Official Secrets (2019) User Reviews (261)

Katharine, you did the right thing.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 8/10 · 9 September 2020]

The true life story of a woman who put the truth before career and personal life. The true life story of Katharine Gun, the brave young woman who leaked a document, telling us exactly what was happening in Iraq.

It's a terrific film, it focuses on a story which for many is still hard to swallow. It's such an exciting movie, crammed with tension, as a political story you may expect it to be slow, it isn't.

The performances are superb, Kiera Knightley is fantastic as Katharine, Ralph Fiennes and Matt Smith are also on point.

IMDb is a platform for reviewing films and shows, it's a terrific site, and not the place for my political views. I'll just leave this, this is the first time I've not switched off something featuring Tony Blair.

Great film, 8/10.

Good for her

[drjgardner · 7/10 · 7 September 2019]

This film is based on a true story of a woman working for the British government who leaked a document to the press so that the Iraqui war might not happen. In case you've forgotten, that war was started under the false premise that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" and they were planning to use them with anti-western forces top launch attacks. Both allegations were blatant lies, trumped up by the Bush administration, but at the time, many people believed them and in fact, the US and the Brits went to war with hundreds of thousands of casualties.

The film is slow paced but the acting is excellent, especially from Ralph Fiennes who seems to utterly disappear into his roles. It's a case study of someone being willing to stand up for what she believes regardless of the consequences. There are precious few people like this, so every film that chronicles their struggle deserves to be seen.

A Dangerous Truth

[ThomasDrufke · 8/10 · 21 September 2019]

It's sometimes difficult for films that deal with heavy dialogue covering subjects that are not always the easiest to translate on screen to create thrilling 100 minutes or so. Official Secrets does it well, bolstered by yet another great (period piece) performance from Keira Knightley. This film may not be revered as much as All the President's Men or Spotlight but it's up there for me. Separating itself by showing the true costs of being a whistleblower emotionally and physically while still succeeding in using a similar formula structurally. I was nothing short of enthralled with Official Secrets.

8.8/10

Official Secrets

[0U · 11 February 2020]

If you want to become freshly enraged about the massive war crime we call the Iraq war, go see this film. Perhaps the most emotionally distressing aspect is the underlying knowledge that absolutely nothing has changed on any level of power, in any way, since this extraordinary deception.

Bush and Blair continue to be celebrated in high society.

Intelligence agencies continue to illicitly gather compromising material to use as blackmail and extortion on people who might stand in the way of this war-for-profit gravy train.

We continue to be deliberately and criminally deceived about these so-called humanitarian wars by a media that continues their fawning sycophantic support of the war-loving establishment.

The butchery-for-Raytheon profits continue with no end in sight.

It's a great yarn well told, Knightly is perfect as Katharine Gun, and it has a lot of very interesting old footage from the time which will have you shouting at the screen in frustration. But the effect on most will be excruciating cognitive dissonance between the world we think we live in and the actual power structures that manipulate us into handing our tax money over to kill poor people overseas for geostrategic reasons that benefit no one except the very rich and powerful.

Really Enjoyable

[agmoldham · 7/10 · 23 October 2019]

Official Secrets studies the events that are happening in intelligence during the run up to the second gulf war. Having lived through the times myself was aware of the background to the movie, but unaware of the specific story that it explores.

Keira Knightly plays Katharine Gun who works at GCHQ collecting intelligence for the UK. She is concerned about the accuracy of the intelligence that is being used to prove the case for war. The British and American government need a resolution passing at the United Nations to legitimize the war. A memo is distributed to collect intelligence on the United Nations members that can be used to coax them into voting for the resolution. She is shocked by this and wants to stop the war.

In the same way that Brexit dominates British news at the moment WMD's dominated the next back then. The movie is good and shows the pressure that everybody is under. You get the chance to wonder whether you would make the same decisions as Katharine and whether she was right to do it.

I've never been a big fan of Knightly, but she does a fine job in Official Secrets. Well worth a watch.

