Recensioni degli utenti

The great director who's not afraid to tackle matters of war, conspiracy and controversial American political issues, has returned. Only this time, Oliver Stone has upgraded his latest film's look and tone to make it seem more digitally advanced, which is fine because it fits the story of Edward Snowden and we're living in this day and age where every millennial's favorite series happens to be "Mr. Robot." SNOWDEN, as you've guessed it, is a thriller about the whistleblower and former intelligence contractor, Edward Snowden, played in this film by the talented Joseph Gordon-Levitt. "Divergent" star, Shailene Woodley plays his girlfriend, Lindsay Mills, who stays by his side through his ordeals of working for the government due to his patriotism while at the same time feeling conflicted about how the government runs its methods in the name of national security. This film dramatizes the events that led Snowden to becoming one of the most wanted men in the world.

First, I have to give praises to Joseph Gordon-Levitt who I think went above and beyond in not only capturing Edward Snowden's mannerism and the way he speaks but my goodness, Gordon-Levitt's performance in this film is so calculating and precise, you can see his brains constantly work itself out, just by looking at him. And Shailene Woodley gives her most mature performance yet, because this film is more than just about the whole surveillance controversy, it's also about how that negatively affects Snowden & Mills relationship and I think it's fairly handled, both aspects don't take away or diminish each other's importance in the process.

When it comes to the film's dramatizing the U.S. and British global surveillance program, I'm sure there'll be questions as to how authentic the portrayal is, as far as the headquarters are concerned, for example, some may see it as a bit too much like a Bond villain's secret lair, but you'll be entertained by some of the visual effects that the film applies to showcase hacking and how one person can connect to another person and to another person and what's most fascinating about it is that there's a programmer watching the whole thing the entire time.

So SNOWDEN is essentially part conspiracy thriller, part relationship drama, and to a certain extent, part heist. Overall, I think it's a riveting film that keeps you engaged and more importantly gets you thinking, which I think is the goal of Oliver Stone's movies. Does the film lean one way in that it paints Edward Snowden as a hero? I think so, but not in a way that intentionally judges those who at the end still think of him as a traitor. SNOWDEN might cause audiences to become more paranoid or it might cause audiences to start supporting any effort to hold our government accountable. The jury's still out.

-- Rama's Screen --

This movie succeeds in padding out the personal dimension of the Edward Snowden story. Its focus is the impact of Snowden's highly secretive, demanding work on his home life – and particularly on his relationship with his girlfriend, Lindsay.

The Snowden story is so bloody interesting – which makes this film interesting, thought-provoking and definitely worth a watch. However, the script was a bit melodramatic at times and I did find myself wishing they had done a better job with the content.

If you're interested in Snowden generally, I would definitely recommend the documentary Citizenfour over this one. But if you've already seen it, then it's worth adding this one to your watch list.

It's a great Oliver stone movie, seems right up his alley to do a film About a conspiracy and about questioning the government.

It's weird when people do movies about such recent events but hey that's how fast the media works these days.

It's a great ensemble cast as Stone tells the story of Edward Snowden who discovered that the government was spying on us weather we did anything wrong or not and decides to let us all know.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Snowden as a very likable guy, even if he was a Bush supporter, but most importantly he was a dude who loves his country and felt what they were doing to its citizens was wrong.

As Snowden, Levitt had the biggest chunk of screen time in a film filled with well know actors taking small, but important roles, like Zachary Quinto who played the guardian journalist chosen to tell Snowden's story and Nicolas Cage who's character acted like a mentor for Snowden's at the CIA.

Stone's fairness to the whole situation is painting a lovely portrait of the whistle blower himself

Edward Snowden is one of the most fascinating Americans alive, so it's no wonder his life has been made into a movie. After the documentary Citizenfour, it's already the second film featuring the famous whistle-blower. Citizenfour focused on the days Snowden spent in a hotel room in Hong Kong, where he invited two journalists who published the news about the massive surveillance of millions of people. Oliver Stone's new film takes a different approach and shows us Snowden's back story. His life is shown in flash backs from the hotel room scenes. What made him decide to basically give up his comfortable life and spend the rest of his days in exile? Stone shows how Snowden slowly changed from a patriotic army soldier into a concerned citizen. When he and his girlfriend Lindsay discuss the war in Iraq, shortly after they have met, they disagree. He defends the war, and ridicules Lindsay's liberal views and her participation in anti-war protests. She tells him: 'America is founded on the right to question our government'. Years later, he uses those exact words to explain and defend his whistle-blowing.

