MI-5 (2015) User Reviews

Commercialism hits everything in the end

[kennedyaaron · 5/10 · 20 November 2015]

I am a humongous fan of the Spooks TV series (MI5 to our American friends) and really got my hopes up when I found out a feature film was coming out as a follow up to the ending of series 10, which did itself need a lot of redeeming.

If you're a fan of gritty British films, and prefer Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy over your run-of-the-mill bullet fest, this film could well be for you. Strong cinematography throughout, and it's clear that this is written - in a way - to honor Spooks and keep it alive, but little things like the set design of the new Grid just ruin the atmosphere that the old Spooks stayed strict to, for a reason. That however was nowhere near as bad as the films "Main" characters. I say "Main" because there weren't really any, just a group of monotone bores, a youthful touch from Kit Harrington (the writer personifies his idea of revitalizing the show) and Peter Firth, stretching his ability to always be the rock of the team to the limit by making him the only life in the movie.

It's amazing that throughout the first 6, maybe 7 series of Spooks, every spectator felt like they were watching a 2 hour film squeezed into an hour slot. Spooks:The Greater Good feels like a 50 minute TV show stretched into 104 minutes, without any added storyline or plot developments.

If you've never watched Spooks, you're mad and you're missing out, but watch this film first. You'll probably like it, it's confident in its approach, strictly realistic and contains a fantastic Peter Firth performance. But once you've done that, go back to Series 1 of Spooks and watch the whole thing. The film won't be so annoying to you that way.

"MI-5" is no "Mission: Impossible 5", but it holds its own in 2015's crop of spy and espionage movies.

[dave-mcclain · 7/10 · 13 December 2015]

When I was buying my ticket to "MI-5" (R, 1:44), the cashier asked me if I knew that this movie was not "Mission: Impossible 5". I said that I did, and we briefly spoke about the confusion caused by the title of the movie that I was about to see. As if on cue, as I walked away, I heard the woman who had just come to the box office request a ticket for "Mission: Impossible 5". She decided to choose another movie.

Her confusion is understandable. Just a few months before the British spy thriller "MI-5" hit American theaters, "Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation" (sometimes referred to as "M:I-5") was playing widely in the U.S. Lest anyone think that "MI-5" is trying to ride the coat tails of "M:I-5", I should mention that the former is a cinematic continuation of the 2002-2011 British TV series of the same name. And, ironically enough, the jump that "MI-5" made to the big screen mirrors that of "Mission: Impossible" in which the first of the movies has the hero of the TV series going rogue. If all that is too confusing, maybe this will help: The British series is called "MI-5" in the U.S., but was titled "Spooks" in the U.K. (after the common nickname for spies around the world) and the film version is known overseas as "Spooks: The Greater Good". I hope that clears up any confusion, and I'll just talk about the British film from here on in.

"Spooks: The Greater Good" / "MI-5" takes its name from the legendary British Secret Service which is responsible for counter-terrorism and counter-espionage as it works to protect British governmental and economic interests. When Adem Qasim (Elyes Gabel), the CIA's most wanted terrorist, escapes British custody while being transported to American agents, Harry Pearce (Peter Firth), head of MI-5's counter-terrorism department (Section D), is blamed. With "MI-5" facing an existential crisis and trying to save face after Qasim's escape, the organization pressures Pearce to resign. Instead, he disappears.

Former MI-5 agent, Will Holloway (Kit Harrington), who was only with the agency for a year, is brought in to help find Pearce. Holloway's father used to work with Pearce. MI-5 agents Geraldine Maltby (Jennifer Ehle) and Mace (Tim McInnerny) – with their boss, Francis Warrender (David Harewood) backing them up – tell Halloway that Pearce has more information about Halloway's father's death in the field than the young man had previously known. Halloway is reluctant because Pearce was the one responsible for Halloway's dismissal from MI-5 years before, but he really wants to get the whole story behind his father's death, so he sets out to find Pearce.