Must Watch Film

[eamonn-19 · 9/10 · 27 October 2019]

This film is a true story and shows why we must never accept the spin that Presidents and Prime Ministers tell us to justify their actions. In 2019 we need to be more careful what we believe what our governments tell us.

Kiera Knightley's powerful performance carries the movie

[paul-allaer · 7/10 · 14 September 2019]

"Official Secrets" (2019 release from the UK; 112 minutes) brings the story "based on actual events" we are reminded, of British whisleblower Katharine Gun. As the movie opens, it is "25 February 2004, London", and Gun is appearing in court. "As to the charge regarding the Official Secrets Act, do you please guilty or no guilty?, the court asks her. We then go "One Year Earlier, Cheltenham", as we get to know Gun, as she is watching Tony Blair on TV making the case for the war on Iraq. She works a the Government Communications Headquarters. Gun happens to get some very sensitive information regarding attempts to influence the votes of certain members of the UN Security Council. Gun is very upset and decides to leak the information... At this point we are 15 min. into the movie but to tell you more of the plot would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see fort yourself how it all p[lays out.

Couple of comments: the movie is directed by veteran South African director (and co-writer) Gavin Hood ("X-Men Origins: Wolverine"). Here he brings the real life story of what happened to Katharine Gun. As we all know at this point, the Bush administration outright lied and manipulated the data so as to make the case for invading Iraq. The Blair administration wasn't much better. The movie is hence on the right side of the truth, but of course that is easy to do with 20/20 hindsight. Apart from the whistleblower case, the movie also brings to the front what happened at the Observer, the British newspaper that published the sensitive data. I quite enjoyed it all, and not only because I couldn't wait to find out how it would all end for Gun. Kiera Knightly plays Katharine Gun, and she plays it with passion and with determination. She is an absolute delight to watch her carry this movie on her shoulders. Ralph Fiennes is equally up to the task (as the non-profit lawyer representing Gun).

"Official Secrets" premiered to positive acclaim at this year's Sundance Film Festival. The movie opened on 2 or 3 screens in all of Greater Cincinnati this weekend. The Saturday early evening screening where I saw this at was attended very nicely (about 25 people). If you have any interest in whisleblower cases or how the US and UK administration misled the public about the war in Iraq, I'd readily suggest you check out "Official Secrets", be it in the theater, on VOD or eventually on DVD/Blu-ray, and draw your own conclusion.

Understated but edge-of-the-seat stuff

[JeremyHDent · 9/10 · 26 October 2019]

Beautifully-crafted production with great performances from the cast. It seems pointless regurgitating the plot because it is factual and well-known and, despite any real surprises, the director keeps the tension going. It just shows you can craft thoroughly enjoyable films taking the high moral ground without the ridiculous violence and coy sexuality of most Hollywood offerings. The core of the film is the ethical question of whether state employees act for the people or the government and the latter's privileged cronies and backers. Catherine Gun calls this into question and, despite the UK Government rephrasing the Official Secrets Act, she triumphs because of the duplicity of the then UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and the obvious willingness of the USA to prosecute a patently illegal war with Iraq whatever the United Nations votes or does. The door to neo-liberalism creaks open a bit but then we all know what is behind it.

Solid, even vital story, coolly related

[dloft59 · 7/10 · 31 July 2019]

In the winter of 2003, a translator working for the British government saw a document that indicated the U.S. was trying to lead the Western powers into an illegal war in Iraq. The document, an email from a US National Security Agency official, urged spying on members of the UN Security Council to pressure them to vote for a resolution to support the war. Enraged that the British government is apparently participating in this effort to lie to their respective nations' citizens and blackmail others to justify an illegal war, Katharine Gun arranges for the email to be leaked to the press.

