Wikileaks: We Steal Secrets

Directed by Alex Gibney. Featuring Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, James Ball, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, Adrian Lamo, Michael Hayden. 130 mins

Alex Gibney is one of America’s most important documentary makers. Yet he has been consistently overshadowed by louder, crasser peers such as Michael Moore. Content to stay off-screen, with Gibney it’s his subjects, not him, who are the focus. He is the perfect filmmaker, therefore, to investigate WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and alleged whistleblower Bradley Manning.
Using interviews, transcripts and archived footage of Assange, Gibney combines a character-study with a bitingly intelligent examination of the importance of transparency in the modern world. He addresses the danger of ‘hero’ narratives and shows how becoming a political ‘personality’ can corrupt even the most committed idealists.
Just as Gibney depicts Obama knowingly overseeing war crimes, he shows Assange assuming some of the characteristics of those he despises, all in the name of the “greater good” – a process coined as “noble cause corruption”. We see Assange’s growing hubris and hypocrisy as he lies about WikiLeaks’ methods and use political tactics to denounce women who accused him of sexual assault.
He even disavows WikiLeaks employees who reveal “too much”, criticising their “disloyalty, insubordination and destabilisation in times of crises”. The language is directly from the Espionage Act of 1917.
Gibney is more sympathetic to Manning, whose intimate correspondence with hacker and ultimate betrayer Adrian Lamo reveals a deeply troubled young man, searching for recognition. This empathetic portrait is indicative of Gibney’s psychologically astute insight. Though opinionated, he understands the ethical nuance and complexity of both sides of the transparency debate, refusing to be seduced by individuals. There are no purely altruistic acts, and no unimpeachable heroes.
We Steal Secrets feels slightly premature given Manning’s continuing trial and the ongoing Edward Snowden situation. Nonetheless, it remains a gripping, and thought-provoking examination of one of this century’s most fascinating ethical dilemmas.