IMDb रेटिंग
6.2/10
25 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंWhen a terrorist escapes custody during a routine handover, Will Holloway must team with disgraced MI5 Intelligence Chief Harry Pearce to track him down before an imminent terrorist attack o... सभी पढ़ेंWhen a terrorist escapes custody during a routine handover, Will Holloway must team with disgraced MI5 Intelligence Chief Harry Pearce to track him down before an imminent terrorist attack on London.When a terrorist escapes custody during a routine handover, Will Holloway must team with disgraced MI5 Intelligence Chief Harry Pearce to track him down before an imminent terrorist attack on London.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 2 कुल नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
For those who have billed this as an answer to Mission Impossible or The Bourne series... they are setting this up for a fall. It is not. But I don't think that has ever been the intention.
If you cut all of the stereotypical American patriotism and bravado, add a more intelligent approach (one too intricate for that US market). You're about there.
Although you won't be seeing Kit Harrington drop forty feet on a rope, catch a bead of sweat in slow motion, before it hits the floor sensors. You will see a nod to Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and the internal corruption of the British Secret Service. Its well put together, takes you one way and then spins you 180.
Its a stimulating spy film, which engages the audience to actually have a think while watching it. As good as the M.I and Bourne franchises are, this is all together different. I have never seen Spooks on BBC, but this has pushed me to take a look at what I've been missing out on.
I unfairly went in with a low expectation of this film, and was pleasantly surprised.
A good watch, and one I wouldn't turn anyone away from. Though it does make you think... what am I missing out on, what do the public not find out about, how good are the MI5?
If you cut all of the stereotypical American patriotism and bravado, add a more intelligent approach (one too intricate for that US market). You're about there.
Although you won't be seeing Kit Harrington drop forty feet on a rope, catch a bead of sweat in slow motion, before it hits the floor sensors. You will see a nod to Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and the internal corruption of the British Secret Service. Its well put together, takes you one way and then spins you 180.
Its a stimulating spy film, which engages the audience to actually have a think while watching it. As good as the M.I and Bourne franchises are, this is all together different. I have never seen Spooks on BBC, but this has pushed me to take a look at what I've been missing out on.
I unfairly went in with a low expectation of this film, and was pleasantly surprised.
A good watch, and one I wouldn't turn anyone away from. Though it does make you think... what am I missing out on, what do the public not find out about, how good are the MI5?
Spooks was undoubtedly a riveting espionage drama series for the BBC which never shied away from killing off some of its key cast members. Now four years after its final episode Spooks returns as a feature film for the cinema.
Nothing unusual about this move. I remember in the 1970s the TV show The Sweeney spawned several films for the cinema with the television cast reprising their roles.
With Spooks not many of the television series cast remained so Harry Pearce (Peter Firth) is central to the plot and he is joined here by new cast member Kit Harington who plays a former agent brought in to flush out Harry after a wanted terrorist escapes.
Of course in the cinema this film will compete with Mission Impossible, James Bond and Jason Bourne but with a lower budget and lower wattage stars.
Mission Impossible was a television show re-tooled for the cinema backed by Tom Cruise and the off centre talents of Brian De Palma. Spooks has one of the show's director back for the film but its a plodding style without the flair, style and pacing of the television show. In fact I found it pedestrian despite some international location filming and bigger budget.
The escape part of Qasim looked silly in the first place. A wanted terrorist is being transported and they are stuck in traffic with no police sirens anywhere to shift them all.
The film was decent enough but not a cinematic event. I watched it closely mainly because my brother was an Extra in the film, never spotted him though.
Nothing unusual about this move. I remember in the 1970s the TV show The Sweeney spawned several films for the cinema with the television cast reprising their roles.
With Spooks not many of the television series cast remained so Harry Pearce (Peter Firth) is central to the plot and he is joined here by new cast member Kit Harington who plays a former agent brought in to flush out Harry after a wanted terrorist escapes.
Of course in the cinema this film will compete with Mission Impossible, James Bond and Jason Bourne but with a lower budget and lower wattage stars.
Mission Impossible was a television show re-tooled for the cinema backed by Tom Cruise and the off centre talents of Brian De Palma. Spooks has one of the show's director back for the film but its a plodding style without the flair, style and pacing of the television show. In fact I found it pedestrian despite some international location filming and bigger budget.
The escape part of Qasim looked silly in the first place. A wanted terrorist is being transported and they are stuck in traffic with no police sirens anywhere to shift them all.
The film was decent enough but not a cinematic event. I watched it closely mainly because my brother was an Extra in the film, never spotted him though.
This movie was pretty much how I expected.
It's exciting enough, has some decent action. Some twists and turns. An older agent, a younger agent. Relatively standard stuff, really.
It's a thriller with some action sprinkled in. The action is alright, not incredible, but satisfactory. For a spy-movie it's a little more "realistic" than some of it's more action-oriented counterparts, and not too over the top. But the action isn't cheap-looking. There are bullet holes, blank-firing guns, some destruction.
Had this movie been a little longer, it could have been one of those movies that gets split up into shorter episodes and sent on TV.
Kit Harington is pretty good, the acting overall is good. You won't remember this for eternity, but if you like spy/agent-stuff, you'll have an alright time.
It's exciting enough, has some decent action. Some twists and turns. An older agent, a younger agent. Relatively standard stuff, really.
It's a thriller with some action sprinkled in. The action is alright, not incredible, but satisfactory. For a spy-movie it's a little more "realistic" than some of it's more action-oriented counterparts, and not too over the top. But the action isn't cheap-looking. There are bullet holes, blank-firing guns, some destruction.
Had this movie been a little longer, it could have been one of those movies that gets split up into shorter episodes and sent on TV.