Holloway uses some of his MI-5 skills to catch up to Pearce in Berlin, but gets much more than he bargained for. Before Pearce tells Holloway anything else about his father, Pearce enlists Holloway to help him in his self-assigned one-man mission to find a traitor within MI-5. Holloway doesn't like or trust Pearce, especially when he finds out Pearce has been in contact with Qasim, but his encounters with another agent (Tuppence Middleton) lead Holloway to believe that Pearce is right about the traitor within their organization. The rest of the film involves a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse in which Pearce works Qasim to discover the traitor's identity and Holloway works desperately to prevent a terrorist attack on London.

"MI-5" / "Spooks: The Greater Good" effectively mixes influences from the "Mission: Impossible" movies and TV shows like "Homeland" and "24", but isn't quite as good. Some of the film's plot points feel contrived, but the main story is interesting and keeps the audience guessing. The script contains great lines ("You can do good or you can do well. Sooner or later they make you choose.") as it delves into the complicated world of counter-terrorism in the 21st century and explores the difficult decisions we must make to survive in that world. Gabel isn't quite menacing enough as the villain, but Firth brings forward his character from the TV show wonderfully, while Harrington is great in this modern "Game of Thrones". It's too bad that woman chose not to see "MI-5". She missed a very entertaining movie. "B+"

Decent spy-thriller with OK action and OK story - nothing more, nothing less.

[Finfrosk86 · 6/10 · 21 September 2015]

This movie was pretty much how I expected.

It's exciting enough, has some decent action. Some twists and turns. An older agent, a younger agent. Relatively standard stuff, really.

It's a thriller with some action sprinkled in. The action is alright, not incredible, but satisfactory. For a spy-movie it's a little more "realistic" than some of it's more action-oriented counterparts, and not too over the top. But the action isn't cheap-looking. There are bullet holes, blank-firing guns, some destruction.

Had this movie been a little longer, it could have been one of those movies that gets split up into shorter episodes and sent on TV.

Kit Harington is pretty good, the acting overall is good. You won't remember this for eternity, but if you like spy/agent-stuff, you'll have an alright time.

Frequently dull and derivative spy romp.

[lnvicta · 6/10 · 21 September 2016]

Action is a genre that hinges solely on entertainment value. Even if it's a blatantly dumb plot and objectively not that great, something like Machete or Bullet to the Head, you can still have fun watching it and appreciate it for its pure insanity. MI-5 lies on the opposite side of the action spectrum. It tries to be serious and dark and much smarter than it actually is. This sucks the atmosphere dry and leaves you with a bland, brooding, and tasteless thriller with little to no thrills.

The movie starts off with a criminal escort gone wrong and develops into an espionage mission that can only be done by a specific agent who was kicked off the force, Will Holloway played by Kit Harrington. I can't fault any of the actors here because these characters are paper thin. They're just either giving orders or receiving orders or having secrets meetings or reciting some other form of lifeless expository dialogue for a majority of the movie. There's no chemistry between anyone, they have no development whatsoever. It just doesn't look like anyone is having fun. And with a script like that, how can you blame them.

There is a sleek, glossy feel about MI-5, which is one of the few positive things about it. Kit Harrington is a badass in general and it's nice to see him in a modern action setting. Unfortunately, the action in this movie is so scarce and underwhelming, it's hard to even call it an action movie. Instead of exciting action sequences, we're left with cliché double-crosses and triple-crosses and back stabs that no one cares about because none of the characters are engaging in the first place.

MI-5 is kind of like background music. It's not gripping and won't get your adrenaline pumping, but it's quite harmless to have on. It's just completely run-of-the-mill, linear storytelling that takes a page out of every spy book and streamlines it all into a two hour film. Kit Harrington can certainly be an action star, but this is not the proper vehicle to showcase his talents. MI-5 is a miss.

Intelligent, British and Understated

[adam-998-391675 · 7/10 · 13 May 2015]

For those who have billed this as an answer to Mission Impossible or The Bourne series... they are setting this up for a fall. It is not. But I don't think that has ever been the intention.

