Having been familiar with the history of this subject, I can only be abjectly disappointed. First the good points- it was well acted and looked great. However, the actual facts of this story were largely ignored. The character of Philby was unrecognisable, the writer seemed determined to make him some kind of romantic "Hannay" type moralistic hero, which he was not. Where was Nicholas Elliott, a key, central figure in this drama? Why was Philby's second wife ignored? why all the homo-erotic scenes? Where was Philby's period in the wilderness and his utterly gob smacking press conference? I sense a leftist leaning writer at work here trying to fit in HIS story instead of the true compelling drama that originally unfolded. Bad and worthless.....
Review of Cambridge Spies
