Steam Cold Case Hammarskjöld

Cold Case Hammarskjöld

Cold Case Hammarskjöld is a movie starring Mads Brügger, Clarinah Mfengu, and Saphir Wenzi Mabanza. Danish director Mads Brügger and Swedish private investigator Göran Björkdahl are trying to solve the mysterious death of Dag...

Other Titles
Murder in the Bush: Cold Case Hammarskjöld, Hvem dræbte Dag Hammarskjöld?, Hammarskjöld byla, Caso abierto: Hammarskjöld, Hammarskjöld, döglött akták, Nerešeni slučaj Hamaršeld, Cold case à l'ONU, Fallet Hammarskjöld, Zaboravljeni slučaj Hammarskjöld, Kto zabił sekretarza generalnego ONZ?, Odlozený Případ Hammarskjold, Hammarskjöld: caso sin resolver, Mysteriet Hammarskjöld, White Is the Colour of Death, Wer tötete Dag Hammarskjöld?
Running Time
2 hours 8 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
History, Animation, Documentary
Mads Brügger
Mads Brügger
Clarinah Mfengu, Saphir Wenzi Mabanza, Mads Brügger, U Thant
Denmark, Belgium, Norway, Sweden
Audio Languages
日本語, اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Japanese, اللغة_العربية, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Danish director Mads Brügger and Swedish private investigator Göran Björkdahl are trying to solve the mysterious death of Dag Hammarskjöld. As their investigation closes in, they discover a crime far worse than killing the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Comments about history «Cold Case Hammarskjöld» (26)

Bobby photo

When I first saw this film I thought it was incredibly interesting and thought that it was just a great, fun film. I thought the second time I saw it I enjoyed it more, and I recently watched it again on a DVD and I still think it's a good film. The thing that I loved about this film is that it really captures the energy of a rock band and how it can take you away and make you want to be a part of that band. It's about how you can have a really good experience and a really bad experience and how you have to just relax and enjoy what you have. I was just impressed by the fact that the film really captures the energy of the band and their ability to create a good time, so much so that I would totally recommend this film to anyone who wants to see a fun and entertaining film. The only complaint I have is that I would have liked to have seen a bit more explanation of the story and the characters, but that's really nothing that can't be found in a normal film. My vote for Rock'n'Roll Nightmare is a 7 out of 10.

Samuel King photo
Samuel King

Based on the acclaimed Swedish crime novel by Torben Espen Sandberg, Swedish crime drama "Svenska Dagbladet" tells the story of the investigation into the death of two teenagers who were found murdered in their home in 2005. The investigation and trial were also directed by Johan Persson and are also based on the works of Torben Espen Sandberg. The film is filled with drama and suspense and it's really worth seeing. But, the documentary itself is not particularly enlightening. The documentary does not really do anything new and is not particularly well directed. There is a lot of dialogue and there is a lot of information given about the case. But, the documentary does not really show the actual murder or the trial. The documentary only talks about the case and nothing else. In my opinion, the documentary is not really telling us anything new about the case. In fact, the documentary is not really interesting. The only thing I did really like about the documentary is that it is filled with beautiful music. It is a very romantic, poetic and beautiful soundtrack. The documentary also doesn't really give a lot of information about the case. It just shows us some shots of a crime scene and then another shot of a crime scene. The documentary doesn't really tell us about the murder itself and what happened. It doesn't really give us any information about the actual case. And, the documentary ends quite abruptly. The documentary is not a very interesting documentary. I think it is a bit boring. It doesn't really tell us anything new about the case. I think the documentary is a bit boring.

Pamela photo

It's rare that a documentary gets an award for the whole movie. A whole movie is much more appealing, and that's where we are here. This is the best documentary about a murder mystery that I've seen. I wish it had a longer running time, because the facts are all so important. I was a little disturbed by the way the film was shown, though. It's the idea of the documentary, not the real events. I'm sure they have interviews with other people who know about the crime, and perhaps some have even written about it. But they don't show the actual murder, and that's the problem. If they had shown the actual crime, the documentary would have made an interesting film. The documentary is one of the best documentary I've seen. I recommend it.

