The Circle

Robbie K back, after being off the grid for a week. Tonight's review is on the latest "dystopian" feature film called The Circle. Former Hermione Granger, and more recently Belle, Emma Watson leads the film as she attempts to take us into the workings of a technological conglomerate who has knowledge as its key principle. Yet the trailers paint a much darker secret hidden in its stony walls, one that promises to be a real nail biter. Will this movie deliver those thrills, or are we stuck with another wash out? I'll do my best to answer that question, so sit back, and please read my latest thoughts.

LIKES:

• Nice tool development • Emma Watson • Culturally Relevant Film • Solid Moral Lesson

Summary: We all know technology is becoming the heart of the world, if not already the heart of this country. And certainly, we all know that these technological marvels often require laborious development and maintenance to get the bugs out. The Circle portrays this very well, helping to develop the very tool that we all love. Throughout the journey, you'll get to see the development of the two-faced beast that is technology, and how it requires tweaking to get just "right". Not the highest selling point for a movie, but pretty cool.

Of course, we all know many are going to go for the lovely Ms. Watson, to support the super actress they adore. Good news, Watson does a solid job holding up most of the movie, as she is primary the only main character of the film. Watson brings her charm to the screen once more, portraying intelligence, fortitude and inspiration in a manner that many will latch on to. Her accent is pretty sound (though it fluctuates at times), but she manages to deliver her lines with a decent balance of emotion, to sell her points… most of the time.

Yet the biggest strength of these movies is how culturally relevant it is to the audience. If you didn't gleam it from the trailers, The Circle is essentially a modernized version of the novel 1984 that once more addresses the issues of control, life sharing, and privacy. The film is certainly very political, but has a number of powerful lessons to teach about the place of technology and how easily it can be twisted. I myself liked the comments from Emma's followers, a fantastic representation of the shallow, superficial, and often selfish focus that the internet provides. The scenes are well developed to deliver the full emotional punch, which while not the most unique, can really shock you to the core at how true it can be.

DISLIKES: • Cheesy acting at times • Other actors diluted • Missed character development • Ignorant/Idiotic moments • Lack of Suspense

Summary: Despite Watson's strong performance, she is involved in some overly cheesy moments. On many of the emotionally heated moments, she loses her balance and stretches into the overdramatic region, losing her accent and dialogue forte in the process. But even her worst acting doesn't hold a candle to some of the supporting characters who give either emotionally dull deliveries or lackluster performances. These moments are noticeable enough to offset the momentum of the movie, and derailing it from the quality the trailers promised.

An even worse quality for me was how the other actors of the star-studded cast were reduced to simplistic roles. Legends like Tom Hanks, Patton Oswalt and even the late Bill Paxton are reduced to very linear roles, with little character development or expansion beyond what you've seen in the trailer. With such a strong cast, I can't help but feel disappointed at the missed potential of this movie and how much this all-star cast could have done to amp up the quality of this movie.

Even worse, some of the characters, primarily Emma Watson's character, become so blindly ignorant that the intelligence they worked so hard building is diluted to an idiotic level. As a result, I found myself starting to loathe the character and how 180 they took the character. Yes, I understand the premise behind the movie, but it didn't work for me. Other characters also fell into this mix as well, each built to have this incredible skill that was either not used or rapidly reversed to make the characters seem weak.

Yet the most disappointing aspect of this movie…is the lack of suspense. The trailer made this film out to be a mystery meeting dystopian policing. Not the case at all. The Circle has no mystery, laying all the facts on the table and leaving little to be uncovered. You would think there would be intense moments of espionage, or policing by superiors to build up excitement, right? Sorry, this film doesn't have that either, with the "exciting climax" not showing up until the last twenty minutes of the movie. As such, the movie is pretty dull and lacks the entertainment quality you might have been seeking.

The VERDICT:

The Circle is indeed a "scary" film, but it's mainly due to the reality check provides concerning the dangers technology can provide. This strong message is certainly the strongest aspect of the movie and Emma Watson was a fantastic choice to deliver it. Unfortunately, the weak characters, diluted roles, and lack of suspense took away from the entertainment quality of the movie. Such a dull delivery, leaves me recommending this one for renting at home, or at least recommending you read the book (or books) it is based on.

