People are voting emotionally.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

I wouldn't like to mention past of Spain in the last three decades, but this movie may be classified in an historical movie.Not only historical but it is also a crime movie in which two brave journalists hold roles of police agency and overcome to expose corruptions and inhumanistic crimes of a gang associated with official government.As a spectator I really enjoyed and excited, I was also so glad to see something about reality of Spanish history in the last three decades.It is also make us hopeful to see the victory of democracy supporters against despotism, fascism even racism.I would like to suggest watching it for everyone who like to see reality and crime in movies.

Natalia's cafeteria scene was good but not extremely good, but her total performance was very good. I thought Molla was exceptional. Want him to receive the Spanish Oscar: Goya. The actresses have stunning beauty. Although I hate Hollywoodian close-ups, I loved to study the faces (men's and women's) here. They are not too short and not too long..."just right" as in Goldilocks. I admire the courage shown here by the newspapermen. I admired the courage shown in LOBO by the "topo" (mole) and others. I hope Melchor Mirailles is gathering material for a third film. (Read between the lines). I enjoyed the scenery taken from a far and especially noticed a waterfront scene with night lights to the left and a huge deposit/container to the right. I hope my note of 8 raises the note of the picture.

It's difficult to comment on this movie being from Spain since it depicts a part of our recent history that is very controversial. There will always be a suspicion that a bad or a good review depends on the political ideology of the writer. While I don't believe it is possible to absolutely turn off one's beliefs I think certain elements of a film can be judged objectively. Take a film like JFK for example. Many have criticed what the film says but most have praised how it says it (there are more radical examples like the propaganda films that were made for Hitler or Lenin).GAL is a movie about journalists that try to uncover the clandestine actions of a democratic government in their fight against terrorism. This an exciting premise which GAL is unable to develop satisfactorily. The movie is never thrilling or even too interesting. Sometimes it is even incomprehensive from a narrative point of view. The actors don't help much. Jordi Mollá makes a cartoon out of his character and we don't'care much for the journalists. Everything seems a bit superficial and underdeveloped. The world the movie depicts and the people that live in it seem a bit fake. For a thriller that is based on real events, these are all very big problems.

Natalia Verbeke gives a good performance, showing a driven professional who goes after the truth despite sometimes experiencing personal fear. She has two nice showcase moments in the film where she proves she really got into her character's skin (in the cafeteria before Ariza's deposition and at the paper after a threatening call is received). Jordi Molla, on the other hand, underacts in light of the character he is playing. A military man in such a position would certainly show a great deal more arrogance and violent character, and we all know Molla is capable of showing it after his performance in BLOW. Ana Alvarez is memorable as the submissive girlfriend, but none of the rest of the cast really stand out. There isn't any real character development to make the audience sympathise with any of the main characters beyond mentions in passing that one of the journalists is divorced and the other about to get married.The real problem with this film; however, is that the actors aren't really given much to work with. The basis of the story is explained in a manner approaching docudrama but without sufficient detail to really justify such stilted plot development. The scenes of GAL members doing horrible acts to the tune of American rock music is a teeny bit surreal as clearly it is meant to show GAL was working non-stop committing crimes of all sorts, but the movie doesn't get into the nitty gritty of what they actually did except to show one car bomb and one botched kidnapping. The musical choice makes me wonder if the person who did the soundtrack is at all aware of the music scene in Spain in the 80's and what the characters would likely have been listening to. In any case, the use of flashback at certain parts of the film is supported by the "interview" technique but doesn't add anything in the way of suspense. Rather it gives the film a sloppy and disjointed feel.All in all, the film views like a propaganda film the likes of those shown to troops before wars to get them convinced of how they should feel without explaining too much lest they think for themselves. Frankly, the story this movie covers is a very important one in the history of a country that went from the fascist rule of a dictatorship to democracy without condemning the hierarchy of the previous government for their abuses. Clearly that caused problems in the transition to democracy and arguably those problems are still present today. There are so many historical, political and social issues involved that they cannot easily be treated in 111 minutes. However; that is no excuse for producing a film lacking in focus and development... unless the objective is solely to get the audience worked up.Perhaps a remake will do a better job. Perhaps a subsequent treatment will be worth watching. Aside from Natalia Verbeke's 5 minutes, this one sure is not.