Phillip photo

SPOILERS AHEAD. Okay, so I'm not saying it was the best documentary I have ever seen. This is one of those documentaries you watch with friends and see them discussing what they liked about it. I enjoyed it. But I had a few problems with it. First, there was a lot of information about the historical facts of the year 1859. So it wasn't too helpful if you wanted to know more about that time period. Also, some of the information was fairly outdated. I felt like they needed to make the documentary more current. Second, there were some scenes that just seemed to drag on for too long. I could have liked more scenes. Lastly, the documentary didn't explain how the killings were committed. There were some scenes of the torture and execution but the details didn't come out clearly. I feel like the filmmakers could have explained more about the executions and that might have helped me better understand the killings. Lastly, there was a lot of information about the person who actually committed the murders. He was never really given a name, even though he was accused of doing so. That left me a bit confused as to who was doing what to whom. If you have a book or a movie to watch that explains more about the person who committed the murders then go for it. But if you want to watch this documentary you should go into it with an open mind. This is definitely a documentary that I would watch with my friends. I think it's a good one to watch.

Doris C. photo
Doris C.

This documentary explores the dark side of Hollywood and the importance of freedom of speech, censorship, and artistic freedom. It shows that studios have become dominated by an ideology of censorship, and that their ability to promote creativity is being challenged. It also shows the consequences of the efforts to censor ideas that the studio believes are not in their favor. These are some of the themes explored in this fascinating documentary, which runs for over two hours and is incredibly well produced. It also does a wonderful job of demonstrating the problems that censorship can cause for those who are targeted, as well as the consequences of the censorship. It is very difficult to review a documentary that is well over two hours long, but this one really kept me interested and made me want to see it. The soundtrack also makes the documentary extremely memorable, and it was a pleasure to hear the new songs performed by the cast and crew. I strongly recommend this film for anyone interested in movies, censorship, and the importance of artistic freedom. I also highly recommend it to those who are not familiar with the topics covered in this documentary, or those who are fans of David Fincher or the indie movie scene. I rate this documentary a solid 7 out of 10 stars.

Ralph Rivera photo
Ralph Rivera

In some ways, this documentary is a bit of a waste of time. It is obviously made with a certain focus on the case, the presentation of it, and the presentation of the case by the audience, but overall it is fairly disorganized, lacking in structure, and lacking in understanding of the various phases of the case, and the way the different witnesses fit into it. The film does, however, take some fairly interesting perspectives on the case that the audience can see. That is, the case as it was, and the case as it is being presented. While I can see the bias of the film, it is not without value, and it does show some interesting things about the trial, and it does show the evidence, which is generally not much. I don't think this documentary is a great film, and I'm not sure I could recommend it to any individual with an interest in the case. However, it is not a terrible film, and it is worth watching if you want to see how the case was presented, and the trial, in particular, was presented. I am not sure how to rate this documentary.

Russell James photo
Russell James

Not a masterpiece, but I'm not sure how else to say it. I really enjoyed this documentary, although I did find it a bit "giant". It's not that it doesn't show the facts. But it's so long that it becomes somewhat "grandpa's" style documentary, with little to no context, and very little (if any) actual science. It's basically just a bunch of guy talking about stuff that they probably don't really understand. And it's done with a lot of amateur "giant" quality. But it's really quite impressive. The general tone of the film is more scientific than documentary, and it does a good job of letting the audience focus on what the filmmakers want us to focus on. And while it's more science than film, it does have a very definite documentary feel to it. I was really impressed with the cinematography, and the "deepness" of the interviews. They were all very well shot. I liked the fact that they showed real footage, but also the fact that they were doing it in a very "uncommon" way. I like the way the director shows it. It's very funny, and it doesn't make you feel bad for the scientists, but it still makes you feel a little sorry for them. And the fact that the film is completely unedited, which it would have been (and should have been) at a more "proper" length, was an excellent choice. I thought that it helped to break up the really long monotony of the documentary. I thought that the editing helped the documentary to "speak" in a way that made it seem much more logical and logical. It made the footage flow better. I don't really have a lot of problems with the documentaries. I think they're good. I also don't really have a lot of problems with the directors, but I thought that this film was done much better than the other documentaries that the director has done, and the other documentaries that the director has directed. It was done in a way that was similar to the documentaries that the director is in, but it was done in a way that was very much unique. Overall, I thought it was a very good documentary. It's not really a documentary, but it's very much like a documentary. It's great to see the documentary. It's well shot, and the interviews are really well done. It's a great documentary that I'd recommend to anyone who wants to know more about some of the stuff that scientists do, or to people who are interested in science. It's also really cool to see the things that the director was able to capture. The photography is really cool. It's very bright and pretty. It makes the footage flow really well. It's very easy to understand. The editing is very well done. It helps to separate the interviews into their own "genres". And it also helps to keep the audience focused. It's also very well done. And it really does make the footage flow. It's very funny. And the acting is great. It's really very good. I liked the way the director chose the interviews. It helped to separate the interviews into their own "genres". The music in the interviews is very good.