If you cut all of the stereotypical American patriotism and bravado, add a more intelligent approach (one too intricate for that US market). You're about there.

Although you won't be seeing Kit Harrington drop forty feet on a rope, catch a bead of sweat in slow motion, before it hits the floor sensors. You will see a nod to Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and the internal corruption of the British Secret Service. Its well put together, takes you one way and then spins you 180.

Its a stimulating spy film, which engages the audience to actually have a think while watching it. As good as the M.I and Bourne franchises are, this is all together different. I have never seen Spooks on BBC, but this has pushed me to take a look at what I've been missing out on.

I unfairly went in with a low expectation of this film, and was pleasantly surprised.

A good watch, and one I wouldn't turn anyone away from. Though it does make you think... what am I missing out on, what do the public not find out about, how good are the MI5?

A solid spin off from the TV series

[Tweekums · 7/10 · 15 May 2016]

This film, a spin off from the BBC series 'Spooks' opens with prisoner Adem Qasim being sprung from MI5 custody. This is a major embarrassment for the service as Qasim is a terrorist at the very top of the CIA's most wanted list and he was being transferred to them at the time. Somebody must take the blame and that somebody is director Harry Pierce. Now outside the service, Harry is convinced that somebody within MI5 helped Qasim escaped and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uncover the traitor. Meanwhile MI5 calls in former agent Will Holloway in order to find Harry and discover what he is up to. They meet and Will has to decide whether he trusts Harry or those who believe he could have gone rogue… a question he must continually ask himself until the inevitable final confrontation.

Often films that are based on TV series feel like an extended episode where the plot is stretched to fill the extra time and rely on the viewer being familiar with all of the characters… thankfully this isn't the case here. It doesn't feel televisual and anybody should be able to figure out what everybody's role is without seeing any of the series… that said I expect fans of the series will enjoy it a little more just because it gives them a chance to enter the world of 'Spooks' again. The plot is fun if more than a little unlikely. There is plenty of solid action and for much of the time it is hard to know who Harry and Will can trust. Peter Firth does a fine job as Harry and Kit Harington, best known as Jon Snow from 'Game of Thrones', makes a great addition to the cast as Will. As the story progresses the tension increases rapidly as Qasim stages one terrorist outrage before promising a much larger atrocity. Overall I found this to be a decent spy thriller; it isn't in the league of Bond or Mission Impossible but it is still worth watching if you are a fan of the genre.

Better than expected

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 3 September 2017]

SPOOKS: THE GREATER GOOD is a big screen spin-off for the long-running British TV series about the adventures of agents working on behalf of MI-5. Peter Firth returns as the inimitable Harry and gets plenty of screen time, which fans will enjoy. The film also sticks closely to its small-screen origins and feels like an expanded TV episode throughout. Plot-wise, it's about the hunt for an Islamic terrorist played by the reliable Elyes Gabel, and similar to the Sean Bean flick CLEANSKIN, but better.

The plot twists are surprising at times and the 'hunt the mole' plot is well-utilised. I'm a big fan of GAME OF THRONES, so seeing Kit Harington as the lead was fun for me, although slightly jarring what with him dressed in modern attire and all. Tuppence Middleton is also less irritating than she was in the ill-advised LADY VANISHES remake. Overall, I enjoyed this film, although I'll readily admit that it's no classic.

Ghost script protocol

[deastman_uk · 5/10 · 10 May 2015]

For those who watched the series, this is quite satisfying - but not truly as a film.

Films like these are just a long set of tropes hopefully connected by enough narrative to get you by. The cinematography was pretty good - scenes of London all very well taken. Superior to the TV show.

But the competition in the cinema is not other TV shows, but other films. There are so many spy / action films that the action has to come at a higher standard whatever the intellectual potential of the show.

And this was the problem - much of the direction wasn't quite good enough to carry the action, there wasn't quite enough action and the plot itself was just a crafty rework of the TV show. Including the ridiculous 'breaking into MI5' nonsense.

