I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

This is a film that really shed some light about post USSR society. For years I've wondered if there were any Stalinists remaining in Russia, they did keep the Soviet national anthem and that had me wondering. This film gives a fictional account of what may be.The action in the movie is pretty intense, its more of a Clue and detective film in the likes of National Treasure and DaVinci code, where one clue leads to another clue, and that clue leads to another clue, etc. It can be a bit redundant at times, especially the 2nd part of the mini-series. However, the film is beautiful to watch, having some of the most gorgeous urban cinematography in it. This film is directed very well, and the production never felt cheap. Daniel Craig does a wonderful job playing a determined journalist eager to make a buck; only to become so enthralled in his research that he soon began to forget about the potential money he would make by finally getting a hold of Stalin's lost memoirs and writing a book about it.In the end, we learn a startling truth. There are indeed 30 million people in Russia who stand by Stalin until this day, many claiming to be blood related, and seeking to return Eurasia back to his Red ways. However, the world is a modern planet now, and these Stalin supporters show how out dated and obsolete their ways have become. A truly chilling film indeed.

I am guessing that if this story about Stalin's biological child isn't exactly real, it is as true as any history about any important types of people from along time ago (and present day as well as what is truth any hows?). So, if anyone knows if something like this was supposed to have actually happened, please write to me and let me know. Not that it really matters, so don't waste precious time. Just another story that one wonders on. (Spend more time relaxing)It was a rather fun movie to watch. There is an element about Daniel Craig that makes him a rather tedious person, as opposed to the James Bond dude who practically sparkles. But I'm sure that probably most people will pooh-pooh this movie as it is about rather boring crap - historical Russia. I personally have always found it all fascinating how contorted that those rulers have created their society/world. And the need to be a survivalist there is almost like watching a thriller. So, if you know how to read between the lines about Russia and other prisoned folk - you too may appreciate this movie as I did. But remember its not a sparkler of a movie, just an insight into a different sort of person than gringos.

The best thing about this film is Daniel Craig, but even he cannot save this by-the-numbers made-for-TV slog. I wonder how many airport-fiction writers got inspired by 'Gorky Park' to write a 'Russian' thriller of their own, but this cannot be one of the better results. The premise of post-Soviet Russia being obsessed by (or generally giving a s*** about) Stalin and being in danger of a Communist revolution lead by Joe Jr. is laughable. Little Stalin's short speech en route to Moscow - watch his gloved hands - must be one of the cheesiest moments in the history of cinema.I hope that Russian actors had a good time participating in this silly production; I liked everyone involved, especially the memorable Communist honcho with a fake Russian last name - 'Mamantov' is really 'Mamontov', but who cares? - and the endearingly Ralph-Fiennes'ish 'good KGB guy'. Apart from Russian actors getting paid, another benefit to Russian economy has been the $200 or so that Archangel's director spent on cheap Lenin and Stalin busts and portraits, sprinkled generously all over the set. (Getting live bears proved too expensive, unfortunately).In my opinion, the best line in the movie belongs not to Daniel Craig's character, Dr. Kelso - no relation to the Dr. Kelso from 'Scrubs' - but to a female colleague of his, who propositions the dashing historian with this memorable line: 'I have to get laid before I go back to Princeton'. PS. No, she does not!!! What a waste!!! :)

While this film had an interesting plot and I always enjoy other locations it was missing something. The out door scenes, and there were lots of them, were great. However while the premise of the story was interesting, it was also too clichéd. And while Daniel Craig, looking gaunt, thin & very much the bookish professor was alright as the professor, it seemed just like an acting gig he took to go to Russia. I could be completely wrong, but it lacked...his very direct focus that he does so well. He is such a superb actor that he seemed to just be doing minimal work in this picture. As for the female lead, she was tough, depressed & there was absolutely no romance or chemistry. Yes, it was Russia and it was a hard story & the Russian characters had hard lives from the domino affect of Stalin, but there was absolutely no levity to transition from one scene to the next. Mel Gibson was supposedly going to do this film. Ithink if there had been a better budget and Mr. Craig had consumed some food that maybe the picture would have been better. The movie was alright, but not great & could have been much more I am sorry to say.