IMDb > "Secret State" (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"Secret State" More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 12 reviews in total 

22 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Excellent Channel 4 is back with a bang!

10/10
Author: robinirving18 from loughborough
30 November 2012

Absolutely loved this honestly refreshing to see channel 4 producing a great series with a phenomenal cast, Yes the plot is a bit far-fetched the point of television is escapism and this is gripping and renews hope that your vote counts. Great message and Gabriel Byrne leads this role fantastically. Anyone who goes away and watches this will only be disappointed by the lack of episodes. The series is very short and leaves you desperately wanting more and I really hope a second series is on the cards. For the cynics of the world such as guardian writers they really haven't seen the point of this series. This series really captures the viewers imagination and reminds of hope and that is brilliant.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Gripping and refreshing ! Must watch !

8/10
Author: pavanratnaker from Manchester, England
27 December 2012

Loved this series from the first episode. The plot is superb and the story draws you in beautifully and keeps you wanting more hence the writer deserves the highest accolade. The cast is perfect and do a stellar job. The direction is fabulous too as no thriller can do with sloppy work. Only negative is that it ends too soon, it deserved at least 10 episodes. Thats one view point, other view point says that maybe it was exciting because it was a short series. Hopefully we'll have a longer series 2. Kudos to Channel 4 for this one. So political thrillers are back and back with a bang and this one matches the era we live in.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Enjoyable, clichéd, far-fetched, thought provoking

6/10
Author: antony-1 from UK
24 December 2012

As my summary suggests, this was a bit of a mixed bag.

The show is by no means perfect. It plays to some very old stereotypes in these situations... that everyone is very posh, in it for themselves, that women have to be aggressive and man-like. The moustache-twirling is used to very high degrees.

It of course also takes very broad and simplistic positions on many topics, as it is only a four episode series.

But at its core is an interesting mystery/political thriller, and a good mix of dynamics between government, big business and the banks. Gabriel Byrne is great and distracts from some of the narrative issues well, and delivers West Wing–like speeches at times, and supporting actors such as Ruth Negga provide good turns even if their roles are limited.

One review commented that it was made for stupid 14 year olds, which is the classic way of putting down others by saying if you like it you are clearly a stupid child. However, that reviewer takes things far too seriously. Commenting that in a national tragedy a deputy prime minister wouldn't waste his time going to speak to local residents just shows that he was looking for issues within the first five minutes of the show.

If you crave reality, or accuracy to minute detail, then this show isn't for you. It's fiction at the end of the day. Realistic it isn't, but it does give food for thought and is an entertaining mini series.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

"You get to the top and then you find out that it's only the middle."

9/10
Author: robert-temple-1 from United Kingdom
3 November 2013

This is a superb British TV thriller series. It is the second series based upon a novel written by Chris Mullin, formerly a Member of Parliament and a Government minister, who is a member of the Labour Party. The novel was called A VERY British COUP and it came out in 1982 and was originally made into a TV series in 1988. This new series bears little resemblance to the old. The new series stars Gabriel Byrne, an excellent choice, for his face now that it is older looks like something discerned in the shadows of a Rembrandt painting, and just looking at him creates a brooding and mysterious atmosphere. He doesn't speak that much, but thinks a lot, which makes the whole series even more ominous. When he becomes Prime Minister, he looks so gloomy that one wants to console him for his career success. Rupert Graves is so oily, treacherous, deceptive, and cunning, as a political villain who is a scheming Chancellor of the Exchequer determined to move next door to Number Ten, that he makes the flesh creep. The series was produced and directed by Ed Fraiman, who lives in California, graduated from the Polish Film School, and directs British and American TV series, so is clearly a cosmopolitan character. He has done a brilliant job of this one. In between all those different countries, one wonders how he came to know modern Britain so well. The pace and the tone are perfect. A great deal of the credit for this series working so superbly must go to Robert Jones, who wrote the scripts. The story of the series has been updated so as to be entirely relevant to the present day. One of the villainous organisations in the tale is a bank called Royal Caledonia Bank, which is described as being 88% owned by the British taxpayer because of a bailout. For those who don't know, Caledonia is a name for Scotland. This is therefore apparently a transparent disguise for the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), which is 84% owned by the British taxpayer. The story's attack on the banksters can't get more specific than that while still avoiding a libel action. The Chairman of the bank repeatedly sneers smugly at the Prime Minister and lets him know in no uncertain terms that he is a mere nobody, and it is the banks who are in charge of all the governments. When Byrne protests that the British Government owns the bank, the bankster brazenly says he can move the headquarters offshore at any time. It would be difficult to find a single informed person in Britain today who would find these scenes in any way unrealistic, as it is so obvious by now that the banks are in charge and the politicians really are mere nobodies, that not even an eyebrow is raised anymore when this comes up. The international bank bailouts are merely gigantic transfers of public funds into the private hands of an elite international group of crooks, and it takes a pretty stupid person not to see that by now. When it was revealed that the international banks were conspiring to fix the LIBOR rate, why was no one surprised? After all, it only affected a few trillion dollars worth of transactions a year, and what is a few trillion dollars between bankster friends? It seems that there is no politician willing to stop any of these abuses, because at the least he would lose his position, and at worst he might have 'an accident'. And in any case, many of the politicians are personally benefiting financially from being cooperative, especially when they have safely retired and settled comfortably into the pocket of some bank who needs their 'advice'. What famous grinning person is it who is paid £2 million a year for 'advising' a major bank? Can you guess? Try really hard. So the series addresses these issues, and does so in a bare-knuckled assault on the massive and overwhelming corruption in our public life. As Byrne sadly remarks, when reminded that he is the Prime Minister: 'You get to the top and then you find out it's only the middle.'

