The Fifth Estate - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Fifth Estate Reviews

Page 1 of 31
½ March 6, 2017
Not sure if this is the real character of Assange or it's been Hollywoodnized but the movie exploiting him as a Weirdo self involved hacker that his mission was destroying governments even on the expense of other people's lives
½ January 26, 2017
Benedict Cumberbatch es Julian Assange, el creador de Wikileaks una plataforma de internet que empezó a filtrar documentos de interés público y altamente sensibles en su contenido que, generalmente, destapaban escándalos de corrupción de los grupos más poderosos del planeta en las esferas políticas y económicas. Si bien sus redes no tenían un fin de lucro, sino ser los guardianes de la información y devolverle el poder de decisión a la gente, Assange confundió el camino y sus ambiciones personales volvieron a Wikileaks su fetiche de poder. Su socio Daniel Berg (Dan Stevens), empezó a notar que muchas veces Assange 'jugó las cartas' como a el le convenía exponiendo la vida de sus informantes y, posiblemente, causando daños colaterales luego de la publicación irrestrica, y hasta irresponsable, de material sensible. Al ser cuestionado por ello, Assange se justificó descalificando a quienes eran sus colaboradores más cercanos. Assange actualmente se asila en la embajada ecuatoriana, acusado y condenado por delitos sexuales, y su poder crítico se vio aminorado al estar asilado por un gobierno que no se destaca precisamente por su transparencia. Wikileaks ha sido fuertemente criticado por su incapacidad de proteger a sus fuentes; por ser un brazo de la CIA O bien, porque sería un señuelo para poner censuras a Internet. La película muestra parte de lo mucho que ocurrió con Wikileaks y su fenómeno social
January 9, 2017
great story such a unique film
December 31, 2016
The critics are a bit harsh. I found this film very absorbing and could not stop it for the whole two hours. Not a dull moment. Excellent acting. The light seemed well put on Wikileaks and reveals the issues and tensions between the ideas and the people. The film ends with Wikileaks being squarely betrayed by Daniel Berg and the french guy in charge of the servers. Wikileaks was very important to reveal how much of assholes the powerful people really are. From the soldier to the chief in command and all in between. Assholes doing crimes all the time and only a few aware and able to leak i.e. inform the world. National security is always in danger when the people in charge keep jeopardizing it while pretending they provide security. If they were providing security without relying so much on power and violence, there would probably be much less dangers to security around the world. I am not just talking about the governments, but all forms of power. It seems there was unfortunately a grave lack of information about what happened with ISIS, leading to such misery over there. It feels a lot like the situation was allowed to rot to the point where the military was given carte blanche to extirpate ISIS. I think the military victory is not a convincing argument in itself. It's simply the most powerful one(s) making the rules.
December 31, 2016
The critics are a bit harsh. I found this film very absorbing and could not stop it for the whole two hours. Not a dull moment. Excellent acting. The light seemed well put on Wikileaks and reveals the issues and tensions between the ideas and the people. The film ends with Wikileaks being squarely betrayed by Daniel Berg and the french guy in charge of the servers. Wikileaks was very important to reveal how much of assholes the powerful people really are. From the soldier to the chief in command and all in between. Assholes doing crimes all the time and only a few aware and able to leak i.e. inform the world. National security is always in danger when the people in charge keep jeopardizing it while pretending they provide security. If they were providing security without relying so much on power and violence, there would probably be much less dangers to security around the world. I am not just talking about the governments, but all forms of power. It seems there was unfortunately a grave lack of information about what happened with ISIS, leading to such misery over there. It feels a lot like the situation was allowed to rot to the point where the military was given carte blanche to extirpate ISIS. I think the military victory is not a convincing argument in itself. It's simply the most powerful one(s) making the rules.
December 3, 2016
At first I was enjoying this film as I do most Benedict Cumberbatch flicks, but the Fifth Estate really drags on in the second and third acts. Right on the box it says "a first rate thriller". There weren't many thrills throughout. There is a couple scenes where there is little tension on what they should do, but that ultimately is a false statement. This subject matter just may not be great for film, it may have benefited from better direction though. Cumberbatch did well with what he had to work with and was still pretty good, David Thewlis was also good. The rest of the cast is hit or miss. All in all, The Fifth Estate I think is the first Benedict Cumberbatch film I didn't like. He was good, but the movie was not.
July 31, 2016
I could watch Benedict Cumberbatch is pretty much anything. This movie was interesting, but a bit preachy and one-sided. An interesting film, although it falls a bit short.
½ July 24, 2016
Badly under-rated - this is really a documentary drama rather than an action film - indeed the action that there was, was mostly real footage. The story for me was not about Assange, it was about the handling of facts in our current age. However beyond truth there needs to be accountability, it seems easy enough now to say 'yes that was me and what are you going to do about it?' To which the answer is typically silence.
May 15, 2016
The more I think about this movie, the more I realize what a terrible, gorgeous anti-WikiLeaks propaganda it was. It's so painfully obvious from how they portray Julian as a creepy, lying, immoral, hair-bleaching "other," to how noble and selfless the government is in just trying to protect their sources. Daniel, our viewer insert, is seduced by Julian's promises but in the end sees the light and not only rejects WikiLeaks, but actively destroys it - as we should. It's beautiful. Brings tears to my eyes.
½ May 13, 2016
Benedict Cumberbatch and Daniel Brühl do a fine job of drawing us into their characters, but because 'The Fifth Estate' is an uneven and sometimes confusing thriller, it's not enough.
April 9, 2016
Benedict Cumberbatch at his best!!!!! absolutly Splendid perfomance.
½ March 15, 2016
Cumberbatch's portrayal of Assange is riveting and once again proves his talent to be far above the rest of the cast, however, the overall film leaves you wishing that perhaps, somebody else had put it together.
½ February 9, 2016
a fail movie that doesn't show any respect for the real people it's based on or tells a very good story.
February 9, 2016
Low scores for this one, but I didn't mind it. There is some melodrama that is somewhat weak but the details from the whistleblowers are powerful and seem accurate to real life. Perhaps, though, that it's too soon for a drama on Assange. A documentary similar to Citizenfour would be welcome, however.
December 22, 2015
Under rated. The romantic subplot was unneeded.
December 16, 2015
In Medieval Europe, the First Estate was the clergy, The Second Estate was the nobility and The Third Estate were the commoners - basically, what we would call today "the 99%". The term The Fourth Estate emerged later as a designation for a group of people who aren't large in numbers, but are great in influence - usually the news media. This leads us to the title of the 2013 film "The Fifth Estate" (R, 2:08). What if there were another group of people, further outside the older classes of society - a group that was an offshoot of The Fourth Estate, smaller in size, but greater in influence? In this, The Information Age, the internet has created such a group, a group that plays a role similar to The Fourth Estate, but does it completely independently and with no accountability. It's a group that is influential enough, and different enough from the established media, that a new name seems appropriate to describe this group. This is The Fifth Estate, and there is no better example of The Fifth Estate than the WikiLeaks website, publisher of documents leaked to the site by people within corporations, military and government organizations who feel that they have a responsibility to expose corruption, questionable practices, lies and policies and practices with which the leaker simply disagrees. Calling a movie about WikiLeaks "The Fifth Estate" begs the question: Can people who work with such an organization really be called journalists, are they lawbreakers, or are they something new and different, something that defies definition? It's an important question and it's what this film asks its audience.

