Snowden (2016) User Reviews (301)

Riveting! Joseph Gordon-Levitt gives an Oscar-worthy performance.

[Ramascreen · 8/10 · 11 September 2016]

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 --

New perspective on Snowden

[nataliejobrien · 7/10 · 30 September 2016]

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.

Well laid out movie.

[subxerogravity · 7/10 · 18 September 2016]

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

Classic, clean-cut film about a fascinating subject

[rubenm · 6/10 · 5 November 2016]

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.

Watch this instead of, or along with, the documentary: Keep an open mind

[cinswan · 10/10 · 29 March 2017]

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

Great thriller kindasorta based on true events

[vandeman-scott · 7/10 · 4 November 2020]

Oliver Stone isn't known for his faithfulness to historical fact. That dynamic remains true in SNOWDEN, an excellent and entertaining, if fictionalized, thriller. Viewers who understand and accept that each side of this particular moral and political dilemma will not receive equally fair consideration in a Stone film will be entertained in spite of the whitewashing of relevant facts.

This movie lacks the nuance necessary to illustrate adequately that good people can do the wrong things for the right reasons on both sides of the ideological equation. Snowden was right: The U. S. government was engaging in criminal acts under the guise of national security. That's made clear in the film.

What isn't made clear is the seriousness of Snowden's crime when he took it upon himself to release unilaterally highly sensitive, classified information that put the U. S. and its agents at grave risk rather than blow the whistle through proper channels first.

Both Snowden and the government were wrong. Both deserve to suffer appropriate consequences. Nevertheless, Snowden is portrayed as wholly good and the U. S. government as wholly bad. Thinking people know things are never that simple, and had complex realities been acknowledged, it would have made for a better and more interesting film.

The movie itself is a gem! Well written, well directed, and well acted, with a stellar performance by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. It's a highly entertaining film and well worth the watch. But if you're looking for a history lesson, this isn't it.

Excellent movie, well worth the price of admission.

[peter-31732 · 10/10 · 16 September 2016]

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

Gordon-Levitt excellent as Snowden

[harry_tk_yung · 9 October 2016]

One critic refers to a new subgenre when reviewing "Snowden" – a movie about very recent historic events. In this film, in particular, the protagonist's face is very familiar to the general public, even those who have not seen the topnotch documentary, Oscar-winner "Citizenfour". I have. And I have also watched most of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's major work (too many to list). Watching this talented actor's portrayal, I came to believe that I was actually watching the real Edward Snowden. At the concluding scene of the monumental Moscow interview, when the camera deftly superimposed the real Snowden while fading out Gordon-Levitt, I hardly even noticed. That is how good he is!

"Citizenfour" came entirely from the camera of Laura Poitras (who never appears herself in the film, except for her voice) recording the interview Snowden had in a hotel room with two other media veterans Glenn Greenwood and Ewen MacAskill. Oliver Stone's "Snowden", anchoring on that interview to which he allocates less than one third of screen time, uses flashbacks to cover two other aspects of this "astonishing" (Ewen MacAskill's parting words) young man – career and romance. Everyone knows that the key controversy here is "whistleblower" vs "traitor". In his film, Stone is telling the story as Snowden would have liked to tell it. Personally I have no problem with that. Anybody who wishes can make another movie of Snowden, portrayed as a criminal.

The earliest flashback is brief, showing Snowden's grueling military training that ends abruptly with discharge due to physical disability. While he can still walk normally after an accident, landing with a parachute will definitely result in breaking his leg again. The next segments show his early CIA days where his brilliance is perceived quite differently by two mentors, both fictional characters. Right-wings to his bones, Corbin O'Brian (Rhys Ifans, brilliant, scene-stealing) greets his class by telling them in no uncertain terms that if 911 happens again, it is their fault. He recognizes in Snowden the best student he has ever had as well as an immensely valuable asset to beefing up security. Hanks Forrester (Nicholas Cage, unimposing but scene-stealing in a different way) is fully sympathetic to this exceptionally talented young man who unfortunately, in his innocence, will eventually be disillusioned by the ruthless, unprincipled organization he is stuck with.

