A Call to Spy Review, streaming on Amazon Prime Video in India, tells the story of three women — each of whom played a vital role in the Allied resistance against the Nazis during World War 2 — but has no idea whom to focus its attention on. Touted to be a war film, it lacks realism and tension.
The Story: Stana Katic plays British ‘spymistress’ Vera Atkins, who is tasked with recruiting new agents to send into France. And so she picks a cripple and a pacifist, with the hope that their unassuming appearances would help protect their cover.
Sarah Megan Thomas, in addition to playing the film’s meatiest role — the wooden-legged go-getter Virginia Hall — is also credited as the film’s writer and producer. A Call to Spy can, therefore, be described as a ‘vanity project’ — a term with distinctly negative connotations, often interchangeable with the infinitely more positive ‘passion project’. But deciding which to use is a matter of personal taste.
‘Passionate’ wouldn’t be the first word I’d use to describe this movie; it wouldn’t even be the 10th. A Call to Spy has a distinct ‘made for television’ quality, which could either be because director Lydia Dean Pilcher had to cut corners, or because, besides a fuzzy feminist spirit, the movie has little personality.
Here are the reviews from those who watched the movie
Wonderful, engaging film. Hats off to Sarah Megan Thomas for creating such a fearless and important film and her performance should get some nominations as well. The three lead actresses were all outstanding, particularly Stana Katic.
A Call To Spy Review by Filmykeema
This is an important story and hopefully we see more films from Sarah Megan Thomas. Great job all around – it’s a shame COVID may not give this film the spotlight it deserves.
Quite possibly one of the worst war films I’ve ever seen – and I’ve seen a lot. Low budget, ham set piece scenes, poor characterization and worst of all absolutely no sense of jeopardy, danger or tension. It was shallow, amateur and hollow. Historical accuracy – particularly the training scenes – was hopeless and embarrassing. They were never taught to grab a target from behind and then slash the victim’s stomach!
The explosion that was meant to derail the train was a cheap and totally unconvincing effect. Some clothes and hair styles were wrong for the period…one of the main characters is shot at point blank range but suffers no visible wound! I could go on. These should have been great stories. They were based on remarkable real women after all.
But honestly the end result is an empty shell. My honest advice – check out The Captain or The Pianist if you want to see a great war film with strong characters, real tension, a believable script and a far more realism. As for this effort, seriously, where do the four stars reviews come from?
This film is fearless. It is not afraid to take on incompetence in wartime. It strikes a direct blow to misogyny. It exposes antisemitism in the highest ranks. It brings home the horrors of war without the usual gore. You can usually depend on women historians, directors and playwrights to explain the world from a fresh and challenging perspective.
Here is another take of the movie in short:-
Poor scenes, no wide shots. Inaccurate depictions of techniques. Example:. Training of attack from behind, has them cutting the stomach, instead of the throat, or stabbing be to the left of T6-7.Effects also very sub-par. The train explosion, etc. Acting was ok. Dialog was disjointed, no flow. Inexperienced director. Also, the hand-held camera stuff was overdone, or maybe they couldn’t afford proper cameras.
A Call to Spy does all the above.