Co-writer and director Gavin Wood, whose last project was the taut and thrilling "Eye in the Sky," has created a more calm and conventional presentation of a true story here. It's important -- and even relevant in 2019, when the U.S. President constantly lies and casually dismisses evidence of international espionage. It's also beautifully shot, underplayed with superb acting (especially by Knightley, who manages to hold together somewhat disparate plots -- her character's personal arc with her Turkish Muslim immigrant husband, the issues for the media faced with this info, and the legal questions raised by her defense team), with a brooding, mostly not in-your-face score.

But it's a talky movie that may find it a challenge to connect with American audiences: no shooting, no car chases or punches thrown, and only a brief war-zone scene. The viewer is left to take the critical issues from recent history as far as he or she chooses, and some of the more thorny questions about political whistle-blowers such as Assange and Snowden remain untouched. (The motives of the real Katharine Gun may indeed have been as pure as they're depicted here, and if so, major kudos to her, but that doesn't make for a terribly ambiguous protagonist and story). The understated plotting and acting lead to an equally -- and probably also true -- understated and almost anti-climactic denouement in court, where Gun appears to face charges of violating Britain's Official Secrets Act.

I'm glad Wood and company made the movie. The story and the questions it raises are worth thinking about . . . and one cannot help wondering how Tony Blair, George W. Bush, and Colin Powell look upon those events -- and how they're depicted in this movie -- today.

Brilliant screenplay, superb acting!

[jhwaldo · 10/10 · 25 June 2019]

The screenwriting magic of the incredibly talented husband and wife team of Bernstein and Bernstein bring this true story filled with spies, treason, love and war to the big screen. Though a true story and the ending is known, this film has the viewer balanced on the edge of their seat with suspense. Kiera Knightly's best performance to date and Ralph Fiennes is brilliant as her lawyer. Every performance is excellent in this must see film when it premieres in August 2019. (Viewed at the Nantucket Film Festival June 2019)

Based on a true story!

[lappins-68070 · 7/10 · 18 February 2022]

I do not normally write reviews on here, but after reading the 1* reviews I felt I had too.

This is a true story of Katherine Gun, the whistle blower who leaked the secrets of briefing by GCHQ.

How then do these one star reviewers manage to call it predictable or terrible due to its "fanciful ending" it actually happened, it's not fantasy it's mostly fact.

While I'm sure it will have been tweaked for Tv, it's a strong story of an interesting moment in our actual timeline prior to the invasion of Iraq.

I enjoyed it.

good tension

[SnoopyStyle · 8/10 · 30 March 2020]

It's 2003 and America is making the case to go to war with Iraq. Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley) is a British intelligence translator in GCHQ. They secretly listen in on communications around the world. Everybody gets an email ordering them to work with the Americans to dig up dirt on other UN Security Council states and push them to pass a war vote. Katharine is shocked. Despite the powerful Official Secrets Act, she risks everything to leak the damaging memo to the public. Journalist Martin Bright (Matt Smith) breaks with his paper's endorsement of the war to publish the article as the power of the state bears down upon Katharine and her refugee husband.

I am surprised at the tension of this movie. It helps that I remember a little of the story but not its outcome for Katharine. One thing that frustrated me early on is the attitude of the husband. Without any insights into his character, he can come off as a callous clueless buffoon. The movie needs to lay out his situation from the beginning so that the audience can appreciate his point of view. The other minor issue is the title. It is the blandest of titles. The book's title "The Spy Who Tried to Stop a War" would be vastly better. This movie has lots of tension as a thriller and loads of insight into war creating.

true dilemma

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 30 August 2019]

Greetings again from the darkness. Doing the right thing is usually pretty easy. However a person's true character is revealed when it's not so easy. In 2003, doing the right thing became very difficult for Brit Katharine Gun. How difficult? Well, her decision could jeopardize her job. It's a decision that could get her husband deported. Making the choice could expose two powerful international governments and send her to prison for many years. And if that's not enough risk, how about a decision that could lead to a huge (possibly illegal) war, costing thousands of lives? So you know what Katharine Gun did? She did the right thing.

