Based on the true story of how the Norwegian crown princess steals the heart of President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II and changes the face of world politics.Based on the true story of how the Norwegian crown princess steals the heart of President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II and changes the face of world politics.Based on the true story of how the Norwegian crown princess steals the heart of President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II and changes the face of world politics.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 1 nomination total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
As many have noticed, this story takes the "inspired by true events" a bit too far on occasions. But still I recommend watching it as it gives another side of the grim events more than 70 years ago. I find the acting credible and good but as said.. the historical correctness is highly questionable.
Atlantic Crossing is not a documentary and should not be viewed as such. Nevertheless I was drawn into the drama of the exiled Norwegian Crown Prince and Princess, a family that were separated during the Second World War, due to duty and circumstances.
Whilst living in seperate host countries and having absolutely no political influence and power, the drama portrays how the prince and princess, in very different ways, did everything they could to contribute to the war effort. The ultimate cost of their efforts placing an enormous strain on the royal marriage. Atlantic Crossing is well worth watching, but perhaps for a more mature audience.
This could have been a masterpiece of historical storytelling with a script that focused on the Norwegian peoples' suffering under Hitler and the Royal family's many efforts to free them. But after the first riveting episode, the script becomes stuck inside Sweden's politics, Buckingham Palace and Washington DC with boring storylines that go nowhere. Honestly, I was insulted for the brave Norwegians and their Royal Family. They deserved far better, especially from Masterpiece Theater.
I've read that Shakespeare's Hamlet and Macbeth have little to do with the actual historical characters and events on which they are based. Still, I've never met anyone who cared about that in deciding whether they liked those plays.
The same approach should probably be taken to this series, which plays fast and loose with World War II history. But that's hard to do, because we're so much closer to the real events that this series rewrites than Shakespeare's audience was to minor figures in Medieval Scottish and Danish history. (Did they know anything about those fields at all?) It was very hard for me to sit through the depiction of the female lead, the Crown Princess of Norway, inspiring Lend-Lease, for example. I can imagine that Swedes don't particularly enjoy seeing their former king portrayed as a Nazi sympathizer. But if you don't know anything about World War II history, then I guess that wouldn't bother you. Just as I am not bothered, in reading Hamlet, by the discrepancies between the play and Medieval Danish history.
What we are left with is imitation Downton Abbey - lots of nice-looking aristocracy and their homes, not too much concern with unglamorous commoners.
Also a story to inspire timid women: a timid young princess - think Princess Diana - comes into her own and eventually grows a backbone. She even helps to save Western civilization. A story lots of timid women could relate to.
If you're a World War II history buff, or a guy, or a woman who does not need fantasy history to feel inspired to develop her potential, this will probably seem like a long-winded costume drama, which is what it actually is.
But if you're part of the intended audience, you might enjoy it. And so long as you don't mistake what happens for history, I don't know that there is any harm in that. George Washington didn't chop down that cherry tree, after all, yet Parson Weams' tale of how he did but then did not lie about it provided moral courage to countless young Americans of a previous era. If this series helps timid women develop moral strength, that wouldn't be a bad thing.
------------------------------------
I just watched Episode 6. When FDR, having learned of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, goes first to see the Crown Princess to find courage to deliver an address - what becomes the *A day that shall live in infamy* address to the joint houses of Congress - I almost puked. The rest was pretty much the same thing. FDR turns out to be a lover who finds strength and inspiration in an initially timid Norwegian princess. It's sort of like bad old-fashioned Disney applied to World War II history. Bad imitation old-fashioned Disney.
The same approach should probably be taken to this series, which plays fast and loose with World War II history. But that's hard to do, because we're so much closer to the real events that this series rewrites than Shakespeare's audience was to minor figures in Medieval Scottish and Danish history. (Did they know anything about those fields at all?) It was very hard for me to sit through the depiction of the female lead, the Crown Princess of Norway, inspiring Lend-Lease, for example. I can imagine that Swedes don't particularly enjoy seeing their former king portrayed as a Nazi sympathizer. But if you don't know anything about World War II history, then I guess that wouldn't bother you. Just as I am not bothered, in reading Hamlet, by the discrepancies between the play and Medieval Danish history.
What we are left with is imitation Downton Abbey - lots of nice-looking aristocracy and their homes, not too much concern with unglamorous commoners.
Also a story to inspire timid women: a timid young princess - think Princess Diana - comes into her own and eventually grows a backbone. She even helps to save Western civilization. A story lots of timid women could relate to.
If you're a World War II history buff, or a guy, or a woman who does not need fantasy history to feel inspired to develop her potential, this will probably seem like a long-winded costume drama, which is what it actually is.
But if you're part of the intended audience, you might enjoy it. And so long as you don't mistake what happens for history, I don't know that there is any harm in that. George Washington didn't chop down that cherry tree, after all, yet Parson Weams' tale of how he did but then did not lie about it provided moral courage to countless young Americans of a previous era. If this series helps timid women develop moral strength, that wouldn't be a bad thing.
------------------------------------
I just watched Episode 6. When FDR, having learned of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, goes first to see the Crown Princess to find courage to deliver an address - what becomes the *A day that shall live in infamy* address to the joint houses of Congress - I almost puked. The rest was pretty much the same thing. FDR turns out to be a lover who finds strength and inspiration in an initially timid Norwegian princess. It's sort of like bad old-fashioned Disney applied to World War II history. Bad imitation old-fashioned Disney.
I just watched Episode 6 of Atlantic Crossing. It has gotten worse each week.
This takes "inspired by true events" to a level of fantasy that is beyond ridiculous. I am now finding it truly appalling. I feel like I am watching a bad Hallmark TV movie, but this disaster wants to style itself as somehow based on facts when it is preposterous.
Really, who at Masterpiece thought THIS was a good idea? It cheapens WWII and FDR into a dime store romance novel and is an insult to anyone who actually learned about the Roosevelts by watching Ken Burns' true masterpiece documentary, "The Roosevelts: An Intimate History", also on PBS.
I would say it is almost funny in its absurd depiction of FDR, Eleanor and Missy LeHand - but I found it stupid, offensive and bordering on the bizarre.
I'm done with this drivel. Just makes me wonder why Masterpiece and WGBH had anything to do with this disappointing fiasco.
This takes "inspired by true events" to a level of fantasy that is beyond ridiculous. I am now finding it truly appalling. I feel like I am watching a bad Hallmark TV movie, but this disaster wants to style itself as somehow based on facts when it is preposterous.
Really, who at Masterpiece thought THIS was a good idea? It cheapens WWII and FDR into a dime store romance novel and is an insult to anyone who actually learned about the Roosevelts by watching Ken Burns' true masterpiece documentary, "The Roosevelts: An Intimate History", also on PBS.
I would say it is almost funny in its absurd depiction of FDR, Eleanor and Missy LeHand - but I found it stupid, offensive and bordering on the bizarre.
I'm done with this drivel. Just makes me wonder why Masterpiece and WGBH had anything to do with this disappointing fiasco.
Did you know
- TriviaFranklin D. Roosevelt's first Secretary of War was George Henry Dern. Kyle MacLachlan worked with his great-granddaughter, actress Laura Dern, in Blue Velvet (1986) and Twin Peaks (2017).
- GoofsSets and scenery of the countryside and of interior and exterior of the house are conspicuously Mid-European, looking nothing at all like rural or suburban Virginia in the 1940s.
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Перетинаючи Атлантику
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content