The relationship between Snowden and his girlfriend gets relatively much attention in the film. On the one hand because a love interest is always nice for a Hollywood film, but on the other hand also because it is important for the development of Snowden's mindset. His work for the NSA influences their relationship, not only because they have to live abroad, but also because it seems even Lindsay's e-mail and online conversations are being tracked and placed under surveillance. Is this the final straw that makes him decide to take bold actions?

What bothered me about the film is that it is a bit too clean-cut. The intelligence agencies are full of giant screens and slick technology, there are some romantic scenes, and the film looks overall very smooth. It's a rather classic biopic, without much cinematographic added value. For a subject as controversial as the NSA-leaks, and a for a film maker with a reputation such as Stone, that's a little bit disappointing.

For those who don't like documentaries (the documentary about Snowden, which is part of this movie, is excellent education about what our government can do with us) watch this first. Oliver Stone paints a portrait of a stand-up, pretty much button down guy who realizes the work he falls into is anything but what he was taught was right -- and then he needs to find a way out, without endangering his girlfriend. Another great film about a whistleblower --- and for his whistleblowing, he faces far harsher penalties just for coming home. Oliver Stone delivers thought provoking film again, and the entire cast, as well as the writing, is stellar.

For those who made up their mind about Ed Snowden through what was reported in mass media, I would simply say, watch this with an open mind. What happened to him could happen to any of us. This is a cautionary tale based on true facts told in the most exquisite way by Stone and his cast.

Isabeau Vollhardt, author, The Casebook of Elisha Grey

Let me preface this by saying that the film cinematically was good. However, my criticisms regard the impact of the film in relation to the true events that took place, and the real Edward Snowden.

The main character in the movie 'Snowden' was a dishonest and grossly false representation of the real Edward Snowden. Oliver Stone portrays him as this hot shot genius big-wig within the NSA and CIA when the truth is that Edward Snowden was really a mid-level intelligence analyst. I thought that took a lot away from the real story, being that Edward Snowden was one of many ordinary government employees and what made him different is that he had the courage of his convictions to speak up and become a whistle-blower when he saw that our government was acting against the democratic principles for which this country was founded upon.

The real Edward Snowden shows us that even everyday Americans can become true patriotic heroes by speaking up when they see something they know is wrong. It is clear and obvious that the programs he revealed that ARE STILL BEING USED TODAY are completely prohibited by the 4th Amendment.

Very well made movie, very well acted, and directed.

Going in I was worried that the movie would turn into an action thriller or a love story that would cloud what really happened.

I was pleasantly surprised to find a step by step account of real events with a deep look at what goes on behind the scenes at the various spy agencies.

Personally I would have liked a little more time spent on the politicians (and other behind the scenes players) and how they acted before and after the Snowden revelations, but maybe that's a topic for another movie…

I would recommend this movie to anyone interested in modern history and geopolitics

I went to watch Snowden with someone who was extremely well informed about the subject while I sadly wasn't and while we had extremely different perspectives going into it, I believe it is safe to say both thought the movie was pretty darn awesome. From the former point of view, it appears some important things were left out, while I kept getting stuck on stuff like how does a guy who did not even finish high school and obviously really wants to make it in Special Forces turn out to be such a genius, only being self-taught.

The fact is the story enthralled me. Even if some things felt cheesy, especially the abuse of light surrounding the main character in key moments, the fact is due to such a strong issue and Joseph Gordon-Levitt's stellar performance (queue choir of angels – yes, I am biased towards this guy, sue me), this was indeed a memorable experience.

I mean, that guy obviously did such a brilliant character study. I cannot get past how he placed his voice. The facial expressions and ticks, the way he held himself, a lovely mixture of a fragile and strong young man with principles literally held me at the edge of my seat sometimes – I had to keep reminding myself to sit back.

Some things did throw me off besides what I mentioned above, such as the way he got the information out (the entire process just seemed oversimplified) – and really every single time he expressed his obviously dangerous points of view.

However, I had a terrific time watching this and I highly recommend it. Makes me want to watch the documentary, to find out what really happened and what is just in the movie.

