The Spy Who Fell to Earth

The historian behind this story is either not very clever or a grandiose crook or both. My guess is, I'm sorry to say, he might be both.

Total waste of time under a gripping name. The film is pointless consisting of repetitive scenes and having no distinctive narrative. It gives nothing. Why it is done? Looks a lot like the author's egotrip presenting mostly him.

It's clear that the author thinks he's all that, and he is by far the weakest part of the documentary. Also the info they chose to leave out in lieu of simply retelling the story over and over again, is strange. The editing was also strange and unnecessarily confusing.

Tells the story of Ashraf Marwan, a spy "unmasked" by British historian Ahron Bregman (or, perhaps, someone that Ahron Bregman feels he has unmasked -- with some help from Eli Zeira, the director of Israeli military intelligence during the Yom Kippur War).

The director, Tom Meadmore, makes a solid effort to tell both sides of the story and remain impartial -- leaving the 'double-agent' vs 'not double-agent' up to the viewer and should be commended for such, given the details of this particular case.

One could potentially argue that there could be some sort of reverse-bias in play, in that one tries to be so impartial that glaring inconsistencies or absurdities are downplayed in order to play up the 'mystery'.

The one "slip" (if you could call it that) would be the rather telling question that Tom Meadmore asks Mr. Bregman toward the very end of the documentary -- but it was something on my mind & probably for many other viewers by that point. I think it needed to be said.

Recommended, enjoyed it throughout.

A documentary that to some may feel unfulfilled. We have a spy who was quite the figure. Many things remain unknown about his motives, about his believes, about whom he worked for. Or for how many people. What seems pretty clear is that he didn't just jump and try to fly. I think everyone can agree that that would be quite convinient and totally wrong.

But who did it then? One of the many things the documentary tries to reveal. Again there will be a lot of people who are not satisfied with this and what it actually says. I understand people who argue that it goes in circles or repeats certain talking points. It still is done very well over all. Could have been shorter for sure, but don't hold it against it