Paul Evans Amsterdam 1982, the recession has hit hard. A group of friends and builders are down on their luck and are refused a bank loan. It's spokesman Cor van Hout proposes an outrageous plan, to kidnap local millionaire, the successful Freddy Heineken. The group test the waters by carrying out a bank heist, then carry out the daring dead, taking Heineken and his driver, holding them hostage, issuing a huge ransom demand. Cracks appear in their unit, and their family lives suffer too.Most of the positives surround Hopkins, he gives a masterclass in acting, his performance is understated and yet believable. Some of the best scenes in the movie revolve around his demands for Chinese food, books, Schubert etc, it's very random but enjoyable.One entertaining moment when the team realise they've left the ransom note in a photocopier nearby.Sadly the film didn't keep my attention, it's the kind of film you'll need a crossword or Sudoku puzzle. Unfortunately it is quite boring, the plot was a good one, I think possibly had some humour been added to it that may have helped, as a thriller it just doesn't work, there's no tension or drama caused, you never feel at any point that the gang truly mean business.As for the accents, some of them wanted to go Dutch, some of them didn't, it felt inconsistent.It could have been so good. I've only seen a trailer for the Dutch production, but that seems to have the atmosphere that was needed, this production is sadly a week old unwanted glass of Heineken, FLAT.5/10

Bryan Kluger This film is based on such a bizarre crime, that it almost seems unreal. 'Kidnapping Mr. Heineken' or 'Kidnapping Freddy Heineken' as it's known in some foreign markets is the true life story of a group of friends who decide to kidnap the owner of Heineken Beer and force a ransom for millions of dollars. This crime actually happened back in the early 80s in the Netherlands.It's a decent enough story, however director Daniel Alfredson never brings any of the characters to life, nor does the story have any real intent other than just showing what happened, before abruptly ending after the last person was arrested. Alfredson is a great director too. His resume includes a couple of the original versions of 'The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo' series where his younger brother Thomas directed the original 'Let The Right One In' film as well as 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy'.So off the bat, Daniel nor his brother Thomas are exactly lightweights. But with 'Kidnapping Mr. Heineken', Alfredson really only wanted to show the actual events with no depth whatsoever. The cast is solid as well with Sir Anthony Hopkins being chained and confined to a cell through most of the film as he plays Mr. Heineken. His kidnappers are played by Jim Sturgess ('Across the Universe'), Sam Worthington ('Avatar'), Ryan Kwanten ('True Blood'), amongst a couple others.This group of friends seem to be paid be some unknown person to evict and literally throw out squatters living in condemned housing. But these guys want more money and decide to kidnap the wealthiest person for a big ransom. That lucky person is Freddy Heineken of the beer company of the same name. They want to come across as professionals, which they are anything but, so they rob a bank to secure financing to build a sound proof room to make it look like an organized crime outfit executed this job.I'm sure you already know the outcome or can read it about it in a number of books, but was it worth making a film about? While the answer may be "yes", there needs to be some sort of depth to the characters other than that one of their girlfriend's is pregnant. Beyond that aspect, each kidnapper might as well be the same exact person. There just isn't much to work with, which is a shame. Sir Anthony Hopkins turns in a great performance, but is on screen for only a few minutes, and doesn't give us time to connect or sympathize with him whatsoever. At the very end of the film, which ends abruptly, there are title cards for each character of what eventually happened with them. The two lead kidnappers went to prison for a decade, but upon being released became the leaders of the biggest and most vicious mafias in the Netherlands.This would have made for such a better movie to see their rise to power with this kidnapping starting the entire reign of terror. Why they didn't make that, I'll never know. But as this film goes, 'Kidnapping Mr. Heineken' doesn't amount to much other than watching a few people kidnap a wealthy person and struggle with whether or not to release him or wait for the ransom money.

dglink The title says it all: "The Kidnapping of Mr. Heineken." Director Daniel Alfredson's take on the 1982 abduction of the Dutch brewing magnate breaks no new ground. However, the film is engrossing and well paced, despite an evident low-budget European production. Based on real events, the movie depicts a kidnapping that resulted in the largest ransom ever paid for a single individual. Set in Amsterdam, five down-on-their-luck buddies seemingly concoct the abduction and a preliminary bank robbery without a great deal of deep thought or careful planning. Somewhat surprisingly, a man of Heineken's immense wealth is taken easily, and the first-time criminals have beginner's luck all around. However, the ransom payment is dragged out, and tensions erupt among the men.While Anthony Hopkins plays the small part of Alfred "Freddy" Heineken convincingly, when shackled in a cell, he displays familiar flashes of Hannibal Lector. Although Sam Worthington and Jim Sturgess head the kidnappers, most of the faces are lesser known, but, like Hopkins, all acquit themselves nicely. The film is better than average, and, with a fairly short running time, introduces viewers unfamiliar with the crime to some of the details, despite accusations of inaccuracy. "The Kidnapping of Mr. Heineken" moves fast, is worth a look, and will keep most viewers entertained.

quincytheodore How a crime drama with such good cast can be so dull is borderline a crime. The actors are good, but the characters they play have the personality of barren unsympathetic schmucks. The screenplay and conversation are dry, primarily dabbling in curses and complaints for nearly the entire movie. While there are clearly a couple of good moments by the actors, they are too few to sustain interest for the rest of boring banters.Kidnapping Mr. Heineken is exactly what it advertises, the story of five men who are down on their luck and decide to snatch a billionaire in hope for monetary gain. It's amazing that none of these five character is even close to being relatable. The movie tries to depicts individuals who are pushed to do illegal things, yet they are all manipulative, aggressive and severely lacking empathy.At latter half they are even interchangeable since everyone has a knack for whining, in exception of Sam Worthington's character who surprises audience with poor and crazy decisions. Probably the best decision the movie did was to put Anthony Hopkins as Heineken in a box and let him do a few monologues. Still, there is no tangible connection between Heineken and the kidnappers, there's not even connection between the kidnappers. When the movie tries to pull friendship theme, it only makes things more awkward.For action crime, one would expect an intelligent plot, perhaps major twists and thought out plans. There's a barely any level of sophistication here as five of them partially wing it and hope for the best. In fact, most of the times they are just fooling around, laughing annoyingly and verbally abusing each other.The film offers the shallow sense of helplessness and uneasiness as audience watch five aversive men threatening an old man for money and bicker with each other.