Oliver Stone's realization of the Citizenfour documentary and Snowden's backstory veers into being mostly a political document about technology and surveillance instead of a biopic. And he lets it all hang out. There are many truthful, but cumbersome and exhausting speeches. Tonally, never-ending drollness leaves you wondering when it all will end. The script in all with how overwrought it becomes leads to embarrassing moments as well. The acting is so-so and it's technically competent. Accurate? Check out the boatload of source material it's based on. But it's a terrible, terrible way to drain two hours out of your day. Watch the slightly shorter citizenfour documentary over it. Each techno-thriller offers different insights, but Citizenfour is powerful without artificially inserted drama.

I watched "Snowden" right after watching Aaron Sorkin's "The Trial of the Chicago 7" and found it fascinating and intense. The two movies are an interesting pairing.

I admit I'm much more of a Sorkin fangirl than an admirer of Oliver Stone. That's just me. Still, I think Stone does a decent job with "Snowden," in part because after the credits finished, I sat and thought about it for a long time.

I never really had a strong opinion about Snowden until now. I didn't really comprehend what he did and the extent and significance of what he revealed. I just sort of assume that government is corrupt and unfair. And so I shrugged off the Snowden drama, and wrongly so. It depicts, just like the "Chicago 7" film depicts, the horrifying things our government is capable of doing. Here, again, is a lesson that we need whistleblowers who are willing to speak truth to power. Beyond that, we must all be vigilant.

The acting is great. It is an interesting coincidence that Gordon-Levitt is in both this film and "Chicago 7". He's just a fabulous actor and in nearly every single scene of this 2 hour movie he simply rocks.

There's a scene at the very end of the movie where all of a sudden we realize we are no longer seeing Gordon-Levitt but Snowden, himself. It's incredibly poignant. I guess that is footage from a documentary. At any rate, I love the shock of the juxtaposition.

Here in 2020 many of us yearn for Obama. Seeing this film is like having a cold glass of water thrown at your face. Barack should have pardoned Snowden. Shame on him for not doing that. Hopefully one day we will bring him home alive and well. He deserves that.

I am not one who, generally, likes to place any credence on the Hollywood excuse of dramatizing events to 'educate' the public. But, I am also one who is not inclined to watch Oliver Stone's genre of movies of any kind. This movie becomes an exception to that rule and only because of a chance encounter with it in a local library. Watching this movie compelled me to review the Snowden story. I tend to agree that this insistence that twisting the facts to make a movie more interesting is 'artistic license which often offends me. However, the results of this movie are that the people who are expected to diss it, for example, NSA overseers, do try to dismiss its value. I do intend, now, to watch Citizenfour, hoping that it will be truer to the truths behind the Snowden incident. What is disappointing is that this movie, with its astute references to the duty of every government employee, EVERYWHERE, to protect the truth and our freedoms over the motives of the entrenched elitists of our society, has NOT motivated many citizens on this planet to ask why the principles of the 1946 trials in Nuremberg are not legally protected in ANY OF our so-called 'democratic nations' on this planet. I am 66 years old, a former scientist who lost his job temporarily for daring to demand that the scientific truths I was responsible to be protected (in 1982). I paused from writing 'those books' which are my record as to why Snowden was indeed a principled man, no matter what the detractors say. Perhaps every viewer should watch this movie with the subtitles on and then ask why 'grand America', whose citizens seem to think like that 'fictional' NSA overseer, is NOT the protectorate of our freedoms and is, instead, silent to the very thing parts of this movie warn us about. In 2018, this movie, despite its shortcomings when it comes to dealing with the facts of the Snowden incident, should awaken ALL true 'democrats' to why a lawyer with constitutional training, Barack Obama, would summarily execute a distant murderer without trial (Osama bin Laden), justify this violation of international law and then become vindictive when the corruption of these partisan serving agencies is exposed by a whistleblower. This film is good at exposing the background dilemma which comes from making partisans, bound to their rich donors, above the law. Obama, this film reminds us, failed this planet and democracy so badly that we are left with a man like Trump, with a finger poised on dangerous weapons of mass destruction, 'for America'. It is sad that this movie seems to have failed us in opening up a debate which the subtitles do expose: when we suppress the freedoms that are compelled to allow criticism of those in positions of power, we do take this planet back to 1929. No matter what the lessons of Nuremberg are, which Oliver Stone appropriately draws into a movie which should compel greater citizen engagement in questioning all of this into 2018. Is it this movie which fails us or are we back to 1933 where journalists and others warned and the citizenry remained more interested in the theatre and movies? Don MacAlpine, Wolseley, Saskatchewan, Canada ... Live not in fear but in personal acknowledgement of the individual duty to protect the truth over self-serving interests of the powerfully positioned ...

