Secretos de Estado

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.

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 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.

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.

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.