene is one of the steamiest to hit network television. However, once you move beyond this couple's sexual energy, the movie tends to droop, leaning toward the lackluster.

The tale of Cleopatra has hit the screen in many guises, but none have succeeded as well as Cecil B. DeMille's 1934 film. Here, director Franc Roddam tries once again to tell the story of the exotic queen who won the hearts of both Julius Caesar (Timothy Dalton) and Antony, while reigning over a troubled country. But how do you tell such an epic in a mere 140 minutes? Obviously, much is left out, making this film more worthwhile as a pleasant diversion than a real history lesson. The sets are quite remarkable for a TV movie, but unfortunately, the acting and dialogue leave something to be desired. Cleopatra comes across as a bratty child rather than an intelligent and manipulative seductress. Surely this tremendous queen had more going on in her life than her romances with Romans, but you wouldn't know it from this movie. Zane is the best part of the film, although his constant do-good boyishness can grate. Dalton is adequate as Caesar, although he seems to have a hard time taking the role seriously. Yet, for all its flaws, the action moves swiftly and while the battle scenes may leave you cringing with embarrassment for the director, the rest of this carefully staged piece is beautiful to look at. If you really want to know about the Queen of the Nile, though, you may be better off with A&E's Biography: Cleopatra or the Intimate Portrait: Cleopatra. --Jenny Brown ... Read more

Reviews (76)

A well done movie.
Many people criticize the lack of historical accuracy in this production, and understandably so. However, if you do not take a historical viewpoint and view the movie as you would view any other romance-tear jerker, you would realize that it is well done and the actors and actresses have done a superb job. It seems that by now people would realize that the last place you should go to for historical accuracy is a made for t.v. movie. Reading other reviews, I become slightly annoyed with other's disgust with Cleopatra. Their main argument was that, hisorically speaking, the movie was extremely off base and the characters were poorly portrayed. I would ask anyone watching this movie to keep in mind that the producers, directors, and actors who participated in this production were targeting a general audience. Unfortunately, the general audience is composed of people who merely want to be entertained, not educated. This movie accomplishes it's purpose, to entertain, which makes me believe that it is worthwhile. Congratulations to Billy Zane and Timothy Dalton for a job well done in portraying two of Rome's most famous characters: Marc Antony and Julius Caesar. Leonor Varela, while her Cleopatra was not the one whom I have come to know and love so well from history books and biographies, seems to have taken a lot of grief for her performance. I believe that she suffered from poorly written dialogue (the writers disregarded the real Cleopatra's intelligence and wit) and carried her part well. In short, I award this movie four stars. I enjoyed it thoroughly and would like to see the actors and actresses receive more credit for their performances, as they all did excellent jobs.

An epic of grand scale!
This movie was amazing, especially for being made for TV. Great, wonderful, awesome... all of the above.

Thrilling drama
Dramas based on history, usually are not historically accurate. This movie is not less historically accurate that Shakespeare's Julius Caesar or Anthony and Cleopatra.
The fact is that it is a thrilling drama, with steamy romance, gripping action and intrigue.
It is probably true from the evidence that Cleopatra was not an extremely beautiful woman, which leads some to fault the casting of the gorgeous Leonora Varela.
But it is totally unfair to fault Leonora as an actress. She is a fantastic actress, and it is great to watch her Cleopatra. Indeed, who could not fall in love with Leonora Varela's Cleopatra? So what if she is not Elizabeth Taylor (she is rather more beautiful than Elizabeth Taylor)

The truth is that Cleopatra in reality was, no doubt, an unscrupulous, and scheming woman, and if anything the casting of the lovely Leonora, in her very sensually charged portrayal of this role, makes me more sympathetic to her character.
I hope to see much more of Leonora, she'd make a great Osnat, the wife of the Yosef, the Hebrew who rose to become Prince of Egypt, Queen Esther of the Purim story, or Pocahontas.

Timothy Dalton as always, was his grand self and added the required force to the role of Julius Caesar, and Billy Zane knew how to do a great Mark Anthony.

I thought some particularly memorable scenes are where Cleopatra shows some skill with weapons in defending herself from would-be-assassins, the portrayal of the Roman Senate, the rally after Caesar's assasination where Mark Anthony swears revenge against Caesar's murderers and enflames the crowd against Brutus , Cassius and company , and the recreation of Alexandria.
Octavian is well displayed as a scheming, power-player, and whoever had the idea of him presenting Brutus' head to Mark Anthony in a basket.

And a nice role played by Kassandra Voyagis as Cleopatra's short lived sister Arsinoe. I was sad to see her go like that, and it certainly showed Cleopatra's cruel side.

Best "Cleo" Yet
This is the best Cleo on the market. Exotic sets & scenery, steamy love scenes. The script is sameoldsameold, but what can you do with this story? The beauty in the title role sends Liz back to Beverly Hills, & the acting level of these two stars is about even.

One Awesome Movie
I orginally saw this movie on tv but I missed a lot of it. I was really interested in seeing the entire movie so I bought the DVD. Trust me it was worth it. I love the costumes that they used in the movie and Leonor Varela isa great actress. She was perfect for the role as Cleopatra. I recommend this movie to everyone. ... Read more