Needed higher quality direction, more action, and a fresh plot. Please.

disappointing film based on one of my favorite TV shows of all time

[blanche-2 · 6/10 · 18 November 2015]

"MI-5: The Greater Good" is an extension of the TV series "MI-5" that starred Peter Firth and dozens of other wonderful people. What made the show so great was that, for me anyway, the plots were never convoluted, you never knew if one of your favorite cast members were going to be killed, and the suspense in some situations was almost too much to bear sometimes. It was always exciting, intriguing, and you cared about the people who worked at MI-5.

The film stars Peter Firth, and I don't believe any of the other originals were present. Firth plays Harry Pearce, the head of the MI-5 Counter-terrorism division who, at the end of the long series, lost the love of his life, Ruth, to whom he had never really committed. Always dedicated to his work, he was never able to let it go.

Now, the CIA's most wanted terrorist is en route to be turned over to them when he escapes, thanks to a motorbike assault. As someone pointed out here, right away the film is in trouble. You can't be transporting the CIA's most wanted terrorist with no security riding around it.

Harry Pearce is blamed for the escape, as he disappears right after it happens.

MI-5 brings in a former agent, Will Holloway to help find Harry, as he was Harry's protégé. Harry believes there is a traitor within MI5, and he asks Will to help him find the mole.

The acting was uniformly excellent, with Pearce, Kit Harrington as Will, Lara Pulver as Erin, Jennifer Ehle as Geraldine, and Elyes Gabel as Qasim.

The movie just did not hold one's interest - it didn't move along at the kind of pace a film like this needs, and it felt like it didn't hang together.

Nevertheless, if they put out more films from the series, I'd watch every one. If you're a fan of MI-5 or Spooks, you will check this out regardless of the review, just as I would.

Spy Game

[Prismark10 · 5/10 · 14 September 2015]

Spooks was undoubtedly a riveting espionage drama series for the BBC which never shied away from killing off some of its key cast members. Now four years after its final episode Spooks returns as a feature film for the cinema.

Nothing unusual about this move. I remember in the 1970s the TV show The Sweeney spawned several films for the cinema with the television cast reprising their roles.

With Spooks not many of the television series cast remained so Harry Pearce (Peter Firth) is central to the plot and he is joined here by new cast member Kit Harington who plays a former agent brought in to flush out Harry after a wanted terrorist escapes.

Of course in the cinema this film will compete with Mission Impossible, James Bond and Jason Bourne but with a lower budget and lower wattage stars.

Mission Impossible was a television show re-tooled for the cinema backed by Tom Cruise and the off centre talents of Brian De Palma. Spooks has one of the show's director back for the film but its a plodding style without the flair, style and pacing of the television show. In fact I found it pedestrian despite some international location filming and bigger budget.

The escape part of Qasim looked silly in the first place. A wanted terrorist is being transported and they are stuck in traffic with no police sirens anywhere to shift them all.

The film was decent enough but not a cinematic event. I watched it closely mainly because my brother was an Extra in the film, never spotted him though.

Something Old, Something New

[adamhoulding · 8/10 · 14 May 2015]

For the uninitiated, 'Spooks' (or MI5 as the Yanks say) was a British television show centered around MI5 spies (nicknamed Spooks and essentially the British NSA). Be under no illusions: this doesn't have blind patriotism, missing super-weapons or a suave chiseled hero. And while Kit Harington is the handsome lead star, the actual star is none other than long-time veteran Peter Firth.

Ah Peter Firth. Never has a older man with wrinkles and a receding hairline been so bad-ass. Firth is the blend of George Smiley and Jack Bauer, a very British and Un-Hollywood-y figure. And that's the key to The Greater Good's success: it feels fresh and oh so British that it may confuse the Yank audience expecting car chases and epic showdowns. Even the Arabic villain is sympathetic, never cartoonish or monologuing, and similar in part to Anwar al- Awlaki. Even a slightly simple Kit Harington fits perfectly in the thrilling spy jigsaw, being a disgraced case officer slightly too soft for such a cold world.

