Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

whatithinkis And wow boring. I'm amazed by all these positive reviews. This is shallow, uninteresting tripe. Nice cinematography captures definite period feel, but, wow, who cares. BORING. Apart from the lead a poor use of talented people. A reviewer on another site said (and I agree wholeheartedly), 'If you're watching this because you think it's about the origins of James Bond, think again. As Mr. Fleming would tell you, the prototype for Mr. Bond was actually Sydney Reilly, a real life spy that nearly usurped Lenin. Probably the best dramatization of Reilly is called, "Reilly: Ace of Spies," and stars Sam Neill. Highly recommended.' "Reilly: Ace of Spies" is riveting. This is not.

petitchatnoir This is Ian Fleming as he would have so loved to be, produced in the style of his Bond character: women can't resist him, his bad behavior is indulged because he's just so bloody amazing, and a bomb that takes out the structure surrounding him as he seduces his prey leaves him not only unscathed but still dapper. From what I've read of and interviews I've seen with Fleming, he didn't possess the charm, charisma and confidence portrayed here. The piece is visually pleasing but not particularly accurate in historical details: style of speech, mannerisms and dress have a modern sensibility (Mu's leather outfit is one glaring example, and Fleming saying "nuclear" rather than "atomic" - if it's to be believed he would have discussed it with anyone - for another). There was also some artistic license with the Operation Mincemeat/Man Who Wasn't There bit. The cast is first rate and make the best of what they're working with. If you want to a bit of fun along the lines of a Bond movie, this should do the trick. If you're looking for information about the "real" Ian Fleming, keep looking.

Essex_Rider I did enjoy the production, but there were quite a few schoolboy errors in it. Firstly, unless people were pretty savvy, Fleming talking about Nazi nuclear secrets would have gone over most peoples heads. It was generally referred to as 'Atomic' weaponry, not nuclear. The fireworks that exploded over London were clearly modern. Fireworks that existed in 1945 were pretty basic, just simple rockets, no more. The reference to 'The man that never was' was an attempt by British Intelligence under the command of Lieutenant Commander Ewen Montagu to fool the Germans into believing the invasion of Sicily would take place elsewhere. As far as we know, Fleming was never a part of this operation. That said, it was enjoyable hokum as clearly Fleming was unable to reveal much of what he did actually do when part of Military Intelligence. The period pieces were pretty much okay and the storyline was pacey and in parts, quite risqué. Although I ticked the spoilers box, maybe I'm being picky because I did watch all 4 episodes and I did enjoy them. By the way, Lara Pulver as Ann O'Neill was simply stunning.

anshopkins Well done...Brits! Having been through having a "hard" mother. I can tell you experientially that this is an accurate portrayal of a man with issues. I kinda wish you had let the blond live a little longer. Granted, I love period pieces.I especially appreciate this WWII piece since my dad was in it.I WILL BUY THIS ON BLU RAY WHEN ITS AVAILABLE.Costumes, story, casting, screenplay, and cinematography...all are excellent. See what you can do when you try a little harder. Congratulations are in order.Again, well done, Brits!