★ 10 / 10
Very good and important film
Quet-zal
This is a film about several whistleblowers in very high-profile cases. If you are interested in human rights, you have almost certainly heard about the cases…
This is a film about several whistleblowers in very high-profile cases. If you are interested in human rights, you have almost certainly heard about the cases raised in this film. The film is therefore not very revealing, but it describes many lesser-known details - for example, how exactly they revealed irregularities, or what somewhat forgotten whistleblowers are doing now.So it is an important social film and, what is even more important, it is well-made. What I mean by this is that it is clearly visible that the film has a creator who thought about what she wants to tell. The narrative and dynamics of the story constantly attract the viewer's attention. This is important to me because many modern documentaries are made in a way that is strange to me. Modern documentaries can sometimes literally record their characters all the time without a coherent narrative. Let's observe in these films often long pseudo-natural scenes about nothing (e.g. A conversation over a meal). There are no such things here. We have a summary of the case and the memories of the characters. Factual but also intimate - for example, how these matters changed their relationships with their loved ones and other people.So it is a well-made and important social film and there is no doubt that I should give it 10 stars. More films like this.
Read full review
★ 5 / 10
Two heroes and one woman who did nowt.
kittycatbarton
Such a missed opportunity in this documentary. It was disjointed, and I feel the stories would have been better served by shorter, individual films or…
Such a missed opportunity in this documentary. It was disjointed, and I feel the stories would have been better served by shorter, individual films or episodes.
The 'talking heads' were pretty irrelevant and most of us watching would know/agree with the things they talked about.
Now the crucial problem for me was the subjects. Rose McGowan, a survivor and a fighter. She gave up pretty much everything to stand up for rape survivors, and was instrumental in the "me too" getting started.
Katharine Gun, a woman who lost her career for telling the truth and exposing the lies of (what we now know) was the illegal war on Iraq. A woman who was arrested and who eventually felt she had to leave her home country.
Then we have Helen. Helen, who choose to leave a job after being silent after her concerns were ignored. A woman who didn't speak out for years. Not only did she have evidence of sexual assaults/abuse of power by aid workers, she'd also collated that evidence and written reports for upper management. It was literally her job to be safeguarding lead for Oxfam. When her concerns were ignored, that was the point she COULD have chosen to blow the whistle. Instead, she stays in her job a while more, then leaves, then when someone else blows the whistle she then does one interview on channel 4....an interview that was so obviously personal damage control, it's insulting to viewers to even suggest it was because she "cared" so much about the most vulnerable people in need of aid.
Rose and Katharine are two women well aware of the dangers of institutions and speaking against them, and bravo to them both. In contrast Helen (who seemed to have the majority of airtime), cared more about protecting the institution of Oxfam, than she ever did the victims of it. When she started to cry about having to leave Oxford I just had to skip through the rest of her pathetic tears.
Read full review
★ 10 / 10
An important and compelling documentary. 10/10.
Sasha_Lauren
I watched When We Speak - an extraordinary, riveting documentary about three women whistleblowers - three times more in a row. The film focuses on interviews…
I watched When We Speak - an extraordinary, riveting documentary about three women whistleblowers - three times more in a row. The film focuses on interviews with each of them. Their brave acts, (which came at a personal, financial, emotional, social cost for them), did not seem like a choice in the light of their integrity and compulsion to prevent harm to others. The wrongdoers get defensive and punish whistleblowers who challenge the misuse of power.
First up is Katharine Gun, who worked at General Communications Headquarters, a British intelligence agency. In 2003 she got an email regarding blackmailing and bribing the diplomats at the UN Security Council to persuade them to vote for the UN resolution that would authorize an (unwarrented) invasion of Iraq. Katharine was shocked, angry, and appalled. She could think of nothing else besides what would happen to the people of Iraq and also to the British troops. She asked herself whether her loyalties were with her employer and the state, or at a deeper level, with humanity.
Second up is Helen Evans who worked in Human Resources for Oxfam when she discovered that aid workers were exploiting vulnerable earthquake survivors for sex. The helpers were predators and victims were prey. She saw this was happening across many countries. She interviewed many victims. Men in positions of power coerced and raped females in desperate, dependent positions in life. In some countries, to be raped is a criminal offense; women might be forced to leave their villages for having sex outside of marriage. Helen was outraged by this systemic sexual exploitation and had to act.
Third up is actress Rose McGowan, one of the first to speak out on sexual abuse in Hollywood. She claims she was raped by Harvey Weinstein when she was just starting her career in Hollywood. Rose explains that anybody who upsets the status quo and goes after the complicity machine is targeted.
All these women made a difference at the cost of their own lives being changed forever. Rose was ostracized by many, including members of her family. She gave up Hollywood and moved to Mexico. Helen lost her marriage and feels tremendous guilt that she asked her husband and son to move out of their home in Oxford. Katharine's family moved from the UK to Turkey because of the financial losses she suffered as a result of her whistleblowing. Although it wasn't an easy question to answer, Katharine, Helen, and Rose all said they would do what they did again.
I know many people who work to expose the corruption in the medical / legal arenas. Preventable medical harm is a leading cause of death and bodily harm in the US. The complicity and coverups are immense. These whistleblowers, like the women in this film, do so at great personal cost. They too are compelled to act. Small battles have been won, but overall, the iatrogenic harm continues.
I saw this When We Speak on Kanopy. I believe it is available to stream elsewhere as well.
Read full review
80%
AUDIENCE
7.3/10
111
•••
"When we speak"?? When do they shut up more like...