In June, 2013, it came out that the National Security Agency had a massive espionage network in place. Within a few days, the source of the information revealed himself. Edward Snowden was a computer professional who had been working first for the CIA, and then switched to the NSA. Before long, his conscience started bothering him, and so he downloaded evidence of the espionage network, flew to Hong Kong, and revealed it to journalists Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill, while director Laura Poitras filmed the interview. Without a doubt it was the biggest story of 2013.

This story got told in Poitras's Oscar-winning documentary "Citizenfour". Oliver Stone's "Snowden" tells the story, but also looks at the years leading up to Snowden's employment by the NSA: his military service, his stationing in Geneva, and then Japan, and finally his employment with the NSA outlet in Hawaii.

I don't know if I would go so far as to call this a masterpiece, but what's mind-blowing is the sheer scope of not just the espionage network, but everything else that it comprised. Without a doubt, the most important scene is the worldwide revelation of Snowden's leaks, and Snowden's subsequent flight to Russia, where he remains to this day.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a fine job as Snowden, as do Shailene Woodley as his lover Lindsay Mills. The rest of the cast includes Zachary Quinto (Spock in the "Star Trek" reboot) as Greenwald, Melissa Leo (Alice in "The Fighter") as Poitras, and an assortment of other people, including some surprise cast members.

All in all, I recommend the movie. Even though the viewer knows the plot, it's still a suspenseful story.

Edward Snowden has had an interesting episode in his life defying the most powerful spy agency and in the process becoming both a hero and a villain depending on our view of his actions. What Oliver Stone got right is his casting and what he got wrong is that he picked a side. Considering this is a contemporary issue with an on-going raging debate about his actions, a popular movie showcasing Edward Snowden as a hero will no doubt influence the public perception whoever doesn't watch it with an open mind.

Snowden (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a patriotic youngster who joins the army to serve his country. When a training accident leaves him unfit for field duty, his expertise and interest in computers leads him to join the training for the virtual battleground under his mentor Corbin O'Brian (Rhys Ifans). When he meets his liberal girlfriend Lindsay Mills (Shailene Woodley), a section of his thought process gets unlocked leading to him questioning the actions of his agency and also himself. On the side, the sequences shown in the documentary where Snowden meets journalists and filmmakers Laura Poitras (Melissa Leo), Glenn Greenwald (Zachary Quinto) and Ewen MacAskill (Tom Wilkinson) in a Hong Kong hotel unfolds in a non-linear mode;

There is no doubt about the weight of Snowden's revelations. Snooping on the private space of normal citizens across the world including the domestic American citizens is something that cannot be ignored. At the same time, how else does a security agency preempt an attack or a conspiracy without having options to filter between harmless and dangerous? It is a very thin line on which most of the security agencies around the world might walk in.

Getting Joseph Gordon-Levitt to play the titular character is job half done for Oliver Stone. Though Levitt looks already all geeky, he's hardly had an opportunity to play one and when he got one, he gives a performance par excellence. Bringing in the veterans like Leo and Wilkinson along with a proved talent like Quinto adds in the necessary depth and seriousness to the recreated documentary sequences. However the dramatization and and fictionalization might have gone a little too far when showing the entire NSA personnel having a very callous attitude towards private data of citizens which could not be true.

All the performances were excellent and especially enjoyed a very restrained performance by Nicolas Cage after such a long time. The background score adds to the thrill in some scenes and the screenplay is good in parts. However the runtime might be a little too long for a story which most knows how it ends. The bias is clearly visible when Snowden is shown as a hero and it could evoke some passionate discussions and debates from opinionistic viewers which is good for the movie.

Not sure about its sincerity and authenticity, but I just enjoyed it as a well made thriller full of good performances.

Oliver Stone has not been relevant for some time. The three time Oscar winner owned the 80's. Salvador, Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July, Talk Radio and Wall Street were some of the best the decade had to offer and cemented his name in film history. But by 1997's U-Turn., Stone had lost his magic. His next few films, Any Given Sunday, World Trade Center, Alexander and W. were critical bombs where overlong running times seemed to only further pat the directors own back with self-indulgence. And his last two films, Savage and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps were hardly anchors in what will eventually be a career DVD boxset.