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Enjoyable if a little far fetched

8/10
Author: Oneillmike from United Kingdom
29 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Good cast and exciting plot. I think that in order to raise the excitement and make Tom Dawkins more vulnerable they gave him no friends or allies at all. It seems he had no one in the intelligence or military services that he could trust and was constantly fed bad or no information. He was very isolated and this was not really believable, as was his inability to protect the GCHQ girl who was helping him. I thought he was Prime Minister ! Having made those criticisms I was entertained and I thought Byrne was excellent as was the supporting cast. Nice to see Stephen Dillane on the box again. The good guy lost so any chance of a follow up series ?

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

A Decent drama

6/10
Author: samuel dylan from Ireland
2 December 2012

A good drama but A little confused and Hurried.

I was hoping for the story to actually go somewhere but i was disappointed.

Its good but too short and deserves a full series and story development.

But definite Kudos for Gabriel Byrnes dramatic performance. He really carried it along.

I enjoyed it but wanted more, it leaves you wanting the story to properly finish, and for "Byrnes" character to fulfill his heroic destiny.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Excellent political drama yet nobody heard of the series.

8/10
Author: ecopolst from Norway
25 December 2015

I found this series searching the web for political drama. Watching it is a very positive experience.

Filmed in 2011 or so the setting is UK in the present time. Lots of unfortunate events happen at one time. The 4 part series is about the political reaction to those events. Happenings and reactions are realistic enough to be relevant although cutting it fine on the dramatic side. Most relevant modern popular political topics are in the series, like terrorism, government surveillance, political infighting and moneys effect on politics.

Minuses are few, the biggest one being the series being way too short and compact :) Other minuses are ambiguities here and there and some minor connections between people and issues that seem a bit strange.

Acting is overall good. To me especially Gabriel Byrne playing the leading role does well.

In short this is must see if you like political drama.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Much better than expected

10/10
Author: Catalin Ignat from Timisoara, Romania
4 September 2014

This series starts a bit grim. First half hour is a dark, bit boring, but most - is confusing for one having no clue about the novel. But boy, was I happy to stick around.

Show combines edgy topics about politics, personal freedom and choices with a high technology setup and master craft of British drama. Apart from first half of hour, it is captivating. Multiple facets, many people acting by their best judgement, and above all, a hero. Byrne is doing a great job, yet the character could have been better composed. It is difficult to get emotionally attached to it, but is sure easy to get attached to its actions.

Strongly recommended. Yet be warned, this comes from a guy who considered Downton Abbey the best show ever. Until now.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Shallow, predictable

4/10
Author: sanyi008 from Hungary
9 December 2015

If you are a huge fan of conspiracy theories, don't know nothing about politics (but like to think it's all about evil powers in the background) you will love this, as there are good dialogues, better actors, and altogether the series don't lack quality till it comes to the story. But if you have seen so much as a season from West Wing (not to mention more complex series like The Wire, House of Cards, etc.) the story will seem something like a high school student's take on politics, painfully naive, incredibly predictable and every character is shallow beyond the point where they could be saved by the actors. Don't waste your time.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Load of old tosh

Author: Flossie Cat from United Kingdom
11 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Back in 1987 Channel 4 led the UK in cutting edge dramas.

Last week we got episode one of "Secret State", allegedly 'loosely' based Alan Plater's superb adaptation of Chris Mullin's book "A Very British Coup". What a difference.

The premise was good, a Bhopal style disaster in Teeside, the casting included some of Britain's finest talent, and the production values were very good.

All this was completely wasted by a script that was puerile, full of clichéd soundbites, and by lousy directing and a cast of stock characters that would have made it into Michael Green's "The Art of Coarse Acting". We had a gonad crunching ambitious female politician, a smarmy yuppie-type ambitious politician, a drunken journo/ex-spook who knows where the metaphorical and possibly literal bodies are buried, and a young feisty journo who pops up with information nobody else has ever heard of.

Has Mr Jones never watched "Yes Minister" or "The Thick of It"?

His opening scenario was ludicrous. In real life the deputy PM would not be sitting in a local school hall being harangued by angry residents. That thankless task would have gone to some junior underling at the Energy Department.

Nor does a pathologist have the power to withhold bodies from being released for burial, that authority lies with the Coroner. If a pathologist had serious concerns about unexplained toxins in body tissue s/he would have consulted their colleagues in the Home Office. Nor would said pathologist be telephoning the Deputy PM as if that individual was the only person with authority in the entire governmental system.

Given the apparent assassination of the PM by a possible terrorist plot how did Ms Kane (alias Gina McKee) manage to get past security to speak to the Deputy PM at aforementioned PM's memorial service? Come to that, where WAS the security?

And why was the head of Intelligence doing her own surveillance work? Does she not have an entire government department dedicated solely for that purpose?

The whole thing seemed to be aimed at not very bright 14 year olds. Do the TV networks really think the viewing public is that dumb?

For shame Channel 4. You've exchanged your credibility for dumbed down broadcasting. You have the temerity to advertise dross like this as 'Drama' while your schedules are chock full of freak shows, crass talent shows, and the dregs of society being filmed in their 'natural habitat' in what passes for "reality" television.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Ratings Awards External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history