Gabcik who assassinated him, but this film really is about Reinhard Heidrich.The first half of this movie is riveting as it charts Heydrich's rise to power. Along the way are scenes that are tough to watch. Jason Clarke is amazing in the role. No, he doesn't look like Heydrich, but who ever could, he was such a distinctive looking dude. But Clarke captures something here that documentaries can only tell you about: the sensitive, artistic man on the one hand and the merciless persecutor on the other.Some aspects of Heydrich's life were left out that would have completed the picture including the time he took out from his SS duties to fly combat missions with the Luftwaffe - before Hitler grounded him. The exact details are debated but it shows that Heydrich was an adrenaline junkie.Jason Clarke projects a man to be feared. We sense the wariness in Stephen Graham's performance as Himmler. In reality, where Himmler shrunk back from viewing the horror of what they were doing, Heydrich never did - an iron heart matched with an iron will.The film has a look. The killings carried out by the Einsatzgruppen have the same incidental quality as similar scenes in the disturbing Russian film "Come and See".Although "Operation Daybreak" and "Anthropoid" did a more comprehensive job of Heydrich's assassination and the battle in the Cyril and Methodius Cathedral, this is still a powerful film with a remarkable performance by Jason Clarke.From Ted Kennedy to Reinhard Heydrich, like Toby Jones Clarke seems able to shape shift. Here he channels the energy of a man who could have taken over the Third Reich towards the end when the top four Nazis were out to lunch. Gabcik and Kubis may have done more to win the war than they could possibly have known.

the Navy its quite likely history would've been written very differently and this movie shows us how these minor events led to the creation of a monster. My only complaint would be that it didn't tell us much about Heydrich's views towards Jews and his role in crafting the Final Solution, but other films like HBOs 'CONSPIRACY' will go along way towards shedding light on that question for interested viewers. The film's inherent weakness is trying to condense over 20 years of Heydrich's life into two hours while also explaining the plot that led to his assassination. That may have been a tall order for any director but at the same time this isn't a film meant for mass consumption. It's not a date movie nor a family affair but is only of interest to those who enjoy history. If you find the topic boring you'll undoubtedly give the movie a low rating but I think as far as this genre is concerned 'THE MAN WITH THE IRON HEART' is certainly a respectable entry in telling the story of one of history's greatest villains.

development. The second part is faster, making it a completely different and original! movie.I read some negative reviews complaining about the two movies in one structure. I understand, it feels a little unsatisfied and rushed at times. Rosamund Pikes character as Heydrichs wife is not used to its full potential in my opinion, and some details are left out of the story Kubis did not actually commit suicide but was fatally wounded and died in the hospital, not only Gabcik but they both shot at Heydrich in the car…etc . Nevertheless, I found in highly entertaining, informative and original. And the casting of Stephen Graham as Himmler is beyond scary.Well worth a watch! Makes you at least want to know more about this very interesting story when you leave the theater.One more thing, we should stop comparing present day Nazi characters in movies with the representation of Ralph Fiennes' Amon Goeth in Schindler's List. It just unfair :

that they included the perspective of his wife.I love that they show her giving birth alone while he coldly works. That shows some of the personal cost that is involved in being a mindless killing machine. When the movie transitions form the Heinrich family to the Czech resistance, I love the cinematography, but i would have liked a tiny bit of context. If you know the story, you figure it out one enough, but if you don't know, its disorienting. Another reviewer here complained about the lack of moral context, that is, why these characters fought to hard to do this and what did they achieve. Its true that that is understated, but I like it. They mention it in passing as they debate shutting down the operation. And its implied in the sadness of the end. It was a real sacrifice. maybe an un-thanked sacrifice, maybe a symbolic one. It didn't stop the war and it led to retaliations and suffering. The benefits were not discussed, but as they suggested, it showed the world that there was resistance, that the Nazis were not invincible.