This movie actually does a really good job of introducing a subject to the American general public to at least remember that Israel and Palestine exist. That the conflict is not just a forgettable world news story you hear in the background on television while getting something to eat and ignoring the information. It's not the movie version of a book or a non-biased documentary, but it's entertaining enough to keep unaware viewers watching and hopefully remembering, if not researching further. I think a huge key to the success of keeping people's attention was the wondering if it's a mockumentary or documentary aspect.I will say the 100 minutes of movie gave me a better overview of how this conflict was related to myself versus the countless hours of world news I did watch, while living in San Diego, that was difficult to discern bickering opinion from what was actually happening and why it should be important to me.For all of you disappointed academics out there, just remember, baby steps; getting people to remember is the first step to future awareness.

What we have here is what at first seems like an interesting doco about Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of the founder of HAMAS, who decided that, as the eldest of the sons, he was to take a stand against the violence of HAMAS once he witnessed their methods of violence. Personally I can't understand how one man can decide to betray and shame his family and culture, as if he alone could make a difference, but that is how the story goes. It quickly becomes repetitive and obvious it has an agenda of some kind, as the film is extremely pro-Israel. This is borderline-propaganda really, as not only is it biased 100% towards Israel, there is zero input from the side of HAMAS, or even Palestinian citizens.Furthermore, the film conveniently glosses over the provocative behaviour by Israel that lead to the creation of HAMAS originally. Instead, it carefully chooses video snippets of Mosab's father Sheikh Hassan Yousef to paint a picture of an evil terrorist who created a purely evil group. His convictions and reasons for forming such a radical group are not explored thoroughly at all; the little we do hear is again pro-Israel and anti-truth.The film makes a big deal about how tough Mosab's decision was to 'go public', supposedly risking his life. Yet he has written his own book, and must be alive and well, able to capitalise on the book by taking it to the big screen within four years. The fact that no attempts at all have been made on his life is literally unbelievable, especially after we are told how risky and life changing it supposedly would be for him to go public. If any attempts have been made on his life, the film doesn't let you know. This then is essentially a filmed wikipedia entry, complete with overwhelming bias, missing key points of the story, as well as intentional ignorance, in this case: Israel's confrontational and provocative behaviour.As a story, it is certainly fantastic, better than most films that cover similar ground. But this is a documentary, one that is very hard to believe in its entirety; especially due to the overwhelming bias on Isreal's behalf and the condemning of HAMAS and Palestine in general, as their constant struggle isn't recognised at all by the filmmakers. They are painted as the bad guys, with no input from them even attempted. The fact that this 'documentary' even made it to screens in my city is a testament to the western bias of the film from beginning to end. There are free films on the internet that are far, far better than this one-sided sob story.One has to wonder: Would a similar story from the opposite 'side' be permitted to be turned into a film, let alone be screened in Western countries? Any interesting cinematography is non-existent, with much of the movie being Mosab's face or his handler's face in front of a grey background. There aren't even changes of angle, just two faces talking at you for about two-thirds of the film. No attempt at all is made to re-enact the story through actors. When it isn't a face talking directly to the camera as if it were made for YouTube, which is what it does look like, there are small random snippets of video footage of Mosab's father, of Mosab, still photos of his father and cold, emotionless night vision footage taken from a helicopter showing the same scene several times over, without it being explained in any way at all.If you know the story already then there isn't anything to see here to see at all, don't waste your time. It really does feel like an amateur documentary made for YouTube, and the fact that they are able to charge people to watch this is incredible to me. I have never wanted my money back after seeing a 'film', but this is one giant freaking exception.The documentary is evolving, from the interesting, varied and well shot Tim's Vermeer to semi-documentaries such as 20,000 Days on Earth that push the envelope of where non-fiction film can go. This doesn't even come close to keeping up, the only envelope being pushed here is one of bias and ignorance.1/5 – Truly a waste of time. I have never given a film such a low score, but this is generous considering this entire film belongs on the internet as a free watch, not as a feature film.

80% of the scenes in this movie are just straight on facial shots of two people telling a story. That is not interesting or creative film making. The rest looks like stock news footage. No interviews with other people, the affected families, people on the street - nothing. A film maker should bring a story to life, give it context, and make it exciting to watch. Having a camera on someone's face and getting them to talk for 90 minutes is not film making. If this was produced by a film student, I would give them an F. Too bad. It's an interesting idea, but told in the most dull, boring way imaginable. This is definitely one of the worst films I have seen in the last 5 years. It is so bad, it is almost unbelievable.

I'm not going to write too much as I'm not experienced in reviewing and am simply studying film and happened to attend a Documentary Festival to view this documentary without knowing the context of it. I personally found this documentary to be very educational and interesting, the story being told by the real subjects, not actors, as many people think, really makes a difference. It was highly informative but has been described as one sided by many viewers, I suppose you could say so but as John Battsek stated in an interview 'You cannot satisfy both sides'. After watching this documentary there was a debate about it between a Palestinian and an expert in Palestinian politics and history, they described this documentary as 'Israeli Propaganda', however I feel that their reasons for this were more personal than simply critiquing the film. I found it enticing and was drawn into the story with its original footage and narration. It didn't focus on anything but the Hamas movement and the involvement of the Shin Bet, things like the lack of information on certain events such as assassinations etc. but that was not meant to be the focus of this documentary and therefore I find the little information given justified.