Kit Harington is pretty good, the acting overall is good. You won't remember this for eternity, but if you like spy/agent-stuff, you'll have an alright time.
"MI-5: The Greater Good" is an extension of the TV series "MI-5" that starred Peter Firth and dozens of other wonderful people. What made the show so great was that, for me anyway, the plots were never convoluted, you never knew if one of your favorite cast members were going to be killed, and the suspense in some situations was almost too much to bear sometimes. It was always exciting, intriguing, and you cared about the people who worked at MI-5.
The film stars Peter Firth, and I don't believe any of the other originals were present. Firth plays Harry Pearce, the head of the MI-5 Counter-terrorism division who, at the end of the long series, lost the love of his life, Ruth, to whom he had never really committed. Always dedicated to his work, he was never able to let it go.
Now, the CIA's most wanted terrorist is en route to be turned over to them when he escapes, thanks to a motorbike assault. As someone pointed out here, right away the film is in trouble. You can't be transporting the CIA's most wanted terrorist with no security riding around it.
Harry Pearce is blamed for the escape, as he disappears right after it happens.
MI-5 brings in a former agent, Will Holloway to help find Harry, as he was Harry's protégé. Harry believes there is a traitor within MI5, and he asks Will to help him find the mole.
The acting was uniformly excellent, with Pearce, Kit Harrington as Will, Lara Pulver as Erin, Jennifer Ehle as Geraldine, and Elyes Gabel as Qasim.
The movie just did not hold one's interest - it didn't move along at the kind of pace a film like this needs, and it felt like it didn't hang together.
Nevertheless, if they put out more films from the series, I'd watch every one. If you're a fan of MI-5 or Spooks, you will check this out regardless of the review, just as I would.
The film stars Peter Firth, and I don't believe any of the other originals were present. Firth plays Harry Pearce, the head of the MI-5 Counter-terrorism division who, at the end of the long series, lost the love of his life, Ruth, to whom he had never really committed. Always dedicated to his work, he was never able to let it go.
Now, the CIA's most wanted terrorist is en route to be turned over to them when he escapes, thanks to a motorbike assault. As someone pointed out here, right away the film is in trouble. You can't be transporting the CIA's most wanted terrorist with no security riding around it.
Harry Pearce is blamed for the escape, as he disappears right after it happens.
MI-5 brings in a former agent, Will Holloway to help find Harry, as he was Harry's protégé. Harry believes there is a traitor within MI5, and he asks Will to help him find the mole.
The acting was uniformly excellent, with Pearce, Kit Harrington as Will, Lara Pulver as Erin, Jennifer Ehle as Geraldine, and Elyes Gabel as Qasim.
The movie just did not hold one's interest - it didn't move along at the kind of pace a film like this needs, and it felt like it didn't hang together.
Nevertheless, if they put out more films from the series, I'd watch every one. If you're a fan of MI-5 or Spooks, you will check this out regardless of the review, just as I would.
I am a humongous fan of the Spooks TV series (MI5 to our American friends) and really got my hopes up when I found out a feature film was coming out as a follow up to the ending of series 10, which did itself need a lot of redeeming.
If you're a fan of gritty British films, and prefer Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy over your run-of-the-mill bullet fest, this film could well be for you. Strong cinematography throughout, and it's clear that this is written - in a way - to honor Spooks and keep it alive, but little things like the set design of the new Grid just ruin the atmosphere that the old Spooks stayed strict to, for a reason. That however was nowhere near as bad as the films "Main" characters. I say "Main" because there weren't really any, just a group of monotone bores, a youthful touch from Kit Harrington (the writer personifies his idea of revitalizing the show) and Peter Firth, stretching his ability to always be the rock of the team to the limit by making him the only life in the movie.
It's amazing that throughout the first 6, maybe 7 series of Spooks, every spectator felt like they were watching a 2 hour film squeezed into an hour slot. Spooks:The Greater Good feels like a 50 minute TV show stretched into 104 minutes, without any added storyline or plot developments.
If you've never watched Spooks, you're mad and you're missing out, but watch this film first. You'll probably like it, it's confident in its approach, strictly realistic and contains a fantastic Peter Firth performance. But once you've done that, go back to Series 1 of Spooks and watch the whole thing. The film won't be so annoying to you that way.
If you're a fan of gritty British films, and prefer Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy over your run-of-the-mill bullet fest, this film could well be for you. Strong cinematography throughout, and it's clear that this is written - in a way - to honor Spooks and keep it alive, but little things like the set design of the new Grid just ruin the atmosphere that the old Spooks stayed strict to, for a reason. That however was nowhere near as bad as the films "Main" characters. I say "Main" because there weren't really any, just a group of monotone bores, a youthful touch from Kit Harrington (the writer personifies his idea of revitalizing the show) and Peter Firth, stretching his ability to always be the rock of the team to the limit by making him the only life in the movie.
It's amazing that throughout the first 6, maybe 7 series of Spooks, every spectator felt like they were watching a 2 hour film squeezed into an hour slot. Spooks:The Greater Good feels like a 50 minute TV show stretched into 104 minutes, without any added storyline or plot developments.
If you've never watched Spooks, you're mad and you're missing out, but watch this film first. You'll probably like it, it's confident in its approach, strictly realistic and contains a fantastic Peter Firth performance. But once you've done that, go back to Series 1 of Spooks and watch the whole thing. The film won't be so annoying to you that way.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाStar Kit Harington received training from an ex-SAS soldier, so he could believably play a former MI5 agent in this film.
- गूफ़The tidal level of the Thames varies while Harry is being watched by Kassim's sniper, indicating this was shot at different times of day.
Some scenes require several takes and film makers can't pause while waiting on tomorrow's high tide.
- भाव
Will Holloway: [about MI5] You can do good, or do well.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is MI-5?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $51,61,464
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 44 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें