Nothing But the Truth
Nothing But the Truth
R | 19 December 2008 (USA)
Nothing But the Truth Trailers

When reporter Rachel Armstrong writes a story that reveals the identity of a covert CIA operative, the government demands that Rachel reveal her source. She defies the special prosecutor and is thrown in jail. Meanwhile, her attorney, Albert Burnside argues her case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Reviews
TonyMontana96

(Originally reviewed: 19/02/2017) Here is a political thriller that's plain and simple forgettable; despite some good performance from a well-able cast. The film starts off rather interesting, getting the story outlined and so forth with decent direction from Rod Lurie, but even then there was some poor dialogue which I think was just unfunny and unnecessary, this line was "Eggs give you cancer", says the little boy, Schwimmer replies "I'll finish your cancer", not only is this out of context but I surely don't like jokes about serious subjects such as cancer. Before I get to my major problems with the story, I have a few nit-picks, Beckinsale is merely trying to help Farmiga but she is consistently unlikeable at first, calling Beckinsale "an unpatriotic little c**t", almost in front of her son, which I found most unnecessary. Another is that the judge is unbelievably one sided which I have rarely seen in actual, strong thrillers and even courtroom dramas, surely the judge has to be somewhat fair and not favour one client unless there is a pay-off going on which was unsurprisingly not the case. Lurie's script is also completely subpar when it's not being stupid and dull.Another howler in the dialogue is when Farmiga tells another female CIA operative "you're so lucky you're a woman, because I don't hit girls", which is more pure idiocy which doesn't land whether it was intended to be funny or not. However there are some positives; I like some of the humour, including two instances; one where Beckinsale's character is told by a female prison officer that there is no sex aloud, this includes "eating Pussy", I found this fairly amusing, as I have never heard someone actually try and use that joke in this type of situation, the other instance was when Beckinsale is being interviewed and she's confronted about her source and she has a speech that involves "because the government doesn't care where Paris Hilton had dinner last night; which put her in her place on national television and was a well-timed, amusing line.There is a couple of smart lines of dialogue, such as one where a character is told he's making a mistake and he says " sometimes a mistake is invading Russia in the winter", but there's not much in terms of these kinds of lines which is a shame. The performances are respectable for the most part, but mainly from Kate Beckinsale (Rachael, the reporter), Alan Alda (Albert, her lawyer) and Angela Bassett Bonnie, Rachael's boss), but I still think Matt Dillion (Patton, prosecutor) and Vera Farmiga (Erica, CIA operative) are also pretty good. David Schwimmer (Rachael's husband) is merely passable and his character is a first class asshole, that doesn't even bother to patiently wait for his wife, and jumps into bed with another woman as soon as she's imprisoned. There was one point where I was thinking Rachael's time in prison is at least not a cliché but later on she does end up getting beaten up, which like most films with prison sequences is predictable and tiresome. My main problems with the story are two big points, 1) Erica end's up getting shot by a guy pretending to be lost who clearly has a gun in his left hand, now wouldn't a CIA operative have more intelligence and be more cautious when under scrutiny from possible treason? The film insults the intelligence of trained operative's and the audience with it.2) The ending; so the source she was protecting was an 8 year old girl? I highly doubt the government would take action from an 8 year old, let alone kill her, so many like myself will consider the ending a waste of their time; once the ending is revealed the film is completely useless and you leave disappointed and unsatisfied. I did however find the first half or so at least intriguing, but it soon devolves into a slow paced, boring film with a forgettable plot, mediocre writing and a sexist remark thrown in to get the feminists riled up; you should find this during the but if it was a man and not a woman speech towards the third act of the film. Nothing but the Truth even pulls the character back into jail before the end credit's so we can see how it was all a pointless affair, there's plenty of clichés on offer, and that's not the main problem; the fact is, this is a poor political thriller which is forgettable, uninspiring and takes Rachael 237 days to nearly get free from, lucky her, for me it felt even longer, this picture is a waste of time.

... View More
dromasca

What happens when an undercover CIA agent and the investigative journalist who is exposing her to the broad public are both dedicated mothers of kids who learn together in the same well established American urban milieu? What happens when everybody does the right thing and yet the personal lives of the people involved are destroyed or worse? What is the price that is worth paying for following one's principles – family, freedom, life? These are some of the questions that are being asked in Nothing But the Truth, the 2008 film directed by Rod Lurie.Despite the disclaimer that starts the film the story is obviously inspired by a true case and the lead character by a true person – Judith Miller, a New York Times reporter who served 85 days in prison for refusing to name her source in a case where the name of a government agent was made public. It can also be seen as a strong feminist story, as all the key involved persons (the journalist, her redactor-in-chief boss, and the CIA agent) are all women, while the system of justice persons (the prosecutor, the lawyer, the judge) are all men. The story tells about political reporter Rachel Armstrong (Kate Beckinsale) getting under pressure to disclose the source of the information she published about the real identity of a CIA agent, actually a whistle-blower whose revelations are covered up. The clash is between the journalism ethics and the government secrecy, as what is perceived by the journalist as protection of her sources is from the legal point of view a possible crime of disclosing the identity of the agents. The price is however to be paid by both women in their personal life, although the film mostly focuses on the fate of the reporter. How far will she go to respect her principles? The specialty of director Rod Lurie seems to be in political films, but here he succeeds to create not only an interesting intrigue and ask the tough questions, but also to build a credible character drama that exceeds the strict borders of the story. Lurie also wrote the script and the story flows well and is helped by an efficient team of actors. Best are Kate Beckinsale in the lead role and Matt Dillon as the prosecutor. The resulting film is both entertaining and raises interesting issues, it's a politically-motivated film that avoids being dry and rhetorical by focusing on the human dimensions of the story.

... View More
alistairc_2000

This movie had everything. A great cast a great plot and a great soundtrack so why have I given it one star? I love these principle movies. You have to stand by what you believe in. That in itself is worth making a movie. So the movie strings you along with strong performances that really have you feeling for the character. I had read all the other reviews saying how great this was. I see their reasoning but it is flawed. Slight spoilerThe ending of this movie killed it and made no sense whatsoever. Really if the source was who it pertains to be then she would have had no problem giving out their name. End of spoiler.I can see why this movie sank without a trace at the box office.

... View More
j-t-williams78

I consider myself to be a harsh movie critic especially when it comes to endings. The ending to this movie sucked. You spend all that time watching and sitting on the edge of your seat and for what? You already knew everything there was to know in the first hour and by the end of the movie nothing had changed other than the revelation of her source. After the first hour or so I began to think that the source was on their death bed when they told her their story but no it was a their own daughter. She looses everything within the first hour and for what? Just to rub it in her face at the very end? Seriously, one of the last scenes is her pretty much telling her son good bye cause she's settling for prison for the next 2 years and the source and the end. This movie was everything BUT the truth. This woman ruined lives all around her and there is NOTHING entertaining about it!

... View More