And yes, case officer. Not secret agent, as one is completely disposable and the other uses such people to achieve, yes, the Greater Good. Bond would not last in this world, and Bauer would make melodrama of decisions. Pierce would be break it down to cruel ugly arithmetic, one dies while two lives. As modern spy-craft goes, this is the most realistic to hit the big screen yet.

If you haven't seen the television series, this is a solid British spy movie with a thrilling storyline. If you have, some sweet Easter eggs will leave you smiling with secret glee. This feels like not a television movie but a gritty British film worthy of recognition. The actors, directing, setting compliment each other perfectly. It feels like going to a fancy restaurant and eating the greatest dish of Bangers and Mash. Simply thrilling and unafraid to let the audience think, this is a solid movie experience.

This is destined to have a sequel. If not, it at least is a beautiful little gem in a pile of stones.

Spies on the Run

[kirbylee70-599-526179 · 7/10 · 9 May 2016]

I went in watching the movie this movie having no concept of the series on which it was based, SPOOKS, that ran from 2002-11 in Britain. The good news is that you don't have to be aware of that series or its characters. This film picks up with at least one but gives you enough information to stand on its own.

Under Intelligence Chief Harry Pearce (Peter Firth) terrorist Adam Qasim (Elyes Gabel) is being transferred into the custody of the CIA when the convoy is attacked. Rather than jeopardize lives in the process Pearce tells his team to stand down and Qasim escapes. As if that weren't enough, Pearce disappears shortly thereafter making it seem as if he was involved.

Rather than be left with egg on their face MI-5 calls in ex-agent Will Holloway (Kit Harrington) to locate and take down Pearce. As a protégé to the now missing Pearce, MI-5 feels that he will know better than anyone how to find him. With a grudge against Pearce as well, since it was he who took him out of MI-5, Will has every reason in the world to want to take on the task.

The two eventually meet early on and Will discovers there was a reason for Pearce' disappearance. Pearce has discovered there is a mole in MI-5, an operative who seems more than happy to create a reason to bring the entire group down. While the risk Pearce took in the release of a known terrorist was high, the chance of ferreting out the mole was worth it to him. Now he must convince Will to help him discover who that person is.

Playing against MI-5 while making it seem that he is indeed looking for Pearce is not an easy task but Will is up for it. As he tracks down the suspects and works to find the traitor, Pearce lends a hand when and where he can. It eventually leads to a showdown with Qasim who is little more than a pawn being used by the mole. As Qasim plans a massive siege on the city of London with bombs planted in various locations, the final discovery is made as to the identity of the mole.

The movie works well on many levels. Rather than the suave and always calm Bond style of spy we're used to seeing from England we here have a disheveled looking spy in the form of Will who doesn't know all, isn't equipped with the "toys" Bond has and yet is just as if not more capable to handle most situations. Will is what you would expect a real spy to be like and Pearce as his mentor is a character that knows how to deal with the duplicitous nature of the job.

Firth is comfortable in the role of Pearce as he well should be having played the part in the series. He's a spy who's gotten older, seen far too much and while perhaps weary of the tasks at hand is always willing to do his all for Queen and country. Harrington does a great job here as Will. Known mostly for his work on GAME OF THRONES it's nice to see him in something else and able to prove he's more than just worth being regarded for that alone.

On the whole this was a fun movie to watch, a more thought provoking spy film than many and one that I would love to see carry on with sequels though I'm guessing it won't happen unfortunately. Then again after the initial rise of the Bond films who would have thought we'd see sequels to movies like THE IPCRESS FILES back in the day. This one is worth watching.

Far from good

[khan_rado · 5/10 · 9 December 2015]

Unlike many other films categorised as spy thrillers who are filled with action scenes and care less about the spying aspect this one is just the opposite. The pure investigation scenes surpass the action ones. So, you would think you have a fine mind-tickling thriller that makes questions pop up in your head to ponder over? But think again.

