claire-mays-1 I see that a few comments just above mine come from people who read the play. I have not yet seen the film (the majority of comments encourage me to seek it out). I want to urge all those who commented positively at the top to read the script of the play (along with the long and enlightening postscript by the playwright). As those who saw the play on stage know, the action, which ranges over an immense set of times, places, thoughts and "versions" of reality, is conjured up through just a contrapuntal discussion amongst three "ghosts" (without any need to change physical setting). It is breathtaking and fascinating to follow the myriad changes of scene that are contrived just through the statements of each personage. Reading the script you have the luxury to go back over these changes and the ideas and alternatives invoked, just by reading back a few lines, and it is heady to experience the new inflections that are given by a new speaker to something just said by another. I think this must go by very quickly when you are watching the play or the film, and it is a wonderful thing to be struck by the new "spin" given by a new observer (that, too, is a reference to the physics! one learns so much about ideas and words that have become part of our everyday language) and then to retrace that spin at leisure, rereading the exchange that expresses it.A comment to the person who claimed above that only the London playbill mentioned the irony of Jews having been forced into practical applications of physics (and building the bomb) as they were forced out of the theoretical physics more highly valued in Germany: on the contrary this is explicitly discussed by the characters at least once and maybe more often in the printed play. One more reason to read it: you will be dazzled by all the interweaving references, interpretations and explanations that probably could escape notice as you are carried forward by live actors and their evanescent words.Also: as for Margarethe's comment about Bohr being the Pope and Einstein being God: I can hardly believe, as a commentator above suggests, that this was a cheap joke inserted by the playwright to raise a laugh from the audience. There is nothing cheap or facile about the written dialog in Frayn's play. In context that comment tells a certain truth about the development of the science of physics and also tells a certain truth about the psychology of Heisenberg and Margarethe's ironic view of him. Do read the play.

yseban Caught this TV drama on PBS at midnight. Didn't know anything about the play. Thought it would be something a bit starchy and pompous, and in a matter of minutes I was glued to the screen, especially when Stephen Rea (plays Bohr) gets into action...Obviously, people know by now that the play is a masterpiece, but this BBC production in the hands of Howard Davies (director) makes a superb job of conveying something that was and/or might have been. All three characters become fully alive, but again I was hypnotized by Stephen Rea's amazing acting performance. The guy even looked Danish, he probably doesn't look like the real Bohr, but he invented a fully credible character, using eyebrows, stooped shoulders, awkward mannerisms the way a world-class physicist can display. For all aspiring actors, this performance is a must-see. And of course, the huge issue of whether Heisenberg was sincere, duplicitous, suspicious, naive...Frayn gives us all the possibilities. It seems Heisenberg is badly treated by history for having been in charge of the Nazi Atomic program. I re-read this sentence, and I think, well, duh...well it's not that simple, and I have to watch or read the play again. Howard Davies does an amazing job, making a dry a subject something fully engaging, even sensual, with the decor, lighting, costumes/hair/makeup. Camera works are amazing, using a rather contemporary vocabulary of sweeping movements, staccato- like shots, smooth editing, etc...And of course, the issues dealt in the play resonate a long time afterward watching it. I'm pouring over the net to get all kinds of infos. So for example, if the Alllies had not made the Atomic bomb, maybe the Germans wouldn't have either, since they were lacking crucial clues in the physics. But that's a chance the Allies didn't want to take.

andy-520 From the start this film drags and drags. Clumsy overdubs explaining the history, monochrome acting, boring sets, total lack of any humanity, verve or style. The actors look as if they are drugged. Potentially an interesting story completely wasted. Surely somebody realised how bad it was at some point in producing it?

blue_sundog This is well done and thoroughly enjoyable portrayal of the moral hesitation and dissembling that go hand and hand with Heisenberg and his efforts with respect to the bomb. It is well acted with informative and intelligent dialogue that brings two of the leading scientists of the 20th century to life while examining all facets of the issues surrounding Heisenberg's visit to Copenhagen and the consequences of his efforts to develop a bomb for Nazi Germany.