Official Secrets reveals a scandal that did not receive media attention at the time it was evacuated 15 years ago, especially in the American media, although it is related to the war in Iraq in 2003.

Although the structure of the film is somewhat disjointed, it raises the controversial issue of how powerful a citizen's voice is in a Western democracy such as Britain. The voice of the citizen in this case is not simple, but complex enough to risk the secrets of a state.

We are talking about the story of British spy Catherine Gunn, who could not bear to hear the statements of former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, about the US-British war on Iraq, to ​​strip Saddam Hussein's regime of weapons of mass destruction that have not been found to date, and allegations of his cooperation with the organization. Al Qaeda terrorist.

It leaked a secret document revealing American and British blackmail against members of the UN Security Council to secure their vote on the war resolution. The film is told from three perspectives: the spy Gunn (Keira Knightley), the British Observer journalist Martin Bright (Matt Smith), Peter Piemont (Matthew Good) and Edvoliamy (Rhys Evans) and the third The lawyer who took her defense between Emerson (Reeve Vines).

Translated disturbed

Adapted from Marsha and Thomas Mitchell's "The Spy Who Attempted to Stop a War," the film begins in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.It reads in the press and only listens to US and British threats to Saddam Hussein, urging him to cooperate to hand over his alleged arsenal and avoid war.

Catherine Gunn then worked at the Government Communications Center (Intelligence), as a disturbed translator of a memo she had received, requesting unlawful assistance for an operation run by the US National Security Agency to spy on UN diplomats to get them to vote on the UN Security Council's invasion of Iraq.

Gunn listened to her conscience, and although she knew she was committing a grave breach of the Official Secrets Act, she copied the memo and leaked it to an anti-war friend. The memo leaked two weeks later and was obtained by journalist Martin Bright of The Observer. After consulting with his colleagues Peter Piemont and Ed Folyami, Bright decided to check the authenticity of the memorandum repeatedly before it was published.

The publication of the memo created controversy and mania, but the US government managed to discredit it, but the British authorities decided to open an investigation into the leak. Gunn admitted that she had done so that her colleagues avoided the cruelty of the internal investigation, and feared that someone would be unfairly accused.

She was arrested and kept by the government for several months in a state of uncertainty and uncertainty, without being informed of her fate or even being charged. In addition, the government accused her Kurdish husband Yasser (Adam Bakri) of deportation. She was desperate, and contacted Emerson, a skilled lawyer, to represent her legally.

Naive hope

From a cinematic point of view, information leaks or secrets revealers offer good characters but do not necessarily deserve sympathy, such as the narcissistic egotist Julian Assange or Edward Snowden. Catherine Gunn is different from Assange and Snowden in that she tries to save lives and risks everything in the naive hope that she can stop a war.

In the end, her attempt did not succeed and she risked herself and her husband. The South African film Gavin Hood, who came to the forefront in Hollywood when he directed The Wolverine in 2009, directed his first work in four years, when he directed a film about drone wars titled "Eye in the Sky." .

The multiplicity of views of the story gives the feeling that the film is disjointed, and Hood's attempt to add a teaser that seemed intrusive (the scene of a car rushing to the airport and a scene of men watching Catherine) was never necessary.

Echoes of other works

There have been many secrets detective films in the past 20 years, but none has reached the level of Michael Insan in 1999, in which Russell Crowe played a senior official at a cigarette company revealing its secrets because of his anger at her practices. In the same vein, the film, in terms of investigative journalism, echoes other films such as "All the President's Men" or "Spotlight", the latter won the Oscar for best film in 2015, but it is said that this film is limited in text and art, compared to the films mentioned. The limitations of the film made the press scenes look like a cliché, especially Foleyemi's reading from his notebook, screaming and cursing.

One of the most beautiful elements of the film starring Knightley starring in her performance, which stripped Hood of the features of her stardom, and appeared in «MAKEUP» simple proportional to the real character, to avoid the tyranny of the features of the star on the character performed and distract the viewer.

Although “Official Secrets” is liberated from historical realities and adds to its support for the drama factor, it is generally a good story that provides lessons for a simple character who is involved in larger events that change her life forever. It is the case during the war on Iraq.

This film is very good and worth seeing, especially for those who have experienced the war in Iraq in the newsroom and prepared reports, to gain experience and prove themselves at the beginning of their careers, such as the author of this topic.

One of the most beautiful elements of the film starring Knightley starring in its performance, which appeared with «MAKEUP» simple proportional to the real character, to avoid the tyranny of the features of a star on the character you perform, and distract the viewer.

To view this topic in full, please click on this link.


The film can be narrated in three separate and unrelated ways: Catherine alone deserves a film, the three journalists in the story alone, and the lawyer too. The space you deserve is not given.