The film is boring and I found myself easily distracted. It's not until the last half an hour that it begins to hold attention well and becomes interesting. It's supposed to present serious events but the whole feel is not serious enough. Even the most dramatic scenes doesn't deliver adrenalin or any kind of feeling. The film makes progress at a normal pace but it doesn't try to lure you into its story. Instead, it shows you moving pictures and occupies your mind with its dialogue which, frankly, is nothing amazing.

There is no character transition and, sadly, few of the actors can deliver emotions on their faces properly. The characters are not shaped well, and that is especially noticeable with Qasim who plays more the bad guy, rather than an actual leader. The whole film follows the formula of good guys versus bad guys which shows simple approach in storytelling.

Okay, Who's The Canary?

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 14 April 2017]

This is one intricate plot about the British agency, MI-5, trying to stop terrorists from blowing up Oxford Circle and murdering everybody at the top of MI-5. One unusual twist is that the Americans aren't exactly the good guys. The terrorist leader (no mention of religious fundamentalism) has an American accent. Worse, MI-5 is losing its luster and they have reason to believe that they will somehow be absorbed into the American CIA.

Actually, the Brits field three or four fine intelligence agencies, including the equivalents of the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA. MI-5 is the equivalent of one of them but I forget which. In any case, the US often gets tips and evidence from the Brits. As I write this, it's just been alleged that the Brits learned about various connections between one of our presidential campaigns and Russian intelligence/business/government contacts. In Russia, under Putin, the social spheres are pretty much indistinguishable.

I missed the first five or ten minutes and it must have been a crippling mistake because there were times I felt like Kier Dullea going through the Stargate episode in "2001." In one scene, for instance, a young woman has apparently betrayed someone or committed some other peccadillo and when asked why, she replies, "I just did what they told me to." I didn't know who "they" were. The plot is impossible to describe in detail because there are so many details.

It's an unusual picture of London that we're presented with. It's changed a good deal since I was last there. It's all modernized now, or at least those parts of the city we see in the film. Swirling balconies and streamlined buildings and -- surprise -- it's often sunny. Even Waterloo Bridge looks clean and modern. The cleanliness of the streets, the sleekness of the mass transport, puts American facilities to shame.

The performances are fine. Peter Firth, one of the many important players, acts broody and looks like a half-wrecked Anthony Hopkins coming down from battery acid. There is no beautiful gal being fought over. The women, as well as the men, are more or less ordinary. Most outstanding PRESENCE is the noble and thoroughly committed head of MI-5, Tim McInnerny. You have never seen such a somatotype. His features are all squished together, as in a cartoon, and his neck seems about two feet long and bent forward at an angle that imperils his whole head. Really. His image is unnerving.

There are quite a few shootings and occasional rumbles but on the whole it's all well done. If you enjoyed, say, "Smiley's People," you should be able to handle this with pleasure.

A very British film makes it easy to miss the point

[cunningsmile · 7/10 · 21 August 2016]

I'm guessing from the spelling and turn of phrase that a lot of the reviews for this film are from Americans. A lot of the same reviews accuse it of being racist and clichéd with a "middle eastern terrorist bad guy" (he's actually Pakistani but why let geography get in the way?). I guess you need the same mind set as the makers of this film to realise the terrorists are the victims and the bad guys, as they usually were in the Spooks series, are the British. There's a particularly British mind set that distrusts authority figures and thinks they are usually corrupt or at least overly self interested and its in plain view throughout: Harry isn't searching for terrorists, he's looking for a traitor. The final show down isn't guns blazing as terrorists die in a hail of bullets, it's two people sat in a living room talking.

It's the same mind set that birthed writers like John La Carre and stories like Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. It produces slow burning paranoid stories rather than big explosions and gun fights that feature in American cinema. Maybe that's the problem, it's a story style better suited to the small screen and the cinema should be left to the other film this year called MI5

Nothing special, just an OK spy based, thriller.

[subxerogravity · 6/10 · 6 December 2015]

Watching Kit Harrington run around the screen for 90mins was not really that exciting. Nowhere near as exciting as when Tom Cruise does it in the Mission: Impossible series. The Two are in the same boat as they both take the Helm of a movie based on a TV series.