Keira Knightley stars as Katharine Gun. The film opens in 2004 with her facing a British court and the moment of her plea. We then flashback one year to see Katharine working as a staff member of GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters). She spends her days translating and compiling intelligence for the British Government. It's a job that requires the utmost discretion and the contractual obligation to keep work secrets at work. One day she reads a top secret memo making it clear that governments were conspiring to manipulate a United Nations vote required to authorize an invasion of Iraq.

Based on the (lengthy titled) book "The Spy who Tried to Stop a War: Katharine Gun and the Secret Plot to Sanction the Iraq Invasion" by Martha Mitchell and Thomas Mitchell, the film is directed by Gavin Hood (the excellent TSOTSI, 2005) who co-wrote the screenplay with Gregory Bernstein and Sara Bernstein. It's presented as a moral quandary for Katharine. Say nothing and maintain the status quo in her personal and professional life, or speak up and risk everything noted above. We see Katharine's impulsive decision-making, and behavior that would rank her among history's least likely successful spies. It's actually her naivety that guides her to speak up.

The media side is also addressed here, and although some terrific actors are involved, this segment is the film's slickest and least realistic. Matt Smith plays political reporter Martin Bright and Rhys Ifans plays Ed Volliamy. The two journalists for "The Observer" worked together to verify the memo leaked by Ms. Gun, and Matthew Goode is Peter Beaumont, the editor who pushed to run the story. Previously, the paper had been an avid supporter of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and took many of their stories directly from information provided by his office. Running the story exposed the paper to scrutiny that it was not accustomed to.

Where the film excels is in exploring Katharine's personal turmoil. It's also where it fails us as viewers. As her personal story, the subject matter is a unique and rare look at the wheels of government intelligence. Unfortunately, an inordinate amount of time is spent on the media and reporting, and not enough on what emotional torture the year of waiting must have been for her. Ralph Fiennes plays Ben Emmerson, the lead attorney for Liberty - the legal organization who takes on Katharine's case. It's the legal wranglings of this complex case that make for extraordinary drama, and the fallout of her personal choices had the potential for disaster. All of this is covered in a cursory manner, when more detail would have added more heft to a fascinating story. This includes her run-ins with an MI5 agent played superbly by Peter Guiness. The Official Secrets Act of 1989 is mentioned about 10 times, even though we understand pretty quickly that actions against this law likely results in treason. Ms. Gun is a hero for exposing illegal government activity, and a more intimate look at her personal turmoil would have provided more suspense and a better connection for the viewer.

Dull

[samkan · 5/10 · 3 October 2019]

Katherine Gun leaked top secret information to the press. The British government brought charges then dropped the case at the last minute when it realized that complying with the rules of evidence would require it to expose sensitive information. That's it. The End. Fini. As noble as Gun's motives were, there's little story here. Padding things out to feature film length require lots of stupifying dialog and close-ups of Kiera Knightly. More filler is provided by a deranged press veteran and an arrogant prosecutor. There is the stereotypical diligent reporter and the tenacious barrister. The courtroom scene at the end of the film is beyond ridiculous. Don't waste your money.

great political thriller!

[riverside-704-596061 · 3 January 2022]

The movie is great,simply said. It stays like that throughout the whole movie,the ending is in line with the rest. No plot holes there,and since it is based on true events,I expected the movie to be biased toward or against the main character. But it is not. It leaves to the viewer to decide whether Katherine has done the right thing. And that is the main strength of the movie,that everyone has to decide whether she is a traitor who naively endangered her country and the free world,or a martyr who tried to save people's lives...You want to know what my opinion is?

How doing the right deed can get you in trouble unjustly.

[movieman6-413-929510 · 7/10 · 13 September 2021]

Official Secrets is a new drama thriller directed and written in part by Gavin Hood the director of Eye in the Sky and X-men Origins: Wolverine.

