IMDb RATING
6.6/10
1.2K
YOUR RATING
An ambitious historian unmasks the worlds greatest spy, setting in motion the very events that lead to the spy's mysterious death.An ambitious historian unmasks the worlds greatest spy, setting in motion the very events that lead to the spy's mysterious death.An ambitious historian unmasks the worlds greatest spy, setting in motion the very events that lead to the spy's mysterious death.
Muammar Gaddafi
- Self
- (archive footage)
- (as Muammar Gadaffi)
Henry Kissinger
- Self
- (archive footage)
Nikita Khrushchev
- Self
- (archive footage)
Leonid Brezhnev
- Self
- (archive footage)
Hafez al-Assad
- Self
- (archive footage)
Gamal Abdel Nasser
- Self
- (archive footage)
Anwar Sadat
- Self
- (archive footage)
Moshe Dayan
- Self
- (archive footage)
Ashraf Marwan
- Self
- (archive footage)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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.
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.
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
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
The basic story is really fascinating, yet, this film is totally unconvincing. I was completely unimpressed with the rationale of Aaron Bergman.
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.
Did you know
- Trivia"The Angel" Netflix film on the same subject
- Quotes
Himself - Interviewer: When recruiting a new agent, what are the risks to you, to the Mossad?
David Arbel: To the Mossad, first that he might be a double agent. Number two, he's a liar. And number three is that he can surrender you which is very dangerous.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- The Spy Who Fell to Earth
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 34m(94 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content