Comments (62)Add a Comment
The concept would be good and fix a lot of issues, and protect the kids, but if data is used to hurt it can be deadly!
This book opens as a very motivated young woman (Mae) gets the chance of a lifetime – a dream job in a prestigious high tech firm working with her good friend (Annie). Mae becomes star truck by the technological advances generated by The Circle’s teams and desires to be an integral part of it. She meets many tech friendly and luddite types, applying her own interpretation of their reactions to The Circle’s progressive plans. This book is science fiction that is quickly becoming science fact.
The reader, Dion Graham, has a vocal quality and tone that gives a real sense of intimacy to the listener. He fluctuates from near whispering at times to strident urgency. He also captures the various characters vocal inflection so the dialog is easy to follow as he reads.
As the listener, my attention was riveted waiting for the other metaphorical shoe to drop at each turn of the plot. The author drops juicy teasing tidbits throughout the story which prompted me to speculate how these will be knit together later in the story. He grows the suspense slowly and from many directions. This book is well written and worth the listen. This book really got into my head when I went back to employing my own social media habits, making me rethink the ramifications of my activities on the internet. This book was written well before the recent Facebook kerfuffle but much of what happens in the book is what was in the Senate hearings - yikes. Take this audio book along on your summer driving trips. I won’t give it away, but the ending gave me chills.
An introvert's horror.
Odd pacing and hard to understand character motivations and a dark ending. And so many excited people cheering for all the horrific things. Some of the horror came straight from historic corporate culture instead of anything to do with tech/social media, like expecting employees to give up their weekends/evenings to attend social things with coworkers/clients and if they don't give up that free time they are seen as bad employees, ugh...
This movie was fun to watch. It is a bit simplistic so that’s why I rate it 4/5. However it does make me think about Transparency vs Privacy. For example, where and to what extent do we want total transparency in our society? What about the balance of transparency/privacy for Government vs Individual? Would we trust Public officials more if there is total transparency as portrayed in this movie? The movie poses an interesting and seemingly radical proposal to ponder. How long before this movie becomes reality?
It was just entertaining enough to get through, but has a ton of faults and an implausible story. Really a pretty lame movie. I wouldn't recommend to anyone.
This film represents what occurs when technology meets social media in a science fiction fashion. Mae Holland, is a young woman who volunteers to be apart of a technological study where each of her actions begin to have devastating results and impact the lives of those who she cares most about. The character is played by Emma Watson who typically delivers excellent performances, however, this film is one of her worse performances. Although the premise of the movie is rather interesting, it is still lackluster. I would rate this movie 3/5 stars and recommend it to those who are willing to give it a chance and keep an open mind. @The_Reviewer of the Teen Review Board at the Hamilton Public Library
The Circle, featuring Emma Watson and Tom Hanks, was an empowering and thrilling movie to watch. The whole movie focuses on the importance of privacy and how technology might evolve to be. If we looked back 10 years from now, we would probably say, "They got it right. This is happening." But the only downside to the movie, in my perspective, is that the ending of the story moved too fast. Mae (Emma Watson) becomes the company's spokesperson too quickly and the ending felt rushed. One second, Mae is the newest member of the company and is living a "simple" life. Then, BAM! She becomes the company's spokesperson and is known worldwide. Even though that is how social media works these days, the entire second half of the movie felt rushed. The plot was good, the actors were amazing, the entire storyline was great. I would probably rewatch this movie in a couple of years, and realize that the movies were already "predicting" the future. Rating 4/5.
