The Danish film is a compelling murder mystery that goes beyond the investigation of former UN Secretary General Dag Hammarsjöld’s death, into the heart of darkness.

The film is launched this week at Sundance in the World Cinema Documentary Competition section, and has already spilled out of the film pages of major newspapers such as The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel into front page news, due to the possibly explosive clues uncovered by the Danish journalist/director.

Using his signature mix of satire and serious investigation, previously displayed in the acclaimed The Red Chapel and The Ambassador, Brügger has this time around teamed up with private Swedish investigator Göran Björkdahl, and donned the costume of ‘Tintin in Congo’ to try to shed new light on the death of Swedish diplomat Dag Hammarskjöld in 1961, who was killed in a plane crash in former Northern Rhodesia, now Zambia.

In the film, conducted like a John Le Carré crime thriller, Brügger and Björkdahl travel from Stockholm to London, Zambia, The Hague and South Africa among others, collecting clues, building and deconstructing theories, trying to distinguish conspiracy from reality to determine whether Hammarskjöld was murdered or not.

Along the way, the investigation takes the two private eyes into the murky waters of a possible wider and darker plots from South-African based mercenaries, who supposedly used AIDS virus to kill thousands of black Africans.

At the heart of darkness is the clandestine South African Institute for Maritime Research (SAIMR), with a 5,000 strong white militia, led by a mysterious ‘Commodore Keith Maxwell', introduced in the first frame of the film as the face of evil, always dressed in white.

According to a crucial testimony from a certain Alexander Jones, former SAIMR member, the organisation was reportedly linked to the death of Dag Hammarskjöld whose stance at the time against colonialism and support of African nations’ independence was negatively viewed by former colonial superpowers.

Cold Case Hammarskjöld was produced by Peter Engel of Denmark’s Wingman Media, in co-production with Norway’s Piraya Film, Sweden’s Laika, and Belgium’s Associated Directors, support among others from Nordisk Film & TV Fond. DR Sales handles sales.

How did you first get on board the Dag Hammarskjöld case and team- up with Göran Björkdahl?
Mads Brügger: Seven years ago, I read in The Guardian a story about Göran who was tracking down black African witnesses who had seen the plan crash. That immediately felt like a great starting point for a film. There is a megalomania about someone killing the UN secretary that attracted me. I called Göran and we met with my producer Peter Engel. Together with Peter, we wanted to check if Göran wasn’t a tinfoil conspiracy theorist. I was pleased to see he is the exact contrary. Very meticulous, sceptical thinking, discipled…very Swedish!

As our research went along, it became evident that there was a complexity and madness in this vast conspiracy theory.

At the time, what views did you have of Dag Hammarskjöld and what did you think actually happened?
MB: Honestly I knew very little, besides the information that everyone has about the case. He was like a kind of messiah and the way he died made him an iconic figure. Being a journalist, I’ve always been sceptical about a conspiracy to kill him, also because airplanes do crash, especially at that time in Africa. Then, as we went along, I became a believer, which I am very much today.

The film has a more traditional narrative structure than your previous films, although its ground-breaking revelations are astounding, and likely to have major implications. Could you explain your decision-making process in building the film like a true crime mystery, with a true villain, the mysterious ‘Commodore Keith Maxwell, head of the underground SAIMR organisation…
MB: I’m attracted to true crime, political thrillers, partly because I grew up in the 1970s, with films like Three Days of the Condor. I was constantly looking for markers, turning points that would work in a true crime narrative and political thriller, and in that sense, Maxwell was the perfect villain. By nature however, I’m very sceptical and a constant source of frustration was trying to figure out if [the now deceased] Maxwell was just a crazy person with a dangerous imagination, or if the clues surrounding him and SAIMR connected to reality.

Luckily, with Göran and my Swedish co-producer/researcher, Andreas Rocksén, we kept digging into the Maxwell mystery, that we sensed was linked to Dag Hammarskjöld. We all had the feeling of a shadow hiding in the darkness, very evil. It turned out to be true.

