...if you are looking for a thrilling story set during the Second World War, this is likely to satisfy you. If you are looking for an faithful adaptation of Helene Moszkiewiez's autobiography then forget it. A lot of what is portrayed here is vamped-up romanticised Hollywood gloss done so in order to unnecessarily embellish what was already an interesting story. Though it is gripping in parts and Martha Plimpton is well-cast as the intrepid young Jew who fools Nazi officials into giving her a job as a Gestapo spy, I would like to point out a few serious flaws in the re-worked plot. Firstly, Helene was not academic and had no intention of going to university. Far from it, in fact; she hated school. Secondly - and this correction is absolutely necessary - she did not have any romantic relationship with Franz Bueller. Having met him, he introduced her to the ways of the Resistance and she posed as his fiancée throughout the Nazi occupation, but he was in actual fact a double-agent whom she was glad to see hanged for treason at the end of the war. His romantic interests in fact lay elsewhere, mainly with a mistress and two children. Helene herself actually did marry her admirer Albert (although I can't actually remember if he died in the circumstances that were played out in the film). The Jew-catcher part was true although not the chase scene. He was himself Jewish - and saved his own skin by agreeing to help catch Jews for the Gestapo with his amazing ability to "detect" a Jew based on one glance - and though he did alert her bosses to their pretty young employee's true ethnic identity, he was not believed and was reprimanded for making what seemed an utterly erroneous observation. His claim was ignored and he left her alone, eventually being shipped off to join his already forsaken wife and children in the death camps.I'm sorry but I do not like real-life stories being corrupted so just to keep it in the Hollywood mainstream. The story was fascinating. Helene Moszkiewiez was a remarkably courageous polymath who lived entirely on her wits and was not a woman to be messed with. When watching this film I was gripped and intrigued - it is a good film - but not a patch on the book

In Brussels, in the Second World War, after the arrest of her parents, the Jewish Helene Moszkiewiez (Martha Plimpton) decides to fight against the Germans, using her knowledge of German language. She gets a job of translator in the Gestapo, and uses the information she gets to help the resistance forces and other Jews. Helene falls in love with Franz Bueller (Eric Stoltz), a collaborator of the Germans, who is also a member of the resistance. This good movie is very supported by the magnificent performance of Martha Plimpton. There are some flaws in the screenplay, basically because of the selection of Eric Stoltz for the role of Franz Bueller. Eric Stoltz does not speak German as Martha does, so in some parts of the story, the German officers speak in English with Franz, while they speak in German with Helene. But the story is very consistent, having a good direction and a great cast. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): `Um Fio de Esperança' (`A Slender Hope')

Of the three war movies that have most impressed me so far, Hanna's War (1988), The Hiding Place (1975) and A Woman at War (1991), the last one is the most skillfully directed. But the film has another advantage: Martha Plimpton. She is one of the most charismatic and talented American actresses I know of and in my opinion those models with double names rather than actresses who are currently making a career in Hollywood should take a look at Martha and take her genuine radiance and convincing acting as an example. Along with this, I have the impression A Woman at War is one of the last Hollywood films (filmed in Warsaw by the way) that was not hindered by the over-glamorous and slick looking Titanicesque photography which for me partly ruins otherwise nice films such as The Astronaut's Wife, The Sixth Sense and most of all American Beauty. Could it be Panavision changed its lenses or Kodak its film since then? Probably not, it is merely a result of today's producer, director and camera boss focusing on the overall 'clean' look of the film rather then on impact and naturalness and hence they instruct the lighting crew to make that light a little softer, a little warmer and tell the make up department to apply that make up a little thicker, a little harder. A Woman at War is 'pure' and timeless in its looks and is a joy to watch.To come back to Martha Plimpton, I think her performance in this film is magnificent. Her character, Helene, really comes to life. However, I had expected -and I am aware this is rather a matter for scriptwriter and director- a somewhat more emotional response (sadness perhaps?) to the tragic things she experiences: losing relatives and being confronted with the corpses of murdered companions. Of course times are rough, and Helene must be tough in order to survive the war and fight in the resistance, but I now get the impression that it is a taboo thing for the heroic character, who is, if I am correct, not only a tough fighter but also a sensitive, social and young girl, to cry or be shocked and desperate.Yet, the film stands solidly and what is quite pleasant and exceptional is that the story is not melodramatic and does not rely on easy sentimental scoring. Some story lines are left open and there are many interesting but believable plot twists. For instance, in the end we are still not certain, like Helene, whether Eric Stoltz's character was basically good or has betrayed his friends. Great in this light is the scene in which Helene runs from a streetcar because she runs the risk of being caught carrying weapons and as a result is faced with a dilemma, and the one in which Franz comes in to identify her as a criminal and shows nothing but his own real(?) face.A great story, greatly told. With a wonderful lead actress, which I hope will soon start in another lead role: Martha Plimpton.