The romance story has been given considerable screen time, but handled in a low-key manner, which is the way it should be. This sequence is needed to build a three-dimensional character of the man Snowden, not just whistleblower Snowden. Even more importantly, it underscores the sacrifice Snowden has made. All he wants is a simple life with someone he loves and loves him. But on top of that, he also has affluence and lives in paradise (i.e. Hawaii). Shailene Woodley plays Lindsay Mills lovingly, a girl who clearly is nobody's fool but is also supportive when there are reasons to be. One subtext, likely unintentional, is the reflection of an ever-present dilemma that when respective careers dictate different locations for a couple, one has to concede if they want to stay together. In this story, he initially declines Hawaii because of her, but she eventually goes with him because the climate, she believes, will be helpful in his health problem (epileptic seizure).

While it is a gradual process for Snowden to see the "big brother" in CIA, it is in Hawaii where his promotion has given him access to the state-of-the-art surveillance technology that he makes that final decision to blow the whistle. Also interesting is the scene of a leisurely after-work beach barbecue gathering. A colleague, almost nonchalantly, tells how he witnessed a kid winding up being collateral damage in one of these routine surveillance operations. That immediately reminds me of the movie "Eye in the sky".

Probably recognizing that many in the audience would have seen "Citizenfour", director Stone wisely keeps the hotel room interview scenes low key and as faithful to the original as possible. The excellent cast helps, with Melissa Leo, Zachary Quinto and Tom Wilkinson playing Poitras, Greenwald and MacAskill respectively (remember though that Poitras does not appear at all on the screen of "Citizenfour"). "Snowden" is even less of a thriller than "Citizenfour". The only scene of acute conflict is Greenwald's confrontation, in teleconference mode, with The Guardian's editor in London, Janine Gibson, giving her an ultimatum on the time of publishing. Gibson, incidentally, is played by Joely Richardson, Vanessa Redgrave's daughter. As mentioned in the summary line, Gordon-Levitt turns in an excellent portrayal of the Edward Snowden that we have seen on screen, low-key, level-headed, passionate in an unassuming way. It is the image of the real Snowden, again as mentioned, that brings to conclusion this superb film that is not intended to inflame or shock you, but rather to "bother" (quoting from the critic) you, and make you think.

Misrepresentation of Edward Snowden Takes Away From the Real Story

[gabrieltaitmusic · 7/10 · 13 October 2016]

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.

Snowden was a Patriot

[rysmith25 · 9/10 · 17 September 2016]

I don't understand people that complain about this movie.

There is zero to complain about in this movie. You got to wonder if the low reviews are government paid employees or just Oliver Stone haters.

I couldn't keep my eyes off the screen. I was mesmerized from the beginning of the film until the end. I honestly had no idea it ran two hours and 20 minutes. A movie is never too long if you don't look at your phone and check the time. Myself, nor did anyone in the theater once look down at their phone. The movie had great cinematography, excellent pacing, strong emotional dialogue, and solid character/relationship arcs. You can't ask for much more of a drama based on a true story. Excellent job Oliver. Welcome back!

The truth is people don't want to hear it. If it doesn't directly affect their cozy iPhone streaming lives, than they don't want to hear about it. They don't want to hear that they are wage slaves. They don't want to hear that there is no such thing as privacy in this country. They don't want to hear that the government isn't a democracy. People don't want to hear that the American government isn't a government at all, and that it's been replaced by a multi-national fortunate 100 corporate conglomeration funded by the international banking cartel. People don't want to know the truth.

I'd venture a guess that most of the people that rated this movie poorly didn't even see the movie. These are the same people that can't handle the truth. Open your eyes people. Don't be another corporate wage slave.

I think I detect an agenda...