The film is about the true story of Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley), who works as an interpreter. Here she translates a memo on information about how the 2003 Iraq invasion became possible. She shares this information and so it ends up with journalist Martin Bright (Matt Smith), who shares it with the rest of the world. When asked who his source is, an investigation is launched that leads back to Katharine's company. Katharina is so faced with the choice to confess that she leaked the memo at the risk of ending up as a traitor. If she keeps quiet, the war can continue and the number of war casualties increases without the world knowing that this war could have been prevented.

This film does a good job of showing how doing the right thing can unjustly get someone into trouble due to the corrupt side of government. As a result, the main character can lose everything as a result of this good deed, such as her job, marriage and eventually end up unjustly in prison.

The film uses real footage of the news and how politicians reacted to it in an effort to cover up their actions. With the information now known about what certain politicians used to do that led to wrong things, this film shows how these people tried to hide this from the rest of the world. This also shows how she corruptly suppressed people who tried to share this news with the world. This also responds to current events where politicians are still doing things wrong and people get into trouble because of their mistakes.

The acting is well done by the film cast. This is another of Keira Knightley's best major role in a movie since 2014's The Imitation Game. She conveys well how doing a good deed to a corrupt politician can get someone in trouble. In this way she changes her role from hero to person in hiding until the end to unjust victim. Matt Smith plays his part well too, but his character comes across more as an intermediate role who ends up sharing the main character's actions with the world in a bigger way. Later in the film, Ralph Fiennes also plays the role of Katharine her lawyer, who tries to ensure justice despite everything.

Everyone should watch it

[WatchAndSmile · 10/10 · 5 November 2019]

Forget the great acting and all that. Watch it for the story as this is not an isolated incident and things like that happen every year again and again. Knowing what to believe and who NOT to believe and check the fact is of a great importance for everyone, and this film touches on this vital subject.

10/10 for a political thriller. If you are into dolls, harry potter and cartoons, it may not be your cup of tea so judge accordingly!

REALITY BETTER THAN FICTION

[MadamWarden · 6/10 · 29 March 2020]

The movie was ok I guess. Keira was so so. I find her unrelateable and really hard to like or feel empathy for. Fiennes was solid. I found the young husband's character very weak.

Overall, the actual true story was way more interesting than the movie.

An ok watch

A really interesting take on a true story

[trevorwomble · 8/10 · 6 November 2019]

I was talked into going to see this and had my doubts as it seemed to be a variation on the Judi Dench film, Red Joan, which came out last year.

However, despite being a slow burn of a film, it does a very good job with the slightly staid script. The morality angle is very evenly addressed and the politics of the invasion of Iraq are laid bare. We all know now how the government of Tony Blair were sucked in to a war that had resolved very little (and may have made things worse) but to be in the know at the time and to stand up and be counted took great personal courage. And this conflict of interests is very well handled to its satisfactory resolution.

I must confess that Keira Knightley is not an actress I've ever warmed to but she does a decent job in the lead role. However the standout supporting actor to me is Matt Smith who's energy and dynamism as the journalist who doggedly pursues the story he is tipped off about really keeps the film ticking along.

Definitely worth a watch and hopefully it may make you question the honesty of governments in the future.

recalling Meryl Streep in Silkwood

[babybuletgani · 6/10 · 22 October 2019]

The publication of said email on the front page of the Observer not only brought the dirty tricks used to engineer support for Iraq #2 to the world's attention, it also led to Gun being charged with breaking the Official Secrets Act and facing an Old Bailey trial. What it didn't do, alas, was stop a war, a tragic reality that looms over Official Secrets and its attempts to make Gun a fearless free-speech champion. Rendering Gun's actions in simplistic black and white, director Gavin Hood's reductive film is a distinctly televisual recreation, lent more stature than it deserves by its A-list cast. Keira Knightley capably conveys moral certitude, recalling Meryl Streep in Silkwood. There's fine work too from Matt Smith as reporter Martin Bright and Ralph Fiennes as Liberty lawyer Ben Emmerson, though Rhys Ifans borders on caricature as a profanityspewing war correspondent. The scenes in which Gun is interrogated have a claustrophobic charge, while her fight to stop husband Yasar (Adam Bakri) being extradited raises the tempo. Too often, however, Hood labours to fabricate tension. Meanwhile, Smith is lumbered with an excruciating speech in which he passionately reassures Gun, "What you did matters!" Secrets leaves us doubtful that really was the case

a tense whistle-blower morality play

[CineMuseFilms · 8/10 · 26 June 2019]