My scores are:

Drama/Sci-Fi/Thriller: 6.0 Movie Overall: 5.0

"Knowing is good, but knowing everything is better." Bailey (Tom Hanks)

How much information is too much? The Circle shows in a direct and melodramatic form that the saturation point is here. Mae (Emma Watson) is hired by a tech-centered firm, an amalgam of Apple, Facebook, and the CIA. Their inclusion-full-knowledge mantra culminates in Mae's agreeing to have complete transparency, a Truman Show for our time.

Bailey is the Steve-Jobs guru, whose weekly assembly for the campus is a model of group think and cultism, launching from the newest technology to the newest invasion of privacy. The willingness of the audience to embrace everything from the unethical farming of information to his obviously self-serving anecdotes suggests Jim-Jones cool-aid-audience imbibing.

The film is an attention-getting, absorbing object lesson in neglecting critical thinking.

The film's provocative theme about full disclosure includes the implied dialectic between the common good and privacy. Knowing where criminals are, such as in our sex-offender laws, is good in the case of creeps but scary when innocent citizens are the object.

Two incidents close to the protagonist illustrate the effects of private invasion, one for survival, the other for denying the efficacy. The former is about saving Mae from drowning because of surveillance and the other about the world seeing her aging parents having sex. No one could wish not to have life-saving surveillance; no one could want parental transparency 24/7.

The Circle is frequently simplistic, e.g., having records that allow automatic registration for voting but also require voting, ignores invasion of privacy and personal choice.

None of this polemic completely negates the efficacy of social media and constant contact. However, transparency, the film suggests, invades and makes circus-like a privacy our Constitution implies.

The camera spends too much time on Mae's bland, wondering stare and meaningless conversations that would be better spent arguing the mission of the Circle. At least it's a start toward better regulation of social information both public and private.

Director James Ponsoldt's The Circle depicts the story of a not-so-distant future, or perhaps an alternative present, in which one company dominates digital media, data gathering, and surveillance services. Based upon the four-year-old novel by author Dave Eggers, you'll notice some stark similarities between this motion picture narrative and the smash hit TV series Black Mirror. The biggest difference between the two is that The Circle is fast-faced and poorly written whereas Black Mirror is a slow-burning but well-written anthology series. In addition to the similarities between the aforementioned, there are certainly elements of The Truman Show in this movie as well. With a powerhouse cast, brilliant composer (Danny Elfman), and excellent editing, The Circle appears to have what a blockbuster needs; however, the hollow characters, poor character development, fractured subplots, and overall diegesis hold the film back from reaching the impact that it could have had. Having taken a digital media and privacy class in graduate school, and published a few articles, this is a film that I was looking forward to in order to analyze how the social commentary or commentary on the human condition regarding reasonable expectations of privacy and big data were integrated into the plot. Sadly, the screenplay was not strong or developed significantly enough to provide big data and privacy discussions.

Mae Holland (Emma Watson) hates her job at the water company, so she is incredibly excited when her friend Annie (Karen Gillan) lands Mae an interview at The Circle, the world's most powerful technology and social media company. Mae's fear of unfulfilled potential impresses the recruiters at The Circle and she lands the opportunity of a lifetime. After Mae puts herself into harm's way but rescued, thanks to The Circle's newest surveillance and data gathering system, she is encouraged by the company founder Eamon Bailey (Tom Hanks) to take a more active role in technology development by participating in an experiment that puts Mae's life on display for the world (in the vein of The Truman Show) to see. Once Mae turns on that camera, she has more "friends" than she ever imagined and becomes an instant online celebrity. Unfortunately, this decision will affect those closest to Mae and the negative ramifications will reach far beyond her inner circle and begin to impact humanity at large. Sometimes, people just don't want to be found or be "social."

