THE FIFTH ESTATE

UK/US, 2013, 128 minutes, Colour.
Benedict Cumberbatch, Daniel Bruehl, Morris Bleibtreu, Carice van Houten, Stanley Tucci, Laura Linney, David Thewlis, Dan Stevens, Peeta Capaldi, Anthony Mackie.
Directed by Bill Condon.

A film about Julian Assange. It is presumed that everybody knows who he is and what he has done.

Some key quotes from the film: “a mad prophet who needs boundaries”, “a manipulative asshole”, “a media empire that is accountable to no one”, and Assange himself says at one stage “I dangle at the edge of autism”. They are useful in helping the audience to assess Assange as a person, his personal relationships, his relationship with those who worked with him, his technical skills, the work of Wik iLeaks, and the changes in attitude from 2007 to 2009. There is also a mention of “ego”.

Already in 2012-2013, there were two films made about Assange. One was a television film, Underground, made in Australia by Robert Connolly, about Assange and his family life, and the initial hacking into official American sites. It ended when he was about 20. Then there was the extensive documentary by Alex Gibney, We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wiki Leaks. The Fifth Estate runs parallel to the Gibney documentary in its presentation of Assange.

The film opens in 2009 with the release of extensive documents which embarrassed many governments around the world, especially the United States, but also officials in such countries as Kenya, with stories of corruption and killings. The film then moves back to 2007, Assange and the beginnings of Wik iLeaks, his attempts to make his work public, his finding Daniel Schmitt (in fact, Daniel Berg) who shared his idealism, worked constantly with him at great personal cost and financial cost in the early years of Wik iLeaks.

Benedict Cumberbatch bears a significant resemblance to Assange and is made up accordingly, especially his white hair, which he makes something of in passing but which emerges as something the children in the sect to which he belonged as a child had to do. He is imperious in his manner, brooking no position opposition. He severely lacks interpersonal skills, riding roughshod over people in word and manner. But he does persuade people to share his vision, to become volunteers, to staff the sites, to protect them, and so not reveal sources for Wiki Leaks and the whistleblowing.

Daniel Bruehl is very good as Schmitt, serving as Assange’s anchor and checking fact and fiction. Moritz Bleibtreu is Marcus, friend of Schmitt, a hacking expert who is able to protect Wiki Leaks. However, it is well known that Assange fell out with Schmitt, dismissing him, accusing him of disloyalty. Then, it was his Schmitt’s decision, along with his hacking friend, to close down Wiki Leaks.

Audiences will be on side with Assange in the early years, especially as he reveals the conspiracies and atrocities in Kenya, and, especially, as he reveals the footage of helicopter pilots in Iraq gunning down innocent civilians as well as a Reuters correspondent. This brings him to the notice of the American State Department and the CIA, officials in the film played by Stanley Tucci, Laura Linney, Anthony Mackie.

With the extraordinary documents coming through, thousands of them, about American activity in Afghanistan, supplied by Bradley Manning who is briefly seen in newspaper photographs in the film, the newspapers become involved, especially Germany’s Der Speigel, the United States New York Times, the British Guardian.

This brings to a head the conflict with some of Assange’s friends and himself, his principle of publishing everything, while others urged a redaction of the documents, removing personal names for the safety of informers. There is a scene to illustrate this with a contact from Libya whose name is published and who has to escape to Egypt and to the US with his family.

The film raises issues of ethics in publication, the need for truth, for honest expression, but with more nuances than Assange wants to think about. This brings him into conflict, not only with governments, but with some of the editors of the newspapers. He is warned that there will be publicity against him, all kinds of rumours circulated, and audiences are familiar with the accusations of sexual misconduct in Sweden.

The film ends with some discussion by the British about Assange, his ambitions, and the availability of all news instantly online, the new fifth estate. This is a film which will divide audiences, upset those who favour Assange (and this was true of Assange himself who contacted Benedict Cumberbatch urging him not to do the film) and those who might have favoured him initially but who, like his associates, found him to autocratic, an extraordinary controller of every aspect of Wiki Leaks, and, one is tempted to use the word, a narcissist.