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 16 May 2018]

Edward Snowden works for various clandestine elements of the US government machinery. While writing software to shut down Chinese hackers, he discovers that the US is carrying out illegal surveillance over billions of emails from US citizens. What should he do?

Well, we know what he did, he blew the whistle. And despite the fact that he was proved right, and measures were taken to stop the illegal collection of uncountable emails, his copybook is so comprehensively blotted that he remains an exile in Moscow.

Oliver Stone takes things very seriously indeed, and this can sometimes result in two things: one, his personal agenda overtakes the story he is telling and, two, the issues he is raising overpower the entertainment value of the movie. Both these flaws are at work here.

Stone clearly regards Snowden as a hero, a martyr. Maybe this is justified, but it is a little difficult to tell because Stone only ever gives us one side of the picture.

And, unforgiveably, the movie is somewhat on the dull side. Snowden's story is interesting and has built in suspense but, at 134 minutes, the telling of it drags noticeably at times.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt gives a good performance as Snowden, as does Shailene Woodley as his girlfriend Lindsay Mills. For me, the best performance was Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as CIA Deputy Director Corbin O'Brian.

I came out of this better informed I think, though it was difficult to tell how much of what I was being fed was fact, and how much was Stone's overheated agenda at work. But I can't honestly say I was entertained that much.

Outstanding character building by Joseph Gordon-Levitt - even a bigger fan now!

[Anaslair · 9/10 · 26 February 2017]

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.

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

[eshwarmail · 7/10 · 27 January 2017]

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.

Too dishonest. Accuracy matters in a movie like this.

[Tomus7 · 2/10 · 16 October 2017]

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.

Bring Him Home

[LauraAnnG · 2 November 2020]

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.

Amazing story, reasonably well told.

[Denno1972 · 7/10 · 30 December 2020]

The true life story of Edward Snowden is undoubtedly a 10 star rating and the film is solid if a bit flawed. Stone sets the opening up well, jumping to when Snowden meets the journalists for the first time and then we backfill. I think Stone does this well and the set up and the way the story unfolds is good. Where it lost its way slightly is the middle drag a a bit. Stone, ironically (given some of his other work) seems to hold back and go for subtlety rather than bombast but all that does is make The film lack tension in places where it needs it. the ending cranks it up a bit but most probably not enough. it won't surprise you that Stone is firmly on Snowdens side. I will do some more research on this subject before I make my judgements but the contents of what he found should worry the whole world.

there's more than meets the eye

[lee_eisenberg · 9/10 · 2 October 2016]

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.

Great movie to watch

[latinpianist-117-994474 · 7/10 · 30 November 2020]

My wife started watching this movie on Netflix. At first I didn't know what she was watching until I started to watch the storyline. I recognized Snowden's character as soon and I yelled out, "Let me guess, Snowden!" At first it was kind of slow but I liked how the movie took us through Snowden's life and how he got to meet his girlfriend. Then from there we were hooked. SPOILER WARNING: The ending was this powerful scene where Snowden actually shows up. I loved it.

Oliver Stone Served his Country

[theoryneutral · 10/10 · 13 September 2016]

I have to save the 10/10 for those that deserve it and this one does.

I saw this at the opening in Toronto and came into it with a critical eye, having seen Citizen Four and having a good knowledge of the events that unfolded throughout the story recounted in this film.

Understandably, some weren't sure if all the shocking events in the film actually happened in the manner they were portrayed, so it's possible the public at large will never actually know just how accurate and important this film is. It all happened. And more. A lot of content didn't make it into the film but Stone's editing choices were sound.

Oliver Stone's faithfulness to the facts is astounding. Nothing was distorted or sacrificed for entertainment value. For a filmmaker to show this constraint is rare because it puts at risk the approval of a large portion of the audience. And it shows his true intent, even if Stone claims he was not trying to inspire activism.

Snowden Portrayal: Excellent acting, understated; that's Snowden.