MI: 5 is nothing like the sleek and polished (fictional) version of MI:6 from the Bond films. The movie gives a more down to Earth image of how her Majesty's security service (as it's put in the movie) really works.

Harrington plays an ex-spy reinlisted by MI:5 to find his old mentor and boss who has broken quite a few rules in order to track down a terrorist.

The movie is filled with some decent action thriller moments, but I was not too impressed with the espionage. It was kind of weak and corny the way secrets were revealed and pieces of the puzzle were found. a lot of this had to do with using Harrington strictly as an eye candy tool.

The character Harry Pearce was kind of cool as a spy who does his job a little too well. It was interesting watching him out smart other spies in the game in order to reach his most important goal. I don't think I've ever seen this style of patriotism in a British film.

Overall, it was a decent action movie to watch, but as an espionage movie, I felt that they did not even try to be imaginative with the cover ups and the deception, and as cool as it was watching Kit Harrington as a field agent, his purpose to draw in an audience lessened the quality of the picture.

OK, hoping the next one will be even better

[jim_mcneill · 7/10 · 25 May 2015]

I don't go to see many new movies, but as a fan of the Spooks series I wanted to check out The Greater Good. It has many of the virtues of the series, the ruthlessness of spies against a backdrop of everyday life, credible modern Brit professionals, explosive action on city streets and desperate attempts to avert disaster. I can see why other reviewers are giving it great reviews.

But the movie has a low budget air, that extends unfortunately to the script-writing. The threat isn't that threatening, the betrayals fool no-one, the villain is neither mad or evil enough and apart from seconds each of Berlin and Moscow we get that many London panoramas it could almost be The Apprentice.

The ingredients were all there but the cake didn't rise. Perhaps next time?

More of a TV movie but well made. 5/10

[leonblackwood · 5/10 · 25 October 2015]

Review: I'm really in two minds about this film because I was intrigued about who was the traitor working for the opposite side and I did wonder how they were going to take the terrorist down, so I never lost interest throughout the film. It did feel more like a TV movie than a film for the big screen but it's well put together and the attention to detail in the script was quite good. This complex storyline is about a "Most Wanted" American terrorist leader, Adam Qasim (Elyes Gabel), who escapes from MI5 custody during a routine handover. Harry Pearce (Peter Firth) is the leader of the operation and when Qasim escapes from there custody, he's decommissioned from MI5 and he goes underground to find the dangerous terrorist who plans to bomb various locations in London. He puts his trust in former agent Will Holloway (Kit Harrington) to find the traitor within MI5, who helped Qasim to escape but Will doesn't know if he can trust Harry because his father died during an operation with him. As the story unfolds, Will starts to believe Harry's information but he puts all his efforts into stopping Qasim while Harry is out to expose the traitor. Harry is also being hunted down by MI5 because he has gone rogue, so they try and use Will to bring him into custody but Harry is always 2 steps ahead. With all this going on, they still have to stop Qasim causing havoc in London so there is enough elements going on, which kept this movie interesting throughout. I'm not one that watched any episodes of the series so I didn't know what to expect. I personally wouldn't have used Kit Harrington to play the lead because he lacks emotion and he didn't really have intense screen charisma like Bruce Willis in Die Hard. With that aside, it's full of intense drama and I'm sure that the people who liked the series, won't be disappointed. I personally just found it mediocre but that's not to say that it isn't watchable. Average!

Round-Up: This movie was directed by Bharat Nalluri who brought you films like Crow: Salvation and Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day. He also directed 3 episodes of Hustle, 2 episodes of Life On Mars, 1 episode of Torchwood and 6 episodes of Spooks, so he had first hand experience of the series. I think he put together a decent movie and it was good to see that he used some of the original cast. He obviously chose Kit Harington for the lead because he has become popular since his role as Jon Snow in the Game Of Thrones franchise but I would have taken a gamble with a fresh new face. For his first major release, he must be happy with the reception that the movie received and I'm looking forward to seeing what they will do with other movies for this franchise. 

