Rogue Agent

The direction is efficient and coherent. Arterton has been lately choosing roles that emphasize flinty self-determination over movie-star charisma, and she’s getting better at them all the time; this is one of her most credible and engaging portrayals yet. James Norton is equally impressive.

The high-thrills onscreen version, which adheres relatively closely to reality, is taut, exciting and will send viewers to frantically search Wikipedia for the rest of the story.

With neat, concise storytelling, and a skilled cast, Rogue Agent is a compelling film that will appeal to thriller and true crime lovers alike.

As a revenge spy thriller of sorts (the kind that seems tailor-made for a TV miniseries these days), “Rogue Agent” is an engaging affair. Much of it is due to Arterton, whose steely performance firmly anchors the film even during its most improbable twists and turns — especially as it careens toward its inevitable conclusion and its all too pat final image.

The film is ultimately a thoughtful study of how anyone, no matter how vulnerable or self-assured, can be fooled by someone who projects confidence and expertise.

At times, Rogue Agent feels reluctant to fully engage in the kind of deception that might make it a trickier, more “fun” piece of work; it’s almost too tasteful for its own good.

The real account of Robert Freegard might have been unbelievable. Its dramatization, however, is preposterous.

Compelling drama/thriller/biography dramatisation of the exploits of a serial con mans spree across the UK. The excellent cast breathe life into the movie which only captures a short section of the real life mans exploits. Fascinating to watch and well shot production.

The story of a conman like Robert Hendy-Freegard can hardly cover new ground, when it comes to the perks of deceit, but the essential thing about this type of stories that keeps making them relevant is to see their deception being fictionalized and to continue to be amazed at how they were able to fool so many people. Rogue Agent is a concise film in terms of where it wants to go and what it wants to explore, so it becomes a well-made experience, but one that doesn't really take any chances either. That doesn't necessarily mean a bad thing, but in a way it's a safe, passive trip that you'll barely remember after a couple of days, but even so I think it's still worth the experience.

(Mauro Lanari) It's me who felt deceived, manipulated, frauded: the story of the protagonist continues even in these hours, and to be such a "rogue" criminal one must be a psychopath, a less bloody Hannibal Lecter. Yet these two debutants in the feature film have decided to shoot a biopic that does not analyze the sick mind of Freegard in the slightest, obscures the male victims and makes it a case of the usual toxic masculinity. It also wouldn't hurt to stop using lighthouses as a symbol of intellectual clarification.