Greenwald Portrayal: Brilliant acting, and sometimes I got the eerie feeling I was actually watching Greenwald, though the role was perhaps a little too emotional at times when the real Greenwald would have kept his composure.

On Laura Poitras actually being in the film: It was justice that Stone actually gave her character a role in the film, since Laura herself never does, and she deserves credit for what she has done. She risked her life many times over to bring us the facts in Citizen Four.

Oliver Stone served his country in making this film and by doing justice to the bravery of Snowden. Perhaps the world will be more inclined to care about what is taking place right in front of us once this film is available to all.

Dramatizing the documentary

[justbusinessthebook · 7/10 · 17 August 2018]

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 ...

Let's bring Snowden back home.

[raycertx-864-957684 · 9/10 · 19 September 2016]

I saw this movie as part of a small audience. Years ago, when the story was on the nightly news, Our USA news media had distorted the story so badly that I thought that Snowden was a spy. Now, I doubt that he was. There was a question asked of President Obama that made it clear for me. "Do you now consider Snowden to be a spy or a whistle blower?" I think this is a very Good movie. The small audience applauded at the end. It seems to be pretty clear that Snowden blew the whistle on "Big Brother". You should go to see this movie. Take some friends with you. There is very good dramatic acting. Good directing even though Oliver Stone does make it very dark. Snowden wanted to stop government spying on anyone. He would be a much better option for President than either of our current choices. I admit to being an Oliver Stone fan. His movies go into details that our news media ignores. Maybe we should try to get Snowden to come back so we can hear his version of what actually happened.

A controversial computer story with a heartbeat: privacy vs. security vs. emotion

[Yelitza-screenwriting-student · 7/10 · 15 September 2016]

The wonderful: It is enjoyable drama - we connect with the characters and understand their dilemmas. Oliver Stone transformed a dry/robotic stream of data coding,data mining, and complex computing story into a story webbed with human sentiment. It was an informative film. But it's not a surprise that our world has to go off-limits in the subject of surveillance...

The Acting? Great! I loved Rhys Ifans performance! Such mystery and paradoxical cold warmth, fabulous! I also loved Eastwood's fresh role, and the irreverence of Nicolas Cage. Shailene plays a spontaneous and emotionally charged photographer in conflict with Snowden's job's secrecy (favorite scenes? Hawaii and Japan). Joseph Gordon's performance is authentic and heartfelt. Despite his computer focus, he pours out his emotions during moments of revelation and interaction with his girlfriend. We learn of Snowden's vulnerabilities and the worries that drove him to exit the system he was in.

the not-so-good: Minimal action though. Not much of a thriller either. Multi-layered complex (three levels of story: Snowden's personal life, his job and challenges, and the telling-to-the press) and slow plot. Is our protagonist a criminal or martyr? hero or anti-hero? it's a story with ambiguity. Perhaps this is what makes it s good story? Snowden had to approve this story. In conclusion, is a "matter-of-fact" biographical drama, but I guess it couldn't really be a different way.

the take-away: We learn about the human side of a computer hacking story that shook the Nation. It does raise awareness. Because of the dangerous threats to humanity, surveillance is everywhere. I had the opportunity to watch the live satellite interview between Oliver Stone, the actors, and Snowden. Stone wanted to dramatize Snowden's life experience and the circumstances that drove to do what he did, "you take out what you want" he said about the message of the film. The issue here was one individual's conflicted and growing mistrust of the global surveillance and breaching of people's privacy. But as the CIA official (Rhys Ifans) said it at the beginning of the film: is a trade-off between privacy and security. It's true we want privacy, but it's true we want a safe world free of the constant terrorist threat.

Conclusion: Its thought provoking. Perhaps, one day Snowden will use all his amazing talent to help humanity fight the great evil of terrorism. This film reminds me of the Tom Hanks/DiCaprio/Spielberg film: "Catch me if you Can"

Go and watch it in goodwill.