The release of Official Secrets (2019) coincides with the current US President telling the world he gladly accepts intelligence dirt on political opponents irrespective of source. With impeccable timing, the film shows how such dirt-gathering can potentially impact the course of history.

Based on real events, Katharine Gun (Keira Knightly) is a surveillance employee in Britain's Government Communication Headquarters (GCHQ). In early 2003, she sees an email from an American intelligence agency seeking British support to illegally pressure six UN Security Council swing-states for war with Iraq (falsely claiming it possessed weapons of mass destruction). Highly principled and anti-war, Katharine passes on the email to a friend with journalist connections and within weeks it is on the front pages. She confesses her crime, and for the next year, her life is hell as she awaits trial under the Official Secrets Act.

If you have little interest in global politics or major world events, you may get lost in this dialogue-driven moral rights story. It is crafted into several narrative segments: Katharine's relationship to her Muslim immigrant husband; her relations with GCHQ colleagues; the role of The Observer newspaper; and legal arguments by defence and prosecution lawyers. Each is a separate and engaging story that culminates in a shock trial outcome in early 2004.

Official Secrets works at several levels, but it is Keira Knightly who keeps the film together. She exudes an effortless screen presence that holds audience attention despite an uncharacteristically understated performance. This ensures that attention is drawn away from herself to keep the spotlight on the morality of whistleblowing and the duplicity of US and British action in manipulating due process. Archival material on Tony Blair, George W. Bush, and Saddam Hussein defines the story's time and place with authenticity. The script is dense with explanation and legal argument but, at the core, it is a story of one individual who believes an illegal war is about to be declared and cannot bear the moral responsibility of doing nothing.

Much of the action takes place in The Observer newsroom as reporters grapple with the enormity of the information leak, the legal consequences of going to press, and the implications of silence. The interplay of commercial, legal, and political imperatives is well drawn by an excellent supporting cast and a filming style evocative of the loneliness that comes from being one voice standing on principle.

There continues to be real-life morality dramas involving high-profile whistle-blowers around the world, and the public is divided on whether they are heroes or villains. This film may help you decide.

Ok viewing. Tense at times. Unsatisfying

[sameenuk · 6/10 · 16 October 2019]

I got to a preview screening courtesy of the Times. As most of the plot is a matter of public knowledge, it doesn't make sense to avoid spoilers.

This is a dramatic retelling of the story of Katharine Gun, the GCHQ operative who leaked the request by the US to spy on the delegates of the UN Security Council in the run up to voting on permitting war on Iraq. It should be a biography but in a story this complex, a lot of shortcuts and imagined meetings must have happened.

There were lots of excerpts from media footage of Bush and Blair. To take you back into the turn of the millenium. I thought this was a slickly told story, well edited but also sadly flawed. I had many questions frustratingly unanswered. The film itself determined really to look at the legitimacy of the war v the need to disclose state secrets. In essence, the means for the latter attempting to defeat the ends of the former.

The strength of the film is in several areas. What is does exceptionally well is explain very complex situations succinctly. The conflict in disclosing top secret information was set out as the duty to the government v the duty to the country in the police interrogation. The Iraq war as the sheer human cost of removing a tyrants regime as Katharine and her husband argued.

Even the legal argument was easy to grasp as it was layered slowly from a passing thought to the defence which led to charges being dropped. Ralph Fiennes stole every scene with understated precision in his barrister role.