The biggest mind-blowing moment was when we met a guy who had attended a SAIMR training camp and had a diploma from them. That was a defining turning point. The entire investigation was a fantastic group effort and Göran’s own material and video recording of some key witnesses were crucial. There were many dead ends, we kept some and others stayed in the editing room.

The former SAIMR member Alexander Jones makes astounding revelations about the organisation’s supposed plot to decimate black population in southern Africa, and his closing speech in your epilogue is chilling when he says: “Africa could have been a completely different continent, had Dag Hammarskjöld been allowed to live and follow up on his mandate”. How did you feel at that very moment?
MB: That moment gave me goose-bumps. He [Alexander Jones] took part in a vast criminal enterprise, an evilness hard to comprehend, almost like a black holocaust. But he is also the one who commemorates the memory of Dag Hammarskjöld at the end. He was right about the impact of Hammarskjöld’s death on geopolitics. At the time, he was working on assisting newly independent countries in developing an economy, advising governments through experts, which African countries were lacking at the time.

Harry S. Truman, former US president said in the New York Times, two days after Hammarskjöld’s death: “Dag Hammarskjöld was on the point of getting something done when they killed him…Notice that I said ‘when they killed him’.” Indeed, Hammarskjöld had a vision for Africa.

What will happen next? Will the entire case be re-examined?
MD. We did facilitate a recent meeting between Alexander Jones and the United Nations, as part of UN investigator Judge Othman’s examination of new evidence.

To make the mountain of information ‘digestible’ to the general audience, you used two secretaries, asking you somewhat naïve questions while typing the story of your film, chapter by chapter. Can you tell us about that structural device?
MB: I knew that the film would include a lot of narration. I needed a method to make the narration more dynamic and effective. It also daunted on me that typewriters were important. I have a passion about typewriters as both my parents were journalists.

I was also looking for a space, which would help me visualise interracial relations. It’s very much a film about being black or white. I thought the contrast of me, ginger, very white, dressed in white, with a black African secretary would work. I thought they would be mirrors for the audience. I was hoping they would ask informed questions and they did. They also provided warmth and humour. Also, without them, there would be only men in the film, mostly white!

In terms of style, could you go through your aesthetic choices of building the film like classic cold war movies, such as The Osterman Weekend?
MB: I have a fetishistic side to me. I am attracted to the aesthetics and atmosphere of cold war literary dramas from John le Carré and Graham Greene. When I’m very stressed, I watch the original Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy with Alec Guinness. The tempo is like slow motion, but the atmosphere is something I enjoy. Plus everyone keeps smoking!

There is also humour in the film, through the odd-couple that you form with Göran, your own self-deprecating and satirical tone. Could you comment on the film’s in-built humour?
MB: Comic relief is always important to tell serious and disturbing stories. However, after the turning point when I realised that SAIMR might have used AIDS virus, deliberately to kill thousands of black people, I could not use humour anymore.

In the film you also question at a certain moment your journalistic work. At a time when fake news and propaganda methods are destabilising democracies, are you still optimistic? 
MB: I am optimistic about journalism. We are in a new golden age of journalism, after the previous golden age of the 1970s. It’s never been easier to do high quality journalism. You can have access to any source and material. At the same time, what concerns me is the fact that people’s trust in journalism is evaporating. One way to combat this is to be honest and explain, being as transparent as possible.

How would you like the audience to feel after watching your film?
MB: The film is about two middle aged white Scandi guys who embark on a case to try to find out what happened with a Swedish diplomat and somehow, they stumble upon the outlines of a possible black holocaust. This, in my mind, is mind-blowing. I always strive for uniqueness in my films. When you are as privileged as I am as a filmmaker, who receives consequent sums to make documentaries, you have to create something unique. For me it’s important that whatever people will think about the film, they will feel: I’ve never seen anything like this before!

What about solving the Olof Palme murder case now…
MB: I am Scandinavian and remember when he was murdered. But at the moment I need a break from murder mysteries! I’ve worked seven years on this film. It’s a relief to have come to the end.