Budget: N/A Worldwide Gross: $4.7million

I recommend this movie to people who are into their drama/thrillers starring Kit Harington, Tuppence Middleton and Peter Firth. 5/10

It is pretty good but it helps if you love the tv series.

[ib011f9545i · 7/10 · 21 May 2020]

Covid lockdown time and some people are rewatching the Spooks/MI5 tv series. One of the Spooks fans on the internet says yes Spooks is great tv but we don't mention the film. Well I love the Spooks tv series and I like film. It is not brilliant or fantastic but it is better than most of the later series episodes of the tv series. It has a bigger budget than the tv series and the plot is pretty good.

Dreadful

[mikecassidy-79960 · 1/10 · 1 January 2016]

This Spy-Action Thriller film for me, enters the top 50 rubbish films of the last decade. It just could not have been any slower, brutal acting, incorrect character to actor placements, wafer thin story line. I mean seriously, who approves budgets for these movies? If you want a Movie that would have better placed as a series, then this film might just be for you.I reached a point of skipping the Movie forward in blocks about 3rd way into it. Would not recommend this film even in DVD format, no wonder it appeared and disappeared off screen so quickly. Promoters have again done an impetuous job here advertising and portraying film greatness when in fact the film itself demonstrates the opposite. Shockingly the IMDb rating is higher than 50% for this movie, I am shocked... Did a lot of people rate incorrectly?

From me, Stay clear or prepare to Yawn.

It worked for me.

[amalank · 8/10 · 9 May 2015]

The Spooks TV show has been a popular hit in the UK. Now the producers have gone and made a spin-off movie. Peter Firth is back in his role as Harry while we welcome a new addition in the form of Kit Harrington.

First of all, this movie is somewhat separate from the TV show. You don't need to have seen the TV show in order to understand what is going on. The movie had a fairly decent storyline and that is what it mainly focuses on. There are also a couple of intense moments which is what I like in a thriller. There is also a bit of character development as well. Without giving anything away there are also a couple of twists. Don't go into this movie expecting gun fights and car chases - you will be disappointed. They didn't have that kind of thing in the TV show, so it would make sense to do the same thing for the movie.

All in all, it was a good movie to enjoy. I have only seen the first two seasons of the TV show which I enjoyed and I didn't have any problems with this movie. So for me it worked.

I spy cods wallop with a dash of hypocrisy.....

[s3276169 · 4/10 · 18 September 2015]

Spooks:The Greater Good is yet another, tedious, formulaic, self justifying load of I spy cods wallop from the UK.

This film drearily recycles just about any spy drama you care to name. There's nothing new or novel on offer here, just more of the same the nation is under threat nonsense.

Whats really irksome too is the rather hypocritical, self justification. The UK has taken part in wars against a significant number of nations in recent years, often without any real justification. As such, its not easy to play the victim with any degree of credibility or conviction no matter how many excuses you offer or fingers you point.

Combine that with hackneyed characterizations and rather implausible plots with loopy nonsense about umbrella drops, etc and you have a real pot boiler on your hands here. Four out of ten from me and only because the acting is reasonable even if nothing else is.

Realistic and Entertaining

[InnerWisdom1000 · 7/10 · 8 April 2021]

This was a decently written, competently directed, and well-acted film version of the previous excellent Spooks series. The human element was very much evident throughout with no over-the-top Hollywood thrills and spills. Indeed, it was very British and some American viewers might see this film as tepid and lacking the edge-of-the-seat thrills to which they are accustomed. Not that there is anything wrong with over-the-top action fantasy but the danger is this can become cliched, and the accepted norm.

This hit the spot for me. Kit Harrington certainly added kudos and blended well with the aways excellent performances of Peter Firth.

Enjoy!

my notes

[FeastMode · 6/10 · 22 July 2019]

Good spy thriller. nothing special overall but nothing bad either. i enjoyed it (1 viewing)