Yet, when word began circulating that Stone was circling Snowden as his next film, many couldn't think of a director who would be better for the job. Based on the true events of former NSA/CIA employee Edward Snowden who became the center of equal praise and angst when he leaked thousands of classified documents to the press detailing the illegal surveillance tactics of the agencies, Stone attempts to tell the story of how Snowden eventually came to the crossroads in his life that lead him to be labelled as one of the biggest traitors in US history.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Snowden and his voice and mannerisms seem to capture the real life character to a tee. Stone based the biopic espionage thriller on books by Luke Harding and Anatoly Kucherena and switches back and forth in time between his revealing interview with Guardian reporters in 2013 to Snowden's attempts to join the military which was thwarted due to a degenerative leg injury. Snowden quickly goes from the hospital bed to the CIA and uses his cockiness and his innate ability to write code and interpret data.

Under the wing of protégé Corbin O'Brian (Rhys Ifans), Snowden quickly gets fast tracked through the ranks and travels the world in efforts of National Security. Along the way, Snowdwn meets Lindsay Mills (Shailene Woodley) who will become his female companion traveling the globe to stand by her man even as she is kept in the dark as to exactly the job description to which Snowden is fulfilling.

The film's pulse pounding moment comes when Snowden attempts to copy and extract from the secure intelligence facility, the files that when published showed to the world how surveillance works outside the confines of both US and International Law for benefits that could never be accounted. Even with the result never in doubt, Stone is able to lay the groundwork for some tense moments leading to Snowden's escape.

This marks the second film in as many years where actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays a real life character following his role as Phillippe Petit in Robert Zemeckis' under-appreciated The Walk. But this also marks the second time Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays a real life character in movie that is inferior to the documentaries that threw both stories into the spotlight. Both Man on a Wire and last year's Oscar winner for documentary best picture, Citizenfour, were superior films than their dramatized big budget adaptations.

Yet neither is the fault of the young former 3rd Rock from the Sun actor. Snowden collapses on the shoulders of director Stone who doesn't seem to care how long his films run on. Snowden clocks in at 134 minutes and it feels every bit as long as the time suggests. Watching Snowden switch from job to job/country to country is downright hard on the tushy as it is neither interesting enough to keep audiences on the edge of the seats nor important enough to keep us comfortable in the effort. Instead, the film runs out of gas long before Snowden finally determines that the information to which he is responsible must be revealed for the world to judge on merit.

It is an opportunity lost. Laura Poitras' Citizenfour was far superior and clearer in its description of the facts. Stone's Snowden seems muddled in the director's inability to cut entire scenes in the editing room.

And while most of the cast does a comparable job with little to actually do (including Melissa Leo, Zachery Quinto and Tom Wilkinson), Ifans and a role given to straight-to-video artist Nicholas Cage seem miscast. Woodley is good as the love interest and life partner, but is overused and we can't but think her continued screen time was Stone's attempt at giving the female audience members something in which to relate.

So Snowden doesn't exactly make Oliver Stone relevant again. Nor do we think the film will ignite another firestorm over the merits of Snowden's efforts. Instead, it is a mildly interesting film that bores audiences lulling them into a hopeless want for the dates on the screen to catch up with real time.

By far the biggest story of U.S. government malfeasance was uncovered in 2013, when a young man named Edward Snowden leaked out to the media and the world at large that his employers at the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency, besides spying on other countries, and terrorist organizations around the world, were also spying on all the electronic communications of everybody in the United States itself. These revelations made him a man without a country, and a fugitive charged under the Espionage Act of 1917 for allegedly revealing classified information that compromised the security and the lives of U.S. surveillance agents all over the world. It also made him perhaps the most dangerous whistleblower of government overreach in history, or at least since Daniel Ellsberg. And unsurprisingly, it was Oliver Stone, the director best known for his critiques of American political behavior with PLATOON, BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, JFK, and NIXON, who stepped into the breach of this, maybe the most important political story of our time, with SNOWDEN.