WikiLeaks went online in 2007 and was the creation of one man, Australian computer hacker - turned activist and publisher Julian Assange. Benedict Cumberbatch does a remarkable job portraying the enigma that is Assange. In Cumberbatch's hands, Assange is a brilliant visionary... as well as arrogant, rude, manipulative, paranoid, self-righteous and definitely lacking in the social skills. He makes Apple Computers co-founder Steve Jobs look like a puppy dog. Daniel Bruehl plays Daniel Berg, a computer genius who hitches his wagon to Assange's rising star. Berg believes in Assange's goal of revealing the truth about powerful organizations, especially those corrupt, scandalous, embarrassing, or just uncomfortable truths which Assange, Berg and a small group of friends believe can make a difference if exposed to the light of day. Over time, however, Berg comes to see Assange for the man he really is and grows increasingly upset over what he sees as Assange's recklessness in publishing hundreds of thousands of leaked U.S. military and State Department documents and communications without redacting names and other information that, if made public, could endanger the lives of all kinds of people all over the world. That's where Laura Linney, Stanley Tucci and Anthony Mackey come in, as government officials trying to limit the damage from WikiLeaks releasing the biggest treasure trove of documents the website (or any organization) has received from a single source. That source was former Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, eventually convicted of violating the Espionage Act and other crimes and sentenced to 35 years in prison (and has since assumed the identity Chelsea Manning).

This should be seen as an important movie, regardless of one's opinion of the people and events portrayed. First off, WikiLeaks (along with the connections established among people around the world on social media websites) helped lead to the Arab Spring and other significant political changes in many different countries over the few years following Manning's actions. Secondly, whether you agree or disagree with Assange's approach to journalism (or whether you even consider him a journalist at all), this movie raises important questions that existed before the world even heard of Julian Assange, will exist into the foreseeable future, and may never go away. When does the freedom of the press enshrined in the U.S. Constitution conflict with the basic human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness promised in the Declaration of Independence? Is there any way to hold people who post news on the internet accountable without violating our most treasured freedoms? Where is the line between whistle-blower and traitor - and who decides where to draw that line? This film suggests the importance of asking all these questions and more without coming right out and asking them. This film also avoids suggesting that there are any easy answers. As entertainment, many will find "The Fifth Estate" a bit dry, a bit long or both. The director does his best to keep the film engaging by getting the best out of his talented cast, editing and scoring the film to create tension and using creative settings and camera work to represent certain concepts and events in the story. However, the real strength of this film is in its educational value and its ability to get the audience to think about some significant issues that face our country and our world - right now, today - and aren't going away any time soon. At the end of the day, isn't that one of the things that we want (and really need) movies to do - at least some of the time? That is a question that I think this film does answer and that answer is a resounding "yes"! For the significance of this film, its execution and its overall entertainment value, I give "The Fifth Estate" a "B".
½ December 15, 2015
Perhaps it's too early to judge Julian Assange at this stage, but this film did explain why so many people dislike him. Benedict Cumberbatch's performance is great.
½ November 9, 2015
Took me about 3 attempts to get past the first 15 minutes of this movie. Once I got past that it was easier to get through the rest. Talented cast but the story about a sociopathic liar is not really that interesting. Or maybe the script is just not that well-written. I don't know anyone who liked this movie no matter how much we wanted to like it :(
October 26, 2015
A melodrama that's missing spark and energy. Bogged down with too much detail.
½ October 14, 2015
So this movie is pretty much as bland as it looks on the film poster. Benedict Cumberbatch's performance is unsurprisingly impressive but unfortunately he is surrounded by uninteresting characters who can't match his own charisma and more crucially an over complicated plot which is utterly boring. The pacing is horrible as the film never feels like it takes off. The script is very common and struggles under the melodramatic story. This movie is one to miss.
Page 1 of 31