'The Fifth Estate' tries too hard to tell the audience what to think of Julian Assange

'The Fifth Estate' stars Benedict Cumberbatch as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Frank Connor/Dreamworks Pictures/AP
'The Fifth Estate' stars Benedict Cumberbatch (r.) and Dan Stevens (l.).

Julian Assange is a movie waiting to happen and it’s happened twice, with Alex Gibney’s terrific documentary “We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks’’ and now Bill Condon’s “The Fifth Estate,” a jittery talkathon based primarily on the memoir of the WikiLeaks founder’s formerly trusted lieutenant, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, as well as a 2011 expose by British journalists David Leigh and Luke Harding.

The omnipresent Benedict Cumberbatch plays Assange, stringy white-gray hair flowing, and Daniel Brühl is Domscheit-Berg. Condon and his screenwriter Josh Singer don’t quite know what to make of this duo, perhaps because the men didn’t quite know what to make of each other, either.

Most often Assange comes across as a hubristic, tantrum-throwing egomaniac whose desire for justice and transparency takes second place to his avidity for celebrity. It’s a weirdly inventive performance in a movie that otherwise keeps telling us what to think about the man who unleashed the largest leak of official, un-redacted secrets in American history. “Tyrants of the world should beware,” says a Guardian writer (David Thewlis) about Assange at the end of the film. Would that it were that simple. Grade: C (Rated R for language and some violence.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.