IMDb RATING
6.5/10
6.2K
YOUR RATING
A bold, amateur kidnapping goes wildly awry in this fictionalized account of beer magnate Alfred Heineken's 1983 abduction, which would go on to become one of The Netherlands' most infamous ... Read allA bold, amateur kidnapping goes wildly awry in this fictionalized account of beer magnate Alfred Heineken's 1983 abduction, which would go on to become one of The Netherlands' most infamous crimes.A bold, amateur kidnapping goes wildly awry in this fictionalized account of beer magnate Alfred Heineken's 1983 abduction, which would go on to become one of The Netherlands' most infamous crimes.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 5 wins & 9 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Rutger Hauer in great shape, as he has but a few lines, as Alfred Heineken bullied by a young criminal, who in fact build a scary career afterwards. Story well told, much better than the English remake. Heineken never fully recovered, not all the money was traced. More interesting, I admit, once you know what happend afterwards. Not every kidnapper managed to grow old. The young criminals sister, a lawyer, later wrote a book on him, that shocked the a Dutch readers. On basis of her testimony, incl recorded phone calls, he was convicted. With Hauer on screen, there' s a strange effect, he draws your attention, even when he is silent. Sad he is no longer among us.
Having watched the American version of the same incident, it is tough to say which one you should prefer. Obviously both have their limitations, but also strong points. It's the same story, but the weight lies on different things with those movies. While this feels more like a cold, going through what happened movie, the American version was a bit flashier.
This also relies even more on Heineken himself (the character/personal life) and the aftermath, which was handled fairly quickly in the US version. So both can be watched under different aspects and sort of work as companion pieces.
This also relies even more on Heineken himself (the character/personal life) and the aftermath, which was handled fairly quickly in the US version. So both can be watched under different aspects and sort of work as companion pieces.
Well done for bringing these talents together. Rem annex Holleeder is a great invention and makes the movie worth seeing. I also liked Heinekens wife a lot. What is great that the film also brings some humor to it. Before the premiere I was a bit skeptical but it worked out really well. I loved all the scenery. Great locations. I waited almost 30 years for this film. It was worth waiting for it. I think it must have been difficult to leave some details out. Something I was surprised of is that they put emphasis on Heineken personal life. They literally brought two worlds (gangsters and Heineken) together in their private world, which makes it interesting and not to factual.
Rem Hubrechts' family is struggling after the Heineken plant closing. He blames his father's deteriorating health on the company. After a run-in with Freddy Heineken (Rutger Hauer), he recruits his brother-in-law Cor van Hout with his friends to execute their kidnapping plans on the brewery tycoon. The second half of the movie chronicles their escape after getting the ransom. Freddy hounds the four kidnappers across the globe.
The movie is altered from the true story. Rem's story is too convenient. His personality change is jarring. It's relying too much on his hatred as a reason. The way to make it work is to have an underlying personality flaw for Rem. The second half could have been more compelling if Rutger Hauer's powerful persona is released. He's turned into a wimp and it's not as compelling. There is a lack of intensity due to the pacing. The real story has good potential but this is unable to harness it fully.
The movie is altered from the true story. Rem's story is too convenient. His personality change is jarring. It's relying too much on his hatred as a reason. The way to make it work is to have an underlying personality flaw for Rem. The second half could have been more compelling if Rutger Hauer's powerful persona is released. He's turned into a wimp and it's not as compelling. There is a lack of intensity due to the pacing. The real story has good potential but this is unable to harness it fully.
For a dutch film, this is a must see. The aging icon of dutch cinema, rutger hauer, gives another solid performance. This movie was pretty good n all, but still some things wrong with it, mostly the pacing... acting,scripting, suspense building, all top notch. The cinematography is good,and the music makes a good atmosphere. But from time to time i was still looking at my watch... scenes are drawn out too long and the interesting bits are unfortunately, infrequent. Overall a decent attempt with a good outcome of a film.
Enjoy -
The_evil_fred
Enjoy -
The_evil_fred
Did you know
- TriviaThe kidnapper named "Rem Hubrechts" was actually named Willem Holleeder. There actually was a fifth kidnapper, not shown in the movie, called Martin "Remmetje" Erkamps. They used his nickname and gave it to Hubrechts because they couldn't use the name Willem Holleeder because he is still around and threatened with a law suit if they used his name in the movie.
- GoofsThe Mercedes SL has wrong license plates. It has the modern ones with the logo of the European Union on the far left, which is poorly covered with yellow tape.
- ConnectionsFeatured in De wereld draait door: Episode #7.23 (2011)
- How long is The Heineken Kidnapping?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Languages
- Also known as
- 21 Days: The Heineken Kidnapping
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- €4,500,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $3,487,309
- Runtime
- 2h 7m(127 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content