User Reviews

As a character driven drama - a historical one at that and one based on a true story, I thought this was relatively fascinating. The story is undoubtedly a curious one and the cast give decent performances. Its not exactly constantly action packed or anything but its got some interesting twists and turns and its, of course, quite thought provoking. I would definitely recommend this film, yes.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

(Mauro Lanari) Trevor Nunn does not direct a biopic on Melita Norwood, barely mentioned in the closing credits as a source of inspiration, since she was a communist KGB agent. If anything, he is interested in a speech on geopolitical farsightedness by an exponent of the social minorities of the time, in this case women. Nothing bad if it weren't for the clumsy marriage between spy story and romance. Slow but not dull pace. And anyway, much better than "Allied" (Zemeckis, 2016).

For such an interesting story this was tragically dull. And, jesus what a way to waste Judi Dench's talent.

Most people will probably see the film because it stars Judi Dench. Even though she plays the title role, most of the story is taken up with the younger version of her character (Sophie Cookson). It's based on the true story of a woman who shared England's nuclear secrets with Russia via her lover and his sister. Even though there are 2 romantic entanglements, the constant flashback narrative unfolds with cold objectivity and not much passion. None of the performances are especially potent and the direction by Trevor Nunn, who's mostly known for this innovative theatrical productions, lacks much real drama. History buffs might enjoy seeing this tale unfold, but others are likely to be disappointed by the competent, but rather flat recounting.

A by the cookie cutter British spy story that claims to be inspired by a true story then presents pure fiction. Had the pure fiction been less stolid and predictable it might be forgiven but this is just a churned out variation of the well known British spy genre of pre Deighton and Le Carre. It is based on a novel not history. Why isn't the truth good enough?

In 1999 Judi Dench won an Oscar for her 6 minutes on screen in "Shakespeare In Love" and here she spends a little more time on screen in "Red Joan". She has a fiery speech near the end that expresses the movie's moral stance. Dame Dench is no longer a newcomer to the big screen and is more or less wasted in a role that seems to say 'many people in the audience came to see her so let's have her face on the screen for a minute or two every now and then'. As many movies do these days it goes back and forth between Joan Stanley in her 80s and Joan in her 20s, played by Sophie Cookson, which would have been more effective after the opening seeing Joan being arrested for being a spy during WW 2. Cookson could have easily aged as the story is told and brought off a coup that has been done by others. It supposedly 'inspired by the true story' of a KGB spy Melita Norwood though her name is never mentioned. She a graduate student at Cambridge in physics and gets involved with 3 men--I think--and soon rationalizes passing off papers about the atomic bomb that she feels would put Rusian on equal footing with the USA. With all respect, if Judi had made fewer appearances it might have made more clear who became her husband and who was the father of her son played by Ben Miles. The other men in her life are played by Tom Hughes and Stephen Campbell while Tereza Srbova becomes her friend and introduces her to her cousin Leo with whom Joan has an affair with and begins getting involved with the politics of the time. I had many questions regarding who she had affairs with, who the father of her son was, whom she married, how did she get back from Australia and why was she forgotten so many years. "Red Joan" is a typical Britsh quiet spy movie without the noise and fast pace of the Bond movies. It also is bringing out of the closet many stories about women who did a lot during the war but were not giving respect as the men were during that era. She was just a woman who got the tea instead of supplying the important answers that the world was asking for. For me it just makes me want to find out who the true Melita Norwood was an what happened to her. Synopsis: Joan Stanley (Judi Dench) is a widow living out a quiet retirement in the suburbs when, shockingly, the British Secret Service places her under arrest. The charge: providing classified scientific information—including details on the building of the atomic bomb—to the Soviet government for decades. As she is interrogated, Joan relives the dramatic events that shaped her life and beliefs: her student days at Cambridge, where she excelled at physics while challenging deep-seated sexism; her tumultuous love affair with a dashing political radical (Tom Hughes); and the devastation of World War II, which inspired her to risk everything in pursuit of peace. [IFC Films]

It is hard to believe that a film about such an interesting subject (spies stealing nuclear secrets) starring Judi Dench and directed by Trevor Nunn could be so bland and dull. Although everyone shared in the dullness, the worst problem was Sophie Cookson, who played young Red Joan/Judi Dench throughout most of the film. Cookson had no charisma at all, and watching her was like drinking lukewarm water for 101 minutes.