Willie B. photo
Willie B.

The Danish movie set in 1920's Iceland was a very interesting concept to follow, and the short documentary "The St. Michael Project" is no exception. The story itself was interesting, but I found it pretty slow paced. The story was told rather slowly, and there was a lot of time wasted on "documentary style" scenes. The style felt as if it was added for the purpose of interest, rather than to help convey the story. I also found the majority of the narrative material to be boring and unconvincing. I actually enjoyed this documentary more than the actual movie. It gave me a good idea of what the real story was like. If you are into the Icelandic history, you might enjoy this documentary. If you are interested in how Iceland's pre-WWI culture was formed, I would skip this movie.

Donna Walsh photo
Donna Walsh

Funny and even touching at times, it's a strange story, full of strange people and odd ideas. What I didn't like about the film is that it is very slow. The story and all the characters are a bit like a TV series, and there are so many details that it's hard to keep track of them. As a result, I felt that I was not given enough information and some of the characters were so complex that I just had no idea what to expect. But, what is most important is that the film has a great message. It's hard to find films that get to this message, and this film does it very well. The film is very depressing, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. It can be used as a great tool to bring out a message that is in need of the most. This message is about the society and the things that make it better or worse. And for me, this message is the strongest thing about this film. It's about how far we can go to a better world, and it is a very, very good message for the most part. It does however have its flaws. For one, I do not find the narration to be very convincing. I would have liked it more if there was some narration, and I would have preferred it if the narration was used to help the viewer understand the character and his/her motives. And the person narrating, again, is not very convincing. I felt that there were times where he/she just did not want to get off the story, but sometimes he/she didn't really know what he/she wanted to say. But, the narration is a flaw that is pretty minor, and not enough to spoil the film. This film does have a very good message, and I highly recommend it.

Timothy B. photo
Timothy B.

A 13 year old boy from Iceland named Ingir is the primary focus of this documentary. He narrates the story and the documentary as he shows us the most interesting parts of his life. In many ways he is the strongest character of the movie. What he shows us is his obsessive search for truth. He wants to know who murdered his father and is determined to find the truth. He has been through lots of emotions in this documentary. There is much sadness, grief, and intense fear. The documentary is very interesting and I would recommend it. I'm still trying to figure out how the movie ends. Some of the questions raised in this documentary are never answered.

Lisa photo

Dennis the Menace, the famous dog in the '50s TV series of the same name, had a pivotal role in the movie adaption of Stephen King's The Shawshank Redemption. You might be able to guess that the best he could do was show his dog chasing the people in his suit down the street at night. However, Dennis made it his own, all his own. I'm going to take my chances, I suppose. Perhaps he'll do better with a full-length feature. Maybe it's because his talents extend beyond the film medium. Perhaps it's because the dogs are so good and their performances so impressive that they lend themselves to a full-length feature. Whatever the reason, Dennis is superb in this. We get a genuine story, a film that benefits from the great cast. In short, we get a great movie.

Adam Brewer photo
Adam Brewer

This is a very good documentary, it is about a Danish teenager and his investigative work. It is about the whole case, about the trial, about the arrest of the accused, and about the investigation that led to the conviction. It is not only about the case, but about the whole case. I found this documentary very interesting, although the narration is quite slow. The information is not always clear and sometimes it is hard to follow. The narration is quite interesting, however, the information is not always clear, or sometimes it is not really important. The film is very interesting, and I recommend this film, it is about a Danish teenager and his investigative work.

Albert photo

I had great anticipation for this documentary, as i had seen the trailer, but was very skeptical. I was pleasantly surprised. It was well-filmed, well-edited, and detailed. The only real criticism i could think of is that some of the topics dealt with subjects such as the paranormal, aliens, reincarnation, and how a mentally challenged man tried to connect with the dead. This would be a difficult subject to cover in any length of time. I do agree that there is more to the story than what was covered. As an aside, I have the feeling that the children in the documentary are more human than the adults. That being said, it's a must-see.

Emily D. photo
Emily D.