Cheers!

SNOWDEN--Blowing The Whistle On Government Malfeasance, And Paying The Price

[virek213 · 10/10 · 20 September 2016]

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.

Authentic

[chajb · 7/10 · 4 November 2020]

I assume that when watching a movie about an actual event that what I am seeing is an historical novel. I am sure that the movie portrayed the overall picture. I enjoyed the movie. I thought it was well done. My only criticism is Snowden's basic training scenes. As a veteran I will say that in the US Army, an NCO is never addressed as "sir". I learned that rule on day one.

Just another biopic you do not need to see

[myfearlessdragons · 5/10 · 5 June 2020]

A troop of soldiers-to-be is quickly trudging through the woods, mindlessly humming something along the lines of the undying Mickey Mouse March, echoing so eerily and uncannily during the last shots of Full Metal Jacket. They march in concert, occasionally crawling through mud, being mercilessly yelled at, actively becoming a tiny cog in the boundless mechanism. One of these rookies is soon going to turn the world upside down; but for now he is just wearily inspecting x-ray of his fractured leg - there is surely so much to come. But, unfortunately, not for this movie. The modern revolutionary, the inconspicuous face behind the Guy Fawkes mask, the public's key to the darkest government secrets, Edward Snowden is portrayed by Joseph Gordon-Lewitt, who may have certainly caught your attention in Nolan's Inception as a smart-looking, sophisticated 'dream-catcher' and "thought-snatcher". Gordon-Lewitt also happens to bear a chilling resemblance to the modern swashbuckler and impersonates him well enough throughout the movie. However, this particular piece on cybersecurity, the fear of constantly being watched and the uneasiness of being disappointed in your beliefs and principles, is not convincing in the slightest and surely does not stand in the same line with many other works dedicated to Snowden's victories and hardships; Snowden (2016) seems artificial and downright tacky, especially when compared to true-to-life, realistic enough Citizenfour (2014). The movie tries to tell the enchanting and enamoring story of how one single person can successfully fight against the terrifying machine. But I would be lying if I told you that this specific depiction has evoked any emotions in me, much less rage. Delectably tasteless, remarkably bleak and incredibly tiresome to follow: the plot is nothing less of a simple bore. The cinematographic style is likewise inconsistent and incomprehensible; some shots easily remind you of cheap music videos, while others try to express the character's feelings of perplexity and frustration, but succeed only in giving you an annoying headache. I did, however, recognize the barely visible influence of action-style filmmaking with the use of handheld cameras, that flourished so flamingly after the Danish Dogma 95 cinematic movement was formed and managed to stay in big cinema forever. You could imagine my surprise after learning that Anthony Dod Mantle himself, responsible for cinematography in Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire (2008), Trier's Dogville (2003) and yes, Antichrist (2009), partook in the creation of Snowden (2016) too. This rushed biopic, called for some reason 'a thriller' as well, inexplicably reminds of The Imitation Game (2014); the same blue and gray coloring, the same learning environment, the same atmosphere of a genius being born. But if The Imitation Game masterfully crafts a portrait of mysterious and immensely gifted Alan Turing, Snowden (2016) surely does not do justice to the real-life whistleblower. The latter comes out to be plain and one-dimensional, as if unable to feel any real emotions. Everything that surrounds the main character - from the make-believe NSA facilities to Snowden's menacing tutor as well as CIA Deputy Director (that 1984-mocking scene of him peering right into Snowden's soul surely did make me chuckle) to his life-size figure of a girlfriend, the setting does not seem to be believable, not even remotely. Along with its countless gags and goofs inappropriate for a good hacker movie, Snowden (2016) makes rather for a nice laugh and nap, rather than a proper insightful story of a man who has hacked the government. No revolutionary spirit, no protest, no fight and awareness. Just a poorly done retelling of a unique story, with no eye-catching cinematography and futuristic editing to add.

5 suspiciously looking Rubik's cubes out of 10