The flaw is that the film couldn't quite work out if it was a drama in the newsroom, the courtroom, the bedroom or the police interview room. It was all too neatly self contained stopping each bit from resolving.

It can't have been this neatly divisible in realtiy. I struggled to understand why the film didn't bother for example to reflect on GCHQs water cooler moment as the charges were dropped in court. Instead, the film abruptly stopped at the moment a relieved Katharine said she would do it again, betraying secrets.

And here is the issue with this. Keira Knightly was cast as the lead. But what stole the show was her makeup artist. As the tension started to wear on her, Keira looked visibly worn emotionally. But in general there was a lot of stoney faces from the police (special branch?), to work colleagues, to Ralph fiennes as lawyer. And this was despite there being a lot of conflict. The conflicts were contained largely between Katherine and her husband.

The actual flashpoint was between Ken McDonald and Ralph Fiennes Ben Emmerson QC somewhere on the coast away from London. And even then the film left unexplained why there was such a vicious underlying antagonism between the two. It did this a lot. Some kind of shadowy internal affairs at GCHQ applying pressure on colleagues was really the last straw for Katherine? There had to be more but it was all left unsaid.

The newsroom bits were probably the best bits. The over the top acting as everyone was losing their head in the Observer. The Washington correspondent was hammy but entertaining. Yvonne Ridley meeting the journalist to handover the leak was a well done moment building up tension. a lot of material was drawn upon

The most profound bit was the discussion around censorship on national security grounds. The film explored a lot but here is the flaw, it just concluded the newsroom story around two thirds of the way in. The story then made way for the final act in the courtroom. Where again, it just got stuffy if not farcical as "the best lawyer" the DPP had opted not to prosecute at trial. Why even go to trial? The plot itself was that it would have meant disclosing that the legal advice at the time was that the UK going to war in Iraq was illegal. Was it?

It just made a well produced film unsatisfying. A lot of thought had gone into very subtly told scenes. For example, even the lighting in gchq offices and the police rooms seemed oppressive. The dress sense of the detectives was twee as if they knew they didn't belong to the world of spooks. And that's the problem with the story, it just jars as if it's out of place somehow.

Solid Political Thriller

[truemythmedia · 8/10 · 8 August 2019]

Official Secrets is a very well done and very important political thriller, it won the best Foreign Film Award at the Traverse City Film Festival that I attended, so that goes to prove that it has a lasting effect, and I agree. So if you're willing to believe in what the story is telling you, it has great performances and twists and turns throughout, it'll have you cheering for the protagonists and utterly booing the antagonists, if you're in the mood for a good solid political thriller I recommend Official Secrets.

I ran it through spell check

[nogodnomasters · 7/10 · 29 November 2019]

This is an interesting true story other than Kiera Knightly doesn't look anything like Katherine Gun, but did star in The Imitation Game. While working for GCHQ in 2003 she discovers a top-secret memo from the US wanting help in gathering blackmail information on UN Security Council members who might vote against the war in Iraq. Such a vote was necessary for Britain to go to war. The film has her disclose the memo, it goes to the London Observer who attempts to verify it as The Drudge Report claims the authentic memo is false. (How can one guy be 100% wrong 100% of the time?)

There wasn't much courtroom drama and in fact, we knew that she would fail and we would go to war. It is interesting to see how things operated. The story was well done. Well acted. But even still wasn't much of a film.

Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.

Good story, horrible audio

[lbsherma · 5/10 · 14 November 2023]

Like so many under-produced films today, a very interesting and important story is ruined by an audio mix that makes approximately half of the dialog totally inaudible. Music is sappy and way too loud, background sounds (especially in offices) are so loud as to cover talking, same with many sound effects. For anyone with even minimum experience, or awareness, of sound mixing such presentations are both baffling (who was listening to the mix? Surely someone), and hugely irritating. The significance of this film would be large if we could hear anything but noise. New film-makers please note. The revelations of illegal and dishonest government information are timely and very significant. Perhaps this story can be retold.