Master Spy: The Robert Hanssen Story (2002)

terrible... so disappointed.

recommended

Really Surprised!

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

This film contains one of William Hurt's best performances and anybody who is an acting fan in general or a William Hurt fan in particular will enjoy it.I thought that the ideology of the film was quite complex, but ultimately dishonest and reactionary. The film wants to convince us that Robert Hanson was only a strange mentally-ill man who betrayed his family, friends, religion, colleagues and country. They have little sympathy for his painful situation.If one looks at the facts that the story presents, instead of the way the movie presents them, this is clearly not the case. Hanson has to choose between his family, friends and religion and his government and job. He chose his family, friends and religion over his job and his government. He was simply a very intelligent man in an incredibly difficult position. If he had not sold secrets to the Soviet Union and Russians, he could not have afforded the lifestyle to maintain his family, friends and religion. His alternative was to lose his job and everything he loved most in life. His choice can be seen as incredibly courageous on some level.The producer Lawrence Schiller and the writer Norman Mailer are very rich men who do not have to worry about making money every day (as Hanson did).The film deserves credit for at least raising some quite interesting lines of defense for Hanson. For example, the film brings up the point that it is possible that his actions of helping the Soviets and Russians actually made the world a safer place and saved the world from nuclear catastrophe. The film should have seriously considered that in betraying his country, he may have saved the human race. Instead, the film presents this as merely one more fantasy on the part of Hanson.

In the IMDb credits for this movie, it says that Leonid Sherbarshin and Viktor Cherkashin were played by 'Themselves'.I can quite definitely state this is not the case. Sherbarshin is more than a foot taller than the actor playing him in this movie. Cherkashin was born in 1932 and therefore is considerably older than the person playing him.Further, in the movie, when Shebarshin first appears, right after Hanssen first contacts the KGB in 1985, a caption says he is the head of Soviet Foreign Intelligence. In 1985 the head of Soviet Foreign Intelligence was Vladimir Kryuchkov. Sherbarshin did not become FCD head until 1988.Ironically, the credits state 'Alexander Kalugin....?'. This person was actually played by the real former KGB Colonel and defector Oleg Kalugin.In reality the person who stole the Hanssen file from the KGB archive as a retirement plan was not paid $20M for it as stated in the movie, but more like $7M, and that only in installments. However the SVR somehow managed to lure him back to Moscow where he was jailed for 18 years.Other than these minor points this film is largely faithful to the major facts of the case.

William Hurt's performance made Robert Hanssen's life something to watch on the screen, otherwise, Hanssen was a mixed up sick person who could not find where he was going, even if he did go to church. In many ways Peter Boyle took the blame for his son's failures to God, Country and family. The success of this film was created by the excellent acting skills of Hurt and Boyle.

A very interesting story but very uneven and hard to follow. Robert Hanssen was a very complex man and possibly the writer should not have tried to capture him in all his complexities. None the less, worth your time in learning the story about America's most damaging spy.