For all The Circle has going for it, the weak screenplay keeps it from being the blockbuster that it so desperately wants to be. A great movie typically begins with solid writing, and that is what's missing here. After five minutes (or so it seems) of opening title logos, perhaps that is indirect evidence that there were just too many hands in the pot, each trying to take the movie's narrative in a different direction. Much like Frozen plays off like two different movies crudely sewn together, The Circle appears to be one movie for the first two acts, but takes an unexpected and unfulfilling turn in the third. A couple of conspicuous unanswered questions come after Mae meets TrueYou designer and founder Ty (John Boyega). He designed the platform that launched The Circle. At one point he asks Mae to meet him in a secret tunnel (where all the servers are stored) and tells her that "it's worse than I thought." Great opportunity to introduce intrigue, suspense, and more. The problem is that the audience is never told what Ty finds or what happens with what he found. You can remove that whole subplot and the movie remains the same. There are other subplots that are nicely introduced, but never carried out as well. Any or all of them can be removed and the film proceeds the same. Not good. If you can remove several subplots or unfulfilled turning points and the film's diegesis remain largely untouched, then you have poor writing. The third act in and of itself leaves audiences with a hurried ending that does little to provide closure to the narrative; however, it does support the film's circular logic and irony. Hardly satisfying.

In terms of the allegory here, The Circle is a Google-like company with Apple's technology. Eamon Bailey is a Steve Jobs type innovator with characteristics of Mark Zuckerberg and Google's Eric Schmidt. Thankfully, The Circle does not represent any one company, but rather combines all the most notable innovations and technological achievements of Google, Apple, Facebook, Instagram, and more into one globally dominating company. Antitrust issues are introduced early on, but again, that's never fully developed. The movie highlights many issues faced by private citizens, governments, and digital data driven companies today; therefore, it sets the foundation for a movie that could have been thought-provoking, but the writing hinders that ability. The irony in the movie is for every digital answer to streamlining services or bolstering conveniences, a little privacy is eroded each time. Pretty soon, if one shares enough information, the idea of privacy is extinct. Privacy was central to the plot, but it just wasn't handled in the most effective way. Concepts such as "off the grid," self-proclaimed "celebrity," and "calls to action" are displayed and discussed in the film, connecting this augmented reality to real-world issues each of us encounter or think about. One particularly interesting theme in the movie is deep friendship. Unfortunately, this was not fully fleshed as is the case with most of the movie; but still, it does get touched upon.

If you were hoping for another film like the brilliant Social Network, then you will undoubtedly be disappointed. Films such as The Circle should be memorable, but unfortunately this one is very much forgettable. Coincidentally, the movie itself is as hollow as the plot and characters.

Written by R.L. Terry

Edited by J.M. Wead

I was a big fan of Dave Eggers' A Hologram for the King. It was a fantastic read for enjoyment and to analyze. The film adaptation also did not disappoint. When The Circle was announced as a film I immediately checked out the book. To my disappointment, the film wasn't as interesting an got to bogged down to its technological ventures and wasn't exactly the best read. However, I held out hope that the film would be able to impress, especially with the star studded cast at the helm.

Emma Watson plays Mae Holland an ambitious young customer service rep who joins The Circle, a cutting edge technology based company that seems to be growing at fast pace and changing the future. The thing is, the technological leap of the company leads to massive privacy concerns and the company seems to be capable of more than what initially meets the eye. First off, I will say that the scathing reviews I've seen for the film are somewhat unwarranted, however the film is far from perfect and could have been much better.

The plot may seem like its minimal or nonexistent but this wasn't really my concern. I was more concerned with things being introduced into the film that have no real importance later in the film. John Boyega's character is a glorified cameo that seems to just be there as a big name. In the book the character is mysterious has a much larger effect on Mae's life. The ending of the film leaves much more to be desired; there needed to be more explanation onto what the reveal was and anything about repercussions.

The film is littered with talented people but unfortunately the writing and the structure of the film really lets them down. Its a misfire really, and the film needed to be much better and have a stronger central message. I feel like parts of the film and scenes were left on the cutting room floor. The film isn't exactly terrible but its most certainly unfulfilled and really could have left a stronger impression.

6/10

No wonder the millennials hate this movie. This is not the best movie you'll ever see, but it's better that one would conclude reading all the hate reviews that flooded IMDB. The plot and acting are decent, camera and editing nothing to write home about but bearable, overall slightly better than average movie. The movie tells the story of the generation created to live in a minute, not even a day, manipulated so easily by people and organizations that prey on this mental flaw, or vulnerability, to be politically correct... It's a grim future.