This article was written exclusively for The Film Magazine by Jack Cameron.
Enemies of the State (2020)
Director: Sonia Kennebeck
Starring: Paul DeHart, Leann DeHart, Joel Widman
The appetite for true crime and investigative documentaries remains robust, and filmmakers continue to explore how modern technology reshapes how we perceive wrongdoing. Sonia Kennebeck’s documentary Enemies of the State enters this field by examining a case that sits at the intersection of online activism, whistleblowing, and alleged criminal behavior. The film resists easy categorization: it is part biographical portrait, part legal odyssey, and part meditation on the nature of truth in the digital age.
The documentary follows Matt DeHart and his parents, Paul and Leann, who left their home in Indiana and sought asylum in Canada. The core narrative hinges on DeHart’s history as an early participant in the online collective Anonymous and later as a server manager for WikiLeaks. According to the film, Matt came into possession of material from WikiLeaks that he believed could incriminate elements of the U.S. government. He never made that information public, but he maintains that possession of those materials made him a target for federal authorities.
Complicating the story are criminal charges brought against Matt: he was accused of creating and possessing child pornography, charges he denies and says were fabricated to discredit him. That contradiction frames the documentary’s central tension: is DeHart a whistleblower fleeing government retaliation, or is he a suspect attempting to elude accountability? Kennebeck allows both possibilities to surface, presenting interviews, legal context, and re-enactments that shape audience sympathy while keeping definitive answers out of reach.
Kennebeck employs a mix of interviews and stylized re-enactments; actors lip-sync to real recorded audio to convey moments when direct footage is unavailable. This technique, used effectively in films like The Arbor and Notes on Blindness, humanizes subjects whose primary voice might otherwise be absent from the screen. The documentary’s visual tone—cool, desaturated cinematography that recalls contemporary thriller aesthetics—heightens the drama, but sometimes that cinematic polish makes the underlying facts feel less immediate and more staged. The concern is not a matter of technique alone but whether the film’s style amplifies uncertainty instead of clarifying it.
For much of its runtime, Enemies of the State leans toward eliciting sympathy for Matt. Interviews with supporters, family members, and advocates for free speech frame his struggles as part of a larger clash between individual rights and expansive government power. The documentary presents accounts suggesting that Matt was detained and subjected to harsh treatment by investigators, and those elements contribute to an image of state overreach that many viewers will find compelling. At the same time, the filmmakers are careful—perhaps too careful—about producing conclusive documentary evidence. The alleged WikiLeaks documents that might prove a government vendetta are not revealed in the film, and corroborating material remains difficult to access given the secretive nature of intelligence investigations.
As the pace of the narrative slows, the film shifts focus from the specifics of the case to a more philosophical inquiry: How do we know what is true when so much can be manipulated, planted, or hidden online? This is a valuable question for documentaries that address whistleblowing, cyber-espionage, and digital evidence, yet Kennebeck introduces the idea late in the film and does not fully develop it. The result is a documentary that raises profound concerns about perception and verification but stops short of exploring them in depth. That structural choice may leave viewers feeling that they have been led through a compelling personal story only to be offered a general observation as an afterthought.
There is an ethical tightrope here. By devoting significant screen time to building Matt’s humanity—his family life, his supporters’ testimony, and his emotional ordeals—the film creates empathy for a figure who faces very serious allegations. At the same time, the lack of decisive proof on either side of the dispute sustains a persistent ambiguity. The documentary ends without a clear judgment, which is likely deliberate, but the unresolved conclusion may frustrate viewers seeking accountability or a firmer investigative outcome.
For those interested in documentaries about whistleblowers, online activism, and government secrecy, Enemies of the State offers a thoughtful, if incomplete, case study. It raises important questions about evidence, narrative framing, and the difficulties of investigating crimes that intersect with national security and digital networks. The film’s strengths lie in its human portraits and in prompting viewers to consider how truth is constructed in an era of encrypted files, anonymous networks, and political suspicion. Its weaknesses stem from a reluctance to pursue the documentary’s most provocative lines of inquiry to their logical conclusions.
12/24
Written by Jack Cameron
Support the author:
Twitter – @JackCam86118967
Contently – Jack Cameron