Hamilton: In the Interest of the Nation (2011)

What seems like an eternity ago (and let's face it, online anything that happened more than two weeks ago belongs to prehistory), I wrote a piece here about the 'Hamilton' character, sometimes described as the 'Swedish James Bond'.  To briefly recap, the character originally appeared in a series of novels by Jan Guilluo, starting in 1986, many of which were adapted for Swedish TV, others into films which remain relatively unknown in English-speaking markets.  (With the possible exception of 1998's Hamilton, an abortive attempt to launch a big budget English-language film series based on the character, which starred Peter Stormare).  But in 2011 a new film adaptation retooled and reimagined the character for the twenty first century.  Hamilton: In the Interest of the Nation (2011) was a big budget, action-orientated spy movie which proved to be a huge box office hit, both in Sweden and internationally.  Having finally managed to see the film, several things struck me about it - most notably the way in which the producers took a leaf out of the Eon productions play-book when it came to adapting one of the novels.  Basically, as with most of the Bond adaptations, the plot is completely gutted, with the whole Cold War background the books were rooted in ditched in favour of a post-Soviet storyline involving international terrorism and arms smuggling.  The KGB have been replaced as the main villains by a US private security firm, whose mercenaries are busy stirring up unrest in the Horn of Africa, via assassinations they blame on local terrorists, in order that their clients can better pursue their commercial interests and to ramp up arms sales in the region.  

Hamilton himself has become more of a conventional action hero - while the opening titles explain that no Swedish intelligence operative has a 'licence to kill', although under extreme circumstances they might have to use lethal force, Hamilton them spends much of the following film dispatching various characters via stabbings, shooting and, most often, his bare hands.  Moreover, his mission has no underlying moral aspect to his actions - he understands that allegiances and perceptions of who are the 'bad guys' constantly shift, but is instead concerned simply with protecting Sweden's international reputation for neutrality, (a Swedish arms manufacturer is in league with the private security firm to covertly supply arms to the African war zone).  But like many Bond adaptations, it also retains portions of the source material, but suitably altered to meet the requirements of the new plot.  In this case, the original novel involved Hamilton facilitating the defection of a Soviet admiral via the Middle East, the film retains the Middle East location, but now it is a former employee of the private security whose 'defection' to Sweden he facilitates.  Rather like Casino Royale (2005) this return to a version of the original plot only comes after a lengthy opening diversion to set up the new plot elements and new characters.  

While Hamilton: In the Interest of the Nation, is clearly modelling its look and updating of the character on the Daniel Craig Bond movies (leading man Mikael Persbrandt even bears a passing resemblance to Craig), it does do some things you are unlikely to see in any Bond film.  For one thing, it comes from a discernibly left of centre perspective, (albeit not as strongly left-wing as the source novels) - Hamiltopn is aligned with the PLO in the Middle Eastern segments, employing their assistance to get the rogue company man to Sweden.   Most interestingly, it addresses the most troubling aspect of all films about international super-spies - the fact that they are trained killers who, arguably, would find it difficult to handle normal life between missions.  While recent Bond films have paid lip service to this issue, we never see an off-duty Bond get frustrated by queue jumpers at the tills in Sainsburys, or rowdy youths in his local pub and completely lose it, snapping necks and cutting throats with broken bottles on reflex.  But in Hamilton: In the Interest of the Nation, while back in Stockholm, Hamilton does snap, reflexively cutting his girl friend's throat when she startles him while he is sleeping, dreaming about a recent incident in which he was forced to kill an adversary.  His culpability for the killing and his department's covering up of his involvement in the face of an investigation by a determined police detective becomes a major sub-plot in the film.  (As it was in the source novel).  The killing is a shocking moment in the film and serves to completely throw the viewer in their perception of Hamilton - is he really a 'good' guy we can identify with?  Should he face justice over his actions or should he evade it as leaving him free to do his job is 'in the interest of the nation'?

Hamilton: In the Interest of the Nation is a fascinating film, working well as an action thriller, but with an added level of complexity which forces the audience to examine their perceptions of right and wrong and how they are presented in this genre.  Should we really be rooting for such a ruthless and reflexive killer who, even though he clearly has remorse over his reflexive and involuntary killing of his girl friend, can apparently put the act and his feelings about it, aside?  Not something you'll find in the average Bond film.  It's interesting to compare this with the 1998 Hamilton film which, while it went some way to turning the title character into a more action orientated hero, still adhered to the source material's presentation of the character, which had more in common with the characters found in Le Carre and Len Deighton novels - intellectual analysts who, while often out in the field, do much of their most crucial from behind a desk, via careful investigations of files, reports and other documents and interrogations of other characters.  The 2011 film pushes the action angle far more - Hamilton barely sets foot in his office, let alone gets behind a desk, here.  From a UK perspective, the film is of interest because much of the dialogue is in English, with several well-known British actors portraying the villains, (albeit with American accents).  Such was the film's success, that a sequel, Hamilton: But Not if it Concerns Your Daughter, was released in 2012, again with Persbrandt in the lead.  Unfortunately, this was nowhere near as popular as its predecessor, the same critics who praised the first film condemning the second.  (I haven't seen it, so can't comment on its quality).  While there were plans for a third film, with several release dates floated, this never seems to have gone into production, although there was a new Hamilton tv series ran for seventeen episodes in 2020-2022.