Based on Luke Harding's book "The Snowden Files" and Anatoly Kucherena's book "Time Of The Octopus", SNOWDEN stars Joseph Gordon-Leavitt as a young man who, both as an intellectual conservative and a patriot, worked his way up into the highest circles of the U.S. intelligence community during the first decade of the 21st century and the War On Terror, which involved less about stopping terrorism with military force but with the force of electronics and surveillance. This seems all good and fine to him, and he develops further programs to assist the intelligence community…until, as he looks up the data, twice as many communications have been monitored from within the U.S. itself as have been from even our most feared legitimate adversary, Russia. Much of the story is told in flashbacks and flash-forwards, as Gordon-Leavitt relates his story to documentary filmmaker Laura Poitros (Melissa Leo), journalist Glenn Greenwald (Zachary Quinto), and journalist Ewan MacAskill (Tom Wilkinson) in a hotel in Hong Kong (later detailed by the real-life Laura Poitros in her Oscar-winning 2014 documentary CITIZENFOUR). We see how his life, especially with his girlfriend (Shailene Woodley) and his problems with epilepsy, comes unwound, and how he must go on the run after his revelations are published in the British newspaper The Guardian, which Greenwald and MacAskill worked for. He winds up at Moscow International Airport just a few days after his story hits the Internet in June 2013, and in exile, a fugitive from what passes for American justice in the 21st century.

Rather surprisingly, given his penchant for doing extremely controversial movies in his career, Stone was initially fairly reluctant to touch the Edward Snowden story in any way, shape, or form. But Kucherena (Snowden's real-life attorney in Russia) and Greenwald themselves convinced that it would be good for him to detail the story. Stone then agreed to do it, with Fitzgerald assisting him in the writing of the screenplay, and the result is one of the great films of 2016. Gordon-Leavitt is a near dead-ringer for the real-life Edward Snowden, who is seen at the end of the film detailing why he did what he did and why coming back to America would not result in his getting a fair trial. Although Stone had been well-known for doing films with quick-edged MTV-inspired montage sequences, including his notorious 1994 film NATURAL BORN KILLERS, he avoids doing much of that in SNOWDEN, instead concentrating on the inner workings of Snowden's work, and how much harm he may have been creating in the name of National Security, as opposed to merely keeping us "safe" from any more 9/11-type terrorism.

The subject matter that is broached by Stone in SNOWDEN, even with a relatively limited amount of violence and nudity (compared to other films of Stone's), is not easy to watch; nor is it necessarily easy to grasp in a lot of ways how the American people themselves, in the panic that followed September 11, 2001, basically acquiesced and allowed such mass surveillance to take place. Given the revelations in the early 1970s about Ellsberg's Pentagon Papers scandal, and those involving the FBI's Counterintelligence Program against anti-war protesters and civil rights activists, one might have thought that the people would have learned. But speaking truth against government power is a dangerous thing to do, and at the same time the right one; and SNOWDEN, its subject, and its maker, show it better than perhaps anyone else in Hollywood could ever do.

It's 2013. Edward Snowden (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is holed up with Glenn Greenwald (Zachary Quinto) and Laura Poitras (Melissa Leo) in a HongKong hotel room. They convince Guardian editor Ewen MacAskill (Tom Wilkinson) to print sensitive documents stolen by Snowden that implicates the US government in the widespread spying on the American public. Snowden was discharged from the military for medical reasons. He was an Ayn Rand loving Republican who served in the CIA. The highly skilled programmer has a long winding successful career but the unchecked intrusion starts to concern him. His stress affects his relationship with liberal girlfriend Lindsay Mills (Shailene Woodley). Eventually, he copied the files and smuggled them out of NSA.

There are some good information but Oliver Stone fails to make me root for Snowden no matter how hard he tries. And he tries very hard. JGL creates a naive true-believer who grows to hate the corruption of his work. Obviously, Stone has a point of view and is pushing a narrative from Snowden's side. I don't have a problem with that but he has to recruit my sympathies. In the end, a couple of his arguments rang hollow. JGL's mimicry of Snowden does not help. He has a flat speaking voice with some minor autistic tendencies. It's not like the general public knows his voice so it's not really necessary. The information is good but public affairs have overtaken his story. It's almost quaint at this point.

For a controversial subject like Snowden it is important that the movie be at least moderately accurate. This movie will probably be how many viewers form their basic understanding of what happened - and that would be a great shame.

If you want to know the real story, check out Citizenfour which is a documentary and makes an attempt to be honest.

An useful film. more than good. because it reminds basic truths. becuse it is a precise portrait of contemporary world. and, not the last, because it represents a real happy meet between Oliver Stone and Joseph Gordon - Levitt. and , after its end credits, you discover than it is not a film about a specific man, traitor or patriot, but about yourself and a sacrifice changing, at first sigh, nothing but moving evident truths in the light. and the manner to say this story, who remains, step by scene, your story is convincing to impecable. because, against technical details, is the most simple story. about power, freedom and fears, lies and political power, hypocisi and ideals. so, a great movie.