But, in his work is in the public domain, he is a celebrity-figure of his own making, a crusader who did a lot of good, and ambitious man who, as the film ends, and at the time of the film’s release, is still resident in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. While the story will be continued, it has been stalled a long time inside that embassy.

1. The meaning of the title? The explanation, new media, communication, accountability – to know one?

2. Audience knowledge of Julian Assange? Of Wiki Leaks? Stances on the principles, the experience of Wiki Leaks, the consequences?

3. The perspective of the films writers and director? The acceptance of Assange? Appreciation of his work? His revelations? Protecting whistleblowers? Time passing, his methods, the material coming in, becoming more autocratic? His reliance on Daniel? The information from Bradley Manning? His decisions about the Afghanistan documentation, publishing the truth at all cost, a principal? Node nuances in his approach to documents? The paranoid touch or not? The film is based on books critical of Assange

4. the style of the film, places and dates? Editing, pace? A more contemporary style of filmmaking?

5. The events of 2009, the revelations, Daniel and his role, others present, the presentations, the acclaim, the American response, President Obama and Hillary Clinton?

6. The return to 2007, Assange present, imperious, getting to 30 minutes in the hall, the few listening, the technicians working, his talking over them? The audience admiring him?

7. The explanations of his background, his family and his mother, not meeting his birth father till later, their presence in the cult, the effect on him, his white hair and the children having to death dye their hair white, a feeling of oppression, escape? On the run? His relationships, having a child? His hacking in Melbourne, his associates, being in the courts? The film filling in this background?

8. Daniel, a serious man, his beliefs, a realist, his providing funds? His loyalty to Assange, his relationship with hunger? Assange and his will and his whims?

9. Daniel and his friendship with the hacker, the hackers interest, skills? Assigned Assange not interested in him, his working with Daniel, blocking hacking, his worries?

10. Assange and his whims of picking associates, the woman, who work, attending on him? The young man? Hiring and firing?

11. Assange and his personality, the mad prophet, the manipulative acyl, his comments about autism and the effect on his obsessions, skills, lack of people skills, wanting the truth? His bluntness? Is going to Daniel’s family and walking out on them? Pleasant when he needed to be, the scenes of him dancing and the clubs, the background of the accusations against him about Sweden? His wanting total command, giving orders?

12. The information, on the site? The Kenya stories, corruption, the assassinations, his visits, been personally affected?

13. Bradley Manning, the footage of the attack in Iraq, the helicopter pilots and their shooting the Reuters journalist, the innocent father helping? People’s reaction to this footage?

14. The Afghanistan documents, thousands of them, the inability to sift through them all? Daniel and his perspective? Assange in his perspective? The contact with the journalists, with debt Speigel, with the New York Times, with the Guardian?

15. The personalities at the Guardian, the meetings with Assange, with Daniel, the speeches in Iceland, the acclaim for the revelations about the banks Western Mark? Daniel and his getting the phone message, coming immediately?

16. The negotiations at the Guardian, four – Beagle, for the New York Times, the editor of the Guardian, considerations, nuances, the naming of names? The dangers? Cautions?

17. The American State Department, the officials, Sarah Shaw and her concern, the contact with the agent from Libya, getting out of Libya with his family? Boswell and his attitude? Sam Coulson and his warnings? The role of the CIA? Sarah Shaw losing her job?

18. The building to the crisis, the meetings at the Guardian, the effect on each personality?

19. Assange and his falling out with Daniel, dismissing him? Daniel and his fears, with the hacker, the decision to close down the site? The effect on Assange as he was giving his speech? His anger?

20. Assange, the warning that there would be a whispering campaign against him, the Swedish accusations, is finally going to the Ecuadorian embassy? His remaining there?

21. The final interview with Assange, his comments, even about the attitude of the film? The story continuing?