I am sure a number of 'watchers' may have found this boring and 'stupid' but if you look at the way the internet has changed the world and there are more and more 'Internet of Things', this literally is leading into that direction. Are there not places now where you are watched? Are there not people 'following' others around because they feel those people have more interesting lives? This is an idealist view, but humans have a tendency to never be 'stable' those that push for openness in many instances also 'hide'. Thinking of 'clean the swamp' Take out all the alligators and replace them with crocodiles :)
Admittedly, the acting quality was not as important as the content, and all seemed more than sufficient for that. I thought the movie itself was more than worth my time.
The Circle ~ As idealistic As it comes, per the best intentions and purposes noted, albeit exposed hypocrisies. AND the later, as goes the multi-varied learning processes of humans, have always come to bear on the former. Including for all the potential of nuclear energy and military influence in governments- per the warnings of such great leaders as Einstein and Eisenhower. Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to so often rely on 20/20 hindsight, given all the pain and loss that precedes it, in order to develop ways and means to true progress. Including for true social and political transparency, as we've learned from Facebook that transparency in social interaction can be used and abused.
If we can't get our political leaders to attain and maintain it, then can we trust those who would actually manage the systems that facilitate transparency, to work justly and honorably for social interaction? IMO - we can attain all that, incrementally over a LONG period of time, as we also elect leadership to maintain good example. Over a V-E-R-Y long period of time, that is, and IF enough of us *understand* that it likely requires the constant and consistent persistence of faith, observation, and socio-political action, through three or four generations of a growing and eventually significant proportion of societies. And doing that with continuing encouragement of self-empowerment for that and necessary complementary purposes. EG: Fulfilling a virtual requirement for personal growth (certainly psycho-emotionally, almost certainly intellectually) on a grand scale, to say the least.
"Anything is possible"? Yes, by certain individuals in accordance with understandings of such as the above, perhaps. But by large segments of society? ANY thing? I would repeat the "We Can" cheer, but we've never before has there been such a movement free from attack by significant forces for the purpose of disillusionment, if not destruction. Nor have we seen a significant movement of near whole societies encouraging its adherents to self-empowerment over -what, more than a decade or so(?)- unless for monetary and/or militarist purposes. How many people how fast can we teach that personal growth on a large scale translates to monetary progress, if not also a likely eradication of need for a military? I know, sounds like the ole' 60's "Human Potential" movement, more dreamy idealism, thence BS.
So I'll just end by paraphrasing the quotes of a few leaders: Only a group of committed individuals can make a worthy difference for society - first within themselves, then with others - but ONLY As they ALSO simultaneously increasingly do the same, WITH others... But you already knew that (sans the redundancy), right? [ref4Src: "PolyPsyArts, Citizen Healing"]
Bad acting overall. Pushed ourselves to watch this through to the end. Boring movie.
I thought it was interesting, thought Emma Watson did a fine job, thought that it was good to see Nebula outside of costume, and thought it was a fair way to spend an hour and forty minutes.
Like many near-future tech movies / tv shows, this one is unlikely to happen exactly, but brings up excellent points about censorship, transparency, privacy, safety, and other ethical problems that arise with the way our world is headed.
I watched over half to see where it was going. Got bored and didn’t really care, so quit.
Watson's acting bad; Hanks' acting good. Surprise twist at the end makes up for the screenwriter's choice to edit out the cultural critique of Amazon shopping the book includes. (The book is a must read tho dull in spots.) I don't know how some reviewers got the impression that this is an action movie It is psychological drama/pre-apocalypse warning.
I was expecting thrill, excitement, suspense. It seems like it was being built up, then nothing. As if the movie was just a story told be someone’s life instead of a madeup story. And the ending, “exposing” the two guys....... exposing what?!..... and then a bright light fills the screen. That’s it?!
This movie was not as bad as I was led to believe by the critics. I found it very informative and believable about how social media outlets and technology in general can be both a good and a bad thing.
I wasn't impressed with the acting but that not why I watched the movie, I wanted a good storyline that toward the end of movie gave me something deep to think about and I got that after the movie finished.
Privacy verus security. Though the conflict between the two we see in this movie may never reach the exaggerted level we see here; this is a very real issue that is already working itself out in the real world.
This movie gives the viewer a lot to think about. The above record is rather limited in information I just checked the reviews on the book and they are well done. From what I can tell without having read the book the movie seems to have followed the story of the book very closely so if you want to know more check-out the record of the book by Dave Eggers; also available from SPL.
Most of The Circle Employees seem to accept that everybody should know everything about them. It is like they have been seduced by a crazy religious cult.
Perhaps Tom Hanks' most villainous role.
Ends suddenly and without a satisfactory resolution for all the suspense it built. The acting is good, but the story just lacks something. The main character doesn't actually learn anything or challenge anything that scares her about this social media-dominated world; in fact, she buys into the propaganda that social media makes us happier. She only changes who the doorkeepers for the information are; this seems stupid and counterproductive, which our main character has proven over and over she is not.
The Circle is a classic example of how social engineering can use an on-line social program to create group think. Several movies were referenced: Manufactured Consent, Shadow Government and Soylent Green.
The dark database lurked beneath a face plate where input could be restricted access at the flip of a switch. A green substance consumed by the main character without much hesitation, contained sensors to track the subject via biometrics. A Phase IV Pharmaceutical trial was being tested with Adderall.
Several Patent Developments were prevalent throughout, from Google to a top executive who was a former US Government employee for defense related issues, Tommy Thompson of Verichips to the HHS and Hin Kai to the Army.
This reads as a Manifesto for a totalitarian regime. It attempts to create a new age belief that worships technology. This is the type of thing that keeps me in constant prayer!
Generally well made, and has a good cast. The implications are rather terrifying when you stop and think how much of this has already happened. On the other hand, it does feel a tad boring in places, and it does end on a rather sudden note, making you wonder where the last act of the movie is.
Can't help but wonder if Facebook, Google, or any number of other big social media corporations were involved in this weird social-media propaganda piece. A life like this would be (is?) hell for introverts.
Controlling big brother Facebook type of company called "The Circle" fools young people into sharing every part of their lives on their platform. Sounds a little like what's already happening. A truly frightening and insightful plot.
I do agree with another reviewer that this movie is boring except for one big scene toward the end of the movie.
It helps to have read the novel. This movie isn't great but it does take a shot at addressing how our lives are affected by the interconnection of everything in general and social media in particular. A few years ago, I started to think of social media as "Little Brother." Today, as we follow news about Facebook, net neutrality, cyber crime, election manipulation, and related topics, it is apparent that Little Brother is growing up!
The idea and the plot are terrifying when you give it some thought. The movie, however, was more than a bit dull and rather saccharine. Read the book it was based on instead.