Walking into the cinema I expected a film that would highlight Julian Assange as a Protagonist, the hero of this film rather than it's villain. But like most things my thoughts were further from the truth. The film doesn't in my view follow Julian Assange's fight and plight against bringing out a website that reveals secrets without revealing their sources, a Revolutionary of his time.
The film however is based on the book by Daniel Berg, Assange's right hand man, the film highlights Assange's past and how this effected his decisions and this is vital to how he is portrayed on screen. I'm still confused what the message was with Assange as a character, to me the way he is made out to be is a mentally unstable man who is obsessive and controlling and most importantly Damaged.
Thrown into the narrative was the relationship with the Guardian News Paper, who in the end made a deal with Assange to publish information about the war in Afghanistan. This also lead to the sub plot with the US government and how Wiki Leaks could've brought down the whole US government. It was in the sense the biggest Storm they were facing on both sides of the argument.
Regardless of the narrative which I have some major issues with, the film itself is well rounded and produced. It has the edge of a spy thriller to it from the outset, with the sub plot of government agencies and information that was so top secret that having it in the hands of someone like Wiki Leaks could be disastrous. Wiki Leaks is made out to be a new form of espionage for the 21st century, providing confidential information to be leaked without revealing it's sources to bring Truth and Justice to the masses.
Benedict Cumberbatch's performance was brilliant, after a while you were swept up in the way he had even mastered Assange's Australian accent, the bleached blonde hair(which I still don't know is a wig) and even mannerisms were perfection. I can see him earning a Oscar for that performance next year.

So here is the thing I want to address.... THE NARRATIVE!!!!
The narrative to me didn't have a clear resolution to it, the film didn't really tie up anything with the climax not even being pointed out to the audience which is sometimes a good tactic to have as a script writer but it seemed that the resolution was in a way was changed to fit a purpose that I could guess. I have nothing against the narrative, I think it's brilliantly written but something doesn't add up to me and this is just my opinion. In the second act Assange is made out to be the villain of the piece or maybe the false hero of the piece. As an audience you can't really decide who you want to back and in a way you leave confused to who you should've felt empathy for. And this is still puzzling me right now and it will do until I watch it again or read the source information of this film. It's hard to put fact into fiction and transfer it to screen and in that respect I would recommend that you research up on the backstory to the film and more importantly the narrative.
Overall I thought that the film will provoke conversations on the issues that it addresses depending what your view is on the subject matter and whether you are in favour of what Assange has done. It was well edited and used real footage as well as film and had a lot of jokes which Media Students will get in an instant. I think that you have to watch this film with an open mind and not be sucked into it emotionally or view it in great detail and watch it as a drama rather than a documentary.
I would recommend watching this and really did enjoy it and loved Cumberbatch's performance in particular ... also look out for the new Doctor Who and Professor Lupin from Harry Potter making an appearance!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment