The Pentagon Papers

Sometimes the people who have the best perspective on a side of an issue are those who were formerly advocating for the other side. Daniel Ellsberg was employed by the Rand Corporation and then the US Executive Branch at the Pentagon as a mid-level researcher. In the 1960's, Ellsberg advocated for the war in Vietnam. He believed that the cause for democracy around the world was worth the sacrifice of the lives of young men in the South Pacific. After a tour of Vietnam and acquisition of federal documents revealing the history of the war, Ellsberg began to question the morality of the US's Vietnam involvement.

James Spader offers perhaps his best and most important performance as the young and middle-aged Daniel Ellsberg, the man Nixon referred to as a "traitor". The made-for-TV film chronicles Ellsberg's career as a high-level researcher in international affairs. After finishing his doctorate, Ellsberg first worked for the Rand Corporation and then later the Pentagon. He had been completely sold on America's involvement in Vietnam. He is then sent to Vietnam as a researcher to contribute to the Pentagon's internal study of the war.

Upon his return, Ellsberg begins to doubt whether the war in Vietnam is simply a self-perpetuating abattoir with no end in sight, a slaughter-house which keeps feeding upon itself. Were the ends really about spreading the cause of democracy or about some other political ends? Ellsberg sends in his contribution to the study based on his experiences in Vietnam. He then learns that his writing as well as many other researchers were compiled together in a 7000-page internal document chronicling the history of the war in Vietnam.

Ellsberg requests from the Pentagona a copy of the internal study, later dubbed the Pentagon Papers by the Press. Ellsberg reads the entire 7000-page monstrosity only to learn that the Vietnam cause goes as far back as Truman, and the ends for Vietnam were not really about the cause of democracy but more about short-term political gains. In other words, no US President wanted to declare Vietnam a failure on their watch, and passed the buck to the next president. Ellsberg is appalled at the disregard for human life for the purposes of political ends. But what can he do about it? A thoroughly engrossing and underrated film about Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. Spader is completely believable as the man regarded as both hero and villain, depending upon the perspective. Nixon and his cronies regarded Ellsberg as a traitor, compromising their goals in Vietnam. They used the old "threat to national security" argument as the reason that the papers should not be released to the public. Others believed that all the information about the war needed to be exposed to encourage healthy debate. How can we, as a supposed democracy, ever make sound judgments on an issue if we are deprived of all the facts?

This is a wonderful film for anyone who appreciates the craft of film-making. There is a totally consistent vision throughout and it all fits and syncs beautifully. From the direction through to the dialogue, editing and sound. Also some truly inspired performances by the supporting cast. Spader is a little weak, but perhaps that's like saying David Ducovny is weak in the X-Files; when anything else would be camp. By the time you see the end of the film you realise that he has truly studied his character and the resemblance is profound. A brilliant conspiracy film, though as mentioned it's always best to read the book and do your own research before you start quoting facts and figures to your friends. Being a sound guy though, what inspired me most was the overall sound design for the film - the way they blend sound within the film and the musical score and the fact that the use of various instruments is relevant to each sequence in the story - the use of piano during the intimate bedroom scene (he was destined to become a concert pianist) and so forth. In conclusion, I've read above that this was made for TV, which greatly impresses me as I hired it from the video store... made for TV is never like this. And I must mention that the style is perfect - the documentary format of this film is perfect for the subject matter and the creative licence with the editing actually works, I'd be afraid of overdoing it but they throw in fades to itself and layering, throwing white-balance to the wind, it's a flawless production, I'm just so impressed, so inspired to translate this into my own short films and be more daring. 9/10

In the 70s, the ambitious and brilliant Daniel Ellsberg (James Spader) aims to work in the Defense Department of the USA. His ambition destroys his marriage and he goes to Vietnam to fight. He meets Patricia Marx (Claire Forlani), the daughter of a wealthy manufacturer of toys, and they have a brief affair. Once back in the USA, he works as analyst for the Rand Corporation and he finds secret Defense Department documents showing that the American population was being deceived along four successive governments about the Vietnam War. With the support of Patricia and his close friend Anthony Russo (Paul Giamatti), he decides to disclose the documents to the American people, being accused of treason by the government of Richard Nixon.

"Pentagon Papers" is a surprisingly good political film about the history of lies of the Vietnam War. I did not expect such a good movie, indeed very recommended for students. The direction is excellent, the true story is very tense, and the conclusion, with the statement of the real Daniel Ellsberg is fantastic. James Spader and Claire Forlani show great chemistry in this good TV movie. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Segredos do Pentágono" ("Secrets of the Pentagon")

This is a terrific movie about a story that few know. I believe Walter Cronkite called Daniel Ellsberg's leaking of the Pentagon Papers war document the most important story of the latter part of the 20th Century. Performances are really strong and the direction excellent. This is one of those rare moments when a telefilm elevates itself and becomes something very important.

I agree completely with jmuckian (above). I've just finished reading "Secrets", the memoir that this movie is based on. Did they do an okay job for a TV movie? Yes. Does it *begin* to convey the flavour of the book, and the creeping disenchantment that Ellsberg experiences over the course of his years spent at the Pentagon, in the Marines, and at Rand? No, and that's what makes the book an absolutely riveting page-turner. I think the most glaring error in the movie is the reduction of his time in-country to a gunfight or two and the surveying of a decimated village in the middle of a monsoon. In reality, his time on the ground and insistence on really seeing what was going on in villages that others only saw from the air made for the best parts of the story. So in balance, I think that if you were willing to sit through this movie, and find the story at all compelling, you really owe it to yourself to read the book.