We Steal Secrets: La historia de WikiLeaks
Título original: We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks
PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
6,9/10
8,2 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Añade un argumento en tu idiomaA documentary that details the creation of Julian Assange's controversial website, which facilitated the largest security breach in U.S. history.A documentary that details the creation of Julian Assange's controversial website, which facilitated the largest security breach in U.S. history.A documentary that details the creation of Julian Assange's controversial website, which facilitated the largest security breach in U.S. history.
- Nominado a 1 premio BAFTA
- 3 premios y 10 nominaciones en total
Julian Assange
- Self - Founder, WikiLeaks
- (metraje de archivo)
John 'FuzzFace' McMahon
- Self - NASA Network Administrator
- (as John 'Fuzface' McMahon)
Robert Manne
- Self - Professor, La Trobe University, Melbourne
- (as Prof. Robert Manne)
Michael Hayden
- Self - Former NSA and CIA Director
- (as Gen. Michael Hayden)
Chelsea Manning
- Self - WikiLeaks Source
- (metraje de archivo)
- (as Bradley Manning)
Jihrleah Showman
- Self - Bradley Manning's Supervisor
- (as Spc. Jihrleah Showman)
P.J. Crowley
- Self - Former Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs
- (as Philip J. Crowley)
Argumento
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesWilhelm Scream: At 1:10:18 in a clip of an explosion.
- Citas
Julian Assange: You talk of times of peace for all, and then prepare for war.
- ConexionesFeatured in Maltin on Movies: After Earth (2013)
- Banda sonoraBlossom and Blood
Written by Jim Moginie (as James Moginie), Martin Rotsey, Peter Gifford and Rob Hirst (as Robert Hirst)
Performed by Midnight Oil
Reseña destacada
This two hour documentary attempts to tell the story of Wikileaks and does so using TV footage, interviews with government people and former Wikileaks employees and even Adrian Lamo.
Is it a fair documentary? I don't really know. It builds the case against Assange, but it keeps a friendly and supportive view of Wikileaks. It shows that Bradley Manning is practically being tortured under US incarceration, but does its best to describe the boy as an uber-gay mal-adapted geek. It seems to try to be as objective as possible, but does not interview either Assange or Manning and makes them both look like defective weirdos.
My opinion? If this were a politically commanded documentary, then it is a very subtle one, trying to polarize the audience, break any collaboration between Assange and his former employees and fans, even going so far as to show the regret of Adrian Lamo (the guy that ratted out Manning) when he cries on camera, so that he can never be an objective party in the story. This is the usual way official documentaries work, though. They gain power through polarization.
But if this is not a political order, then the documentary doesn't actually say much, other than go through a weak and one sided timeline amongst the various special effects and dramatic music that fill the movie and make it rather boring. At one time I fell asleep while watching it.
Therefore I cannot rate it but below average. I have this fear that the makers of the film were actually trying to show the story and report it accurately, but I fell into the trap of sympathizing with one side or another, but then again, if they wanted objectivity, they should have surfed the middle line, not throw Assange to the wolves.
Is it a fair documentary? I don't really know. It builds the case against Assange, but it keeps a friendly and supportive view of Wikileaks. It shows that Bradley Manning is practically being tortured under US incarceration, but does its best to describe the boy as an uber-gay mal-adapted geek. It seems to try to be as objective as possible, but does not interview either Assange or Manning and makes them both look like defective weirdos.
My opinion? If this were a politically commanded documentary, then it is a very subtle one, trying to polarize the audience, break any collaboration between Assange and his former employees and fans, even going so far as to show the regret of Adrian Lamo (the guy that ratted out Manning) when he cries on camera, so that he can never be an objective party in the story. This is the usual way official documentaries work, though. They gain power through polarization.
But if this is not a political order, then the documentary doesn't actually say much, other than go through a weak and one sided timeline amongst the various special effects and dramatic music that fill the movie and make it rather boring. At one time I fell asleep while watching it.
Therefore I cannot rate it but below average. I have this fear that the makers of the film were actually trying to show the story and report it accurately, but I fell into the trap of sympathizing with one side or another, but then again, if they wanted objectivity, they should have surfed the middle line, not throw Assange to the wolves.
- siderite
- 16 jun 2013
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is We Steal Secrets?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Recaudación en Estados Unidos y Canadá
- 166.243 US$
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- 27.689 US$
- 26 may 2013
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 457.517 US$
- Duración2 horas 10 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
By what name was We Steal Secrets: La historia de WikiLeaks (2013) officially released in India in English?
Responde