This is a great movie, if you want to know what it is about, watch it, I'm sorry if this makes me sound like a fool. However, I'm not sure why so many people can't see the basic point of the movie. The documentary itself is about the history of the crime in Iceland. The idea behind the movie is the same as it was the first time I saw it. We need to know what happened, so we can make our own history. It is easy to forget the dark times of the 20's and 30's, and I think the movie does a good job showing what we are experiencing today. The main characters are well chosen, the music is well chosen, and the idea behind the movie is well done. It is not perfect, and that is the best part. I don't think that there is any reason to watch it again, or even buy it, because I am sure that it won't be the same. However, if you want to know what is happening in Iceland, and how the people there are reacting to it, I recommend it.

Janet Wong photo
Janet Wong

Despite this being a documentary, it's not really a documentary in the way that you'd expect. It's more of a two-parter consisting of many interviews with people who have knowledge of the case and interviews with others who don't. It's a different story than the usual US documentary style of interviewing the experts and "documenting" the process. It's pretty hard to explain why this is the case. First, it's hard to make it into a full length documentary. We get the sense that most of the interviews are edited together for a documentary. This creates a disconnect. It also helps to have the actual case studies that we're talking about. They're well done, though some of them have gaps, which is a good thing. Second, the editing makes it hard to concentrate on anything. If you're watching this on a flat screen, you're left with a lot of things to focus on. It's almost impossible to focus on a couple of things, like the actual case study, or the people who went through the process. For example, we get interviews with, and about, only three of the eight people who actually went through the process. You'll notice that there's no real evidence that the government did it. The most interesting interviews are the ones with people who knew nothing about the case. They give great insight into how it was, and the decisions made, and their feelings about it. There are also the personal interviews with the people who went through the process. It's interesting to hear about the impact it had on them, and their lives. There are some interesting interviews that give insight into how the story is told, and what it took to get to the point that it was. It's just not as clear cut as you would think, though. I'd say that it's a decent documentary, but it's not a documentary. The film is not, strictly speaking, a documentary. There is a lot of information that we don't get into the documentary, but it doesn't make it less a documentary. It's very well done. 7/10

Theresa Contreras photo
Theresa Contreras

This is a very good documentary, about the quest to find the Horn of Africa. I've seen it twice now and it's just as well that I watched it twice as it gets even better with each viewing. I found it very informative and a lot of the facts that they had are very important. One of the things I was particularly interested in was the story of the French in Africa, as they didn't just stay there. They went through many countries and even made their own little empire. It was very fascinating. If you're interested in this topic you should definitely watch this film. You won't be disappointed.

Marilyn Peters photo
Marilyn Peters

This documentary is one of the best I've ever seen. The documentary starts out with a voice over by the two protagonists describing the process of making the film and the situations that went into it. The voice over is actually pretty cool, because it shows a lot of the difficulties and the results of their endeavors. The narration starts off a bit slow, but it picks up and just becomes a great narration. It is very informative and interesting to watch. I've never been interested in documentaries, but this one was very well done and I was very impressed. I think this film would be great for people who don't know much about documentaries, because it's very informational and detailed. I definitely recommend this documentary, because it's one of the best I've ever seen.

Pamela C. photo
Pamela C.

I recently saw this at the Austin Film Festival and I was very impressed with it. It's a very in depth look at the experience of the police and the people who work with them. The film includes interviews with a number of the real people featured in the film, as well as the real police officers who are interviewed, and includes some great footage of the actual investigation into the events of the New York marathon bombing. The police are in a constant state of confusion about what to do with the investigation. They are also dealing with the fact that there are many, many suspects, and they are finding it increasingly difficult to take on any one person. Some people feel that the media should not be involved in the investigation because of the sensational nature of the crime, but I think that that is a very small part of the issue. The movie is really about the police, not the media. It also makes a very strong case for an open and transparent investigation, because it is clear that the media has a part in creating the frenzy of speculation about the people who may or may not have done it. They are making it very difficult for the police to be completely impartial in the investigation. The movie is very interesting and has a lot of good points to make, and the questions it raises are a lot of the things that we are all thinking about when we think about terrorism. This is a very good film and I highly recommend it.

Elizabeth M. photo
Elizabeth M.

I thought this movie was pretty interesting and interesting in a good way. I thought it was very moving and very informative. I think it's a good film to show to people in your life.

Kimberly photo

I saw this movie at a screening at the University of Arizona, and I was glad I saw it. This is one of those movies that you will want to watch over and over. It is a fascinating film. The film covers the key moments in the life of John Paul Getty, a man who is known to the world as the founder of the Gettysburg Museum. He is also known for being the most famous person in the world who was a slave. He was also known for being the most important person in the Civil War. The film covers the key events in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, where Gettysburg was held. This movie is really a unique and important film to watch. It is interesting and informative. It is a fascinating film and worth watching. This is the type of film you would want to watch over and over. I would recommend this film to anyone who is interested in the Gettysburg and Civil War.

Ryan photo

I would like to comment on this film, because I feel it's one of the few documentaries that I've seen that actually make you feel, and think about the situation in which you're living. In this case, it's an uprising in Iceland against the way the country is governed and the economy. This is a difficult subject to tackle, and so many documentaries that are made about other subjects like this are generally just too light on the subject matter. I feel that this film did a very good job at doing that, and it's great to see such a great documentary that makes you feel about the situation in which you're living. The film is very well-made, with good cinematography, and some very good editing, and it's a shame that it didn't get more attention from the critics. It's a really good film, and I'd recommend it to anybody who has the chance.

Pamela photo

Well, it was so refreshing to watch a documentary that does not only look into the different cultural aspects of the peoples of the United States, but also explores the ideas of identity, culture, and what makes us who we are. Yes, I am a woman, and this documentary touched on what is often a taboo topic. It was also interesting to see how the people of this country are very different from the way they were during the American Revolution. Some of the interviews were very interesting, like with the Roman Catholic Church, but there was a lot of stereotyping that didn't really serve the film very well. The movie was very well done, but the book I was looking for was much better.

Keith Curtis photo
Keith Curtis

I've been reading about the story of the 'Hammer' in the news for a while now. I can't remember when the first stories came out about it, but it was long ago. I never knew that it was an unsolved mystery, and now I have a better idea of how the story started. As it turned out, the story was made up of many pieces of a puzzle, and some of them, were missing. This documentary explains what happened to all of the pieces and how they were connected. It is a bit of a pain to watch, because it is a bit hard to follow, but it's worth it. I liked it a lot. I hope you do too.

George C. photo
George C.

My wife and I saw this at the San Francisco Film Festival. We were surprised to find that this is actually an intelligent, well-made documentary. While it is not a documentary about the trial itself, it does address the court cases and the decision-making process. The documentary also includes a comment from each of the defendants on their cases. It is a good, informative film.

Albert Patterson photo
Albert Patterson

A collection of short stories that explore the true history of Iceland and its people. The films are told in a straightforward manner and contain no narration. The stories are written by a team of Icelanders, and each one is a personal work. The filmmaker and writer team of Sebastian Berg and Birgitta Jonsdottir, who also collaborated on the film, does a great job in telling their stories and of making us feel the sadness of the people of Iceland in the years that they were conquered. Some of the stories are extremely sad, but they are all told in a way that allows the viewer to understand what the main characters are going through. One of the stories is about a man who is trying to find his lost wife and daughter. Another is about a man who was a priest in a time of great darkness. Some of the stories are also about his family. They are all interesting and will make you feel for the people in Iceland. One of the stories, the one about the priest, is also about the difference in people's perception of each other. I would recommend this film to anyone who likes documentaries about Iceland and its people. There is not one scene that is not a good example of how the director and the writers made this film. The final word is that this film is a great piece of work that shows how a documentary can be made on a large scale.

Rose B. photo
Rose B.

I was a bit skeptical about this film, considering it was about the "the man who solved the mystery of the Norse Gods". I was pleasantly surprised to find that the film was very interesting and not too boring. The film starts out with a quick overview of the history of Norse mythology, and then introduces the story of Sturluson. It then goes into the life of Sturluson and the various ways he tried to solve the mystery of the Norse Gods. There are several interesting interviews with experts who talk about their interpretation of Sturluson and his work. The film then takes a turn for the more bizarre when we meet some of the Gods and their Gods. The Norse Gods were portrayed in a very different way than the ones we are used to. The Norse Gods are more concerned with things like killing, and having sex with humans. They are not particularly concerned with things like healing, or helping people. The Norse Gods are also much more complex than the Greek Gods. The Norse Gods are described as a combination of the human and the animal. They are also much more powerful than the Gods in the Greek myths. The Norse Gods are also depicted as being human and male, rather than the Gods in the Greek myths. There are also more of a lot of nudity in this film. There is also a lot of nudity and sexual themes in this film. The nudity is not for the purpose of titillation, but is for the purpose of the story telling. It is not a pornographic film, but more of a depiction of the Norse Gods and their relationship with humans. The sex scenes are very explicit, and quite erotic. This film is not pornographic, and I think this is the main reason why it is so good. It is very interesting and very interesting to watch, and I would recommend this film to anyone who is interested in Norse mythology and mythology in general.