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
Going on the knowlegde of the original story I was looking forward watching this. But what a disappointment. This might possible be one of the worst Dutch productions of the last years. No suspense, rushing plot line, bad acting, bad cinemography. The only highlight was seeing Hauer in action again.
Especially in the middle part where there was opportunity for some suspense and story building, the movie seemed to speed up like crazy. Therefor the moment between ransom and captioning the bad guys was ridiculously fast paced.
I struggled through the last hour to even finish it. 2 hours of my life I'm not getting back :)
Especially in the middle part where there was opportunity for some suspense and story building, the movie seemed to speed up like crazy. Therefor the moment between ransom and captioning the bad guys was ridiculously fast paced.
I struggled through the last hour to even finish it. 2 hours of my life I'm not getting back :)
This was a film I came to in a very circuitous route. There was a wonderful piece in The New Yorker in August 2018 entitled "How a Notorious Gangster was Exposed by His Own Sister" by Patrick Radden Keefe. It was about the events leading up to what was the biggest court case at the time and one that had the attention of all of the Netherlands. The article was so well written and interesting that I picked up Astrid Holleeder's book Judas while in Aruba (the translation to English is disappointing as it would have done better to have the story told by an actual writer/storyteller vs. Astrid herself. Also, Astrid seems to have no remorse for living off of the money begot from crime...making her a very unsympathetic character.) After reading the book and feeling very let down, particularly about details of the Heineken kidnapping, I sought out this film to watch.
Rutger Hauer does an excellent job playing the esteemed businessman Heineken, he had just the right amount of smart savvy that exposed the "criminal masterminds" for what they were...crazy and poorly coordinated. It is sad when there is so much work put in to ill begotten gains.
Decently told kidnapping story, worth watching, based on the real-life kidnapping of Freddie Heineken that was masterminded by the infamous Dutch gangster known as "De Neus".
Rutger Hauer does an excellent job playing the esteemed businessman Heineken, he had just the right amount of smart savvy that exposed the "criminal masterminds" for what they were...crazy and poorly coordinated. It is sad when there is so much work put in to ill begotten gains.
Decently told kidnapping story, worth watching, based on the real-life kidnapping of Freddie Heineken that was masterminded by the infamous Dutch gangster known as "De Neus".
The producers of this movie stressed that this movie was not strictly based on the book by Peter R. de Vries, the crime reporter. This book is (claimed to be) an accurate account of what the planning, kidnapping and aftermath actually was like. One of the greatest features of that book is the planning stage, which was incredibly meticulous and exciting.
The producers decided to go their own way, but made a critical error. They assume that people know the story, and subsequently leave out key parts of the narrative. This leaves the audience guessing at times what is actually happening. The planning stage is almost completely skipped with the kidnapping taking place in the first 10 minutes of the movie. A bit later there is a scene where the kidnappers are waiting for a ransom money transfer but this goes awry. The problem is that it is not explained that this is a ransom transfer attempt, and uninformed people that are not familiar with the actual kidnapping do not have a clue what is going on.
So the producers decide to NOT base the movie on the book, but trust that the plot is explained by the knowledge people have of the book. It's easy to see that this will not work, and so it doesn't.
Pacing is also a problem as scenes seem to drag on forever and overall atmosphere is very negative and pressing. It seems like there is a fire burning underneath the movie and pressure is building, but it is never released soon enough to be a pay off for the audience.
Acting is quite good, but the script and wooden dialogue aren't doing the actors much favor. Hauer as Heineken is a good fit, as is the main character who is a dead ringer for Willem Holleeder.
It was a mistake to make a movie about a topic so famous that (almost) everyone knows the complete story and subsequently twist the story in the extent that they did. I almost wish Peter R. de Vries will go through with a script more strictly based on his book.
The producers decided to go their own way, but made a critical error. They assume that people know the story, and subsequently leave out key parts of the narrative. This leaves the audience guessing at times what is actually happening. The planning stage is almost completely skipped with the kidnapping taking place in the first 10 minutes of the movie. A bit later there is a scene where the kidnappers are waiting for a ransom money transfer but this goes awry. The problem is that it is not explained that this is a ransom transfer attempt, and uninformed people that are not familiar with the actual kidnapping do not have a clue what is going on.
So the producers decide to NOT base the movie on the book, but trust that the plot is explained by the knowledge people have of the book. It's easy to see that this will not work, and so it doesn't.
Pacing is also a problem as scenes seem to drag on forever and overall atmosphere is very negative and pressing. It seems like there is a fire burning underneath the movie and pressure is building, but it is never released soon enough to be a pay off for the audience.
Acting is quite good, but the script and wooden dialogue aren't doing the actors much favor. Hauer as Heineken is a good fit, as is the main character who is a dead ringer for Willem Holleeder.
It was a mistake to make a movie about a topic so famous that (almost) everyone knows the complete story and subsequently twist the story in the extent that they did. I almost wish Peter R. de Vries will go through with a script more strictly based on his book.
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.
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