Comment Archives: stories: Movies: Last 7 Days
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Gibney films Anna Ardin saying “I really didn’t want this to be in the papers."
Ardin was interviewed by a Stockholm policewoman between 11:30 and 12:20 on August 21, 2010. She spoke to the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet that same afternoon.
http://wikileaks.org/IMG/html/...
Here’s what former UK ambassador Craig Murray has to say:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/why-i-am-convinced-that-anna-ardin-is-a-liar/
Yet Gibney includes none of this.
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Fixed. Our apologies for the error.
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Rose,
Yes, Assange is in the Ecuadorian embassy in the U.K. I made a cut-and-paste error while moving some text around, and I sincerely apologize for the facutal error, and will request that it be corrected.
Arbed,
I am in no position to dispute the facts of Sweden's case against Assange. However, I do think that Gibney's depiction of it is quite slanted (partly because of his views on Assange, but mostly to try to counteract the demonization of the two female plaintiffs). I certainly welcome debate and additional information on this point, and any other relevant matters.
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Wikileaks has leaked a full annotated transcript of the film, with links to independent sources of evidence rebutting many of the claims made in the film. I think in fairness to your readers you should maybe update your article to include it at the bottom, to at least alert your readers that some things in Alex Gibney's film are disputed.
wikileaks.org/IMG/html/gibney-transcript.html
As an example, here's one Wikileaks note that deals with how Gibney treats the Swedish case:
wikileaks.org/IMG/html/gibney-transcript.html#2682
To my mind, this is one of the most egregious things Alex Gibney does in this movie. When he was challenged about why he chose to show a picture of a used-looking, torn condom from the police forensics file on screen but chose NOT to tell his viewers that forensics found there was no DNA on that condom, this is what he said (he was responding to a negative review of his film):
"There is some doubt as to what condom is pictured on screen, so it seemed pointless to add detail about dna."
Alex Gibney is lying. There is only ONE picture and only ONE condom in the police forensics report, and Gibney knows that full well if, as he claims, hes researched the Swedish case. So, yes, if Gibney shows a used-looking condom with a big rip in the top then that's the one that Assange supposedly deliberately ripped during sex and the fact it has no trace of any DNA on it not male, not female either is a very big deal indeed. A very big deal. And Gibney knows it. (What was submitted to the forensics lab from the other woman is only a FRAGMENT of a condom). There's no way that Alex Gibney can have missed this vital fact - the no-DNA result is just two pages away from the photo of the condom in the forensics report (on page 77 if anyone wants to go check for themselves. It's available on the internet). Another fact: the Swedish prosecutor received the lab report on 25 October 2010 - so she wrote out an Interpol Red Notice and an extradition warrant for Assange weeks later IN THE FULL KNOWLEDGE that one of the women (interviewed in disguise by Gibney) had handed in faked evidence to the police.
So much for Gibney's film being "balanced, fair and exhaustively researched". So fair in fact that he uses a 3D animation to reconstruct the alleged DNA-free "rapes". Disgusting.
Re: “Zack Snyder's Superman is a hollow Frankenstein's monster”
This is a horrid review! Mr. Wilson has a terrible opinion of a "sure to be" Blockbuster smash! Movies like this set the stage for the rest of the story. Batman Begins, had a similar plot to introduce the new spin on a iconic comic book character. (Look how well that franchise did!) Man of Steel is sure to do the same. Its reviews like this that validate the old saying, "Keep your opinions to yourself" Even though I am contradicting myself with the previous statement, this is merely a rebuttal to Wilson's review. It reminds me of the ignorance of critics. The "Hipsters" of Hollywood who take pride in hating everything and wear the douche crown proudly. Besides, opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks."
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Or is Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in Britain? Obviously you know all about it. Movie is fictional Propaganda anyway, and outdated.
Re: “Alex Gibney's WikiLeaks doc We Steal Secrets: a movie you probably shouldn't watch on a Verizon cellphone”
Okay, but I think it should be said, in Gibney's and in Ardin's defense (and in the spirit of general fairness) that WikiLeaks is going to publish a set of data that is quite slanted in its own right.