I went to see The Fifth Estate for two reasons – the first being that I have a soft spot for Benedict Cumberbatch, and the second being that I wanted to see how such a controversial topic would be tackled on screen. On both counts I was disappointed; the film seems overly cautious not to get deeply entwined in the political situation, and Cumberbatch is practically unrecognisable.
The costume department does a fabulous job with Cumberbatch, using a wig, false teeth and contact lenses so effectively that Cumberbatch could actually be Julian Assange. Not only does Cumberbatch look the part, he powerfully inhabits it too – pinning down every idiosyncratic mannerism that Assange showed the world. He has the drawling voice, the self-righteous smugness, and the unnerving edge created by a mixture of arrogance and genius. Daniel Bruhl’s characterisation of Assange’s second-in-command Berg is also commendable, capturing his docility and blind faith in a manner that makes him sympathetic. The cast is full of talented actors – Peter Capaldi, David Thewlis and Dan Stevens all make an appearance. But despite the prestigious cast, the film manages to fall slightly flat.
The Fifth Estate tackles a world “on the verge of a major international crisis”, looking at the Wikileaks revelation of corporate crime and government secrets – thus you couldn’t be blamed for assuming that it would be a highly dramatic thriller. You would, in fact, be mistaken. Too much screen time is spent on the personal betrayal of Berg by Assange, so the focus is rarely on the actual political fallout, thus the actual work of Wikileaks is brushed upon and then glossed over, giving the audience no room to make a moral judgement of the controversial organisation. The unfortunate effect of this is that The Fifth Estate fails to capture the edge of intense drama that the real situation held.
Possibly the greatest fault of The Fifth Estate is the apparent inability of the writer, singer and director Condon to pinpoint exactly what it is about. Two different angles clash together in one film – the film could be about Assange and his motivations, but then again, it could also be about the power Wikileaks held, and the continuing debate over political security and privacy. Unfortunately, being a two hour film, it is not structurally feasible for both angles to be fully explored and as a result each angle is only half explored. This creates a highly insubstantial air as relevant information is not expanded upon – we are given only fragments of Assange’s turbulent yet relevant childhood, and we see only flickers of the revolutionary work done by Wikileaks.
The film should have been a springboard for discussion, an ethical representation of whistle-blowers and a considered debate looking at both the corruptions of power, and the need for global security. However, it feels as if many of the topics that should have been tackled (especially the scale of the work done by Wikileaks) were given too little screen time, meaning that the controversial topic is approached too cautiously to captivate. Despite hosting a talented cast, Cordon’s film is one that leaves the viewer feeling disappointed due to a lack of dynamic energy, clear direction, relevant information and actual controversy.
2/5
Carla Tromans