@EMBookWorm14 of the Hamilton Public Library Teen Review Board
The Circle is a 2017 drama/science fiction movie starring Emma Watson, and Tom Hanks, based on the book by the same name. When Mae Holland gets a job at the circle, one of the most powerful companies in the world, she couldn't be more excited. It's not until Mae realizes the company's true intensions that she realizes the company might not have her best interests at heart. A star studded cast? Check. Now all this movie needs is a good script. The premise of the movie seems interesting enough, but there is nothing added from hearing the premise or even watching the trailer. Watching the movie, it becomes fairly obvious that it's based on a book. Scenes (including the ending) were left unexplained, and rushed. Very disappointing. 2 Stars
- @Ruby_Tuesday of the Teen Review Board of the Hamilton Public Library
I am sure a number of 'watchers' may have found this boring and 'stupid' but if you look at the way the internet has changed the world and there are more and more 'Internet of Things', this literally is leading into that direction. Are there not places now where you are watched? Are there not people 'following' others around because they feel those people have more interesting lives? This is an idealist view, but humans have a tendency to never be 'stable' those that push for openness in many instances also 'hide'. Thinking of 'clean the swamp' Take out all the alligators and replace them with crocodiles :)
Admittedly, the acting quality was not as important as the content, and all seemed more than sufficient for that. I thought the movie itself was more than worth my time.
The Circle ~ As idealistic As it comes, per the best intentions and purposes noted, albeit exposed hypocrisies. AND the later, as goes the multi-varied learning processes of humans, have always come to bear on the former. Including for all the potential of nuclear energy and military influence in governments- per the warnings of such great leaders as Einstein and Eisenhower. Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to so often rely on 20/20 hindsight, given all the pain and loss that precedes it, in order to develop ways and means to true progress. Including for true social and political transparency, as we've learned from Facebook that transparency in social interaction can be used and abused.
If we can't get our political leaders to attain and maintain it, then can we trust those who would actually manage the systems that facilitate transparency, to work justly and honorably for social interaction? IMO - we can attain all that, incrementally over a LONG period of time, as we also elect leadership to maintain good example. Over a V-E-R-Y long period of time, that is, and IF enough of us *understand* that it likely requires the constant and consistent persistence of faith, observation, and socio-political action, through three or four generations of a growing and eventually significant proportion of societies. And doing that with continuing encouragement of self-empowerment for that and necessary complementary purposes. EG: Fulfilling a virtual requirement for personal growth (certainly psycho-emotionally, almost certainly intellectually) on a grand scale, to say the least.
"Anything is possible"? Yes, by certain individuals in accordance with understandings of such as the above, perhaps. But by large segments of society? ANY thing? I would repeat the "We Can" cheer, but we've never before has there been such a movement free from attack by significant forces for the purpose of disillusionment, if not destruction. Nor have we seen a significant movement of near whole societies encouraging its adherents to self-empowerment over -what, more than a decade or so(?)- unless for monetary and/or militarist purposes. How many people how fast can we teach that personal growth on a large scale translates to monetary progress, if not also a likely eradication of need for a military? I know, sounds like the ole' 60's "Human Potential" movement, more dreamy idealism, thence BS.
So I'll just end by paraphrasing the quotes of a few leaders: Only a group of committed individuals can make a worthy difference for society - first within themselves, then with others - but ONLY As they ALSO simultaneously increasingly do the same, WITH others... But you already knew that (sans the redundancy), right? [ref4Src: "PolyPsyArts, Citizen Healing"]
Bad acting overall. Pushed ourselves to watch this through to the end. Boring movie.
I thought it was interesting, thought Emma Watson did a fine job, thought that it was good to see Nebula outside of costume, and thought it was a fair way to spend an hour and forty minutes.
Like many near-future tech movies / tv shows, this one is unlikely to happen exactly, but brings up excellent points about censorship, transparency, privacy, safety, and other ethical problems that arise with the way our world is headed.
I watched over half to see where it was going. Got bored and didn’t really care, so quit.
Watson's acting bad; Hanks' acting good. Surprise twist at the end makes up for the screenwriter's choice to edit out the cultural critique of Amazon shopping the book includes. (The book is a must read tho dull in spots.) I don't know how some reviewers got the impression that this is an action movie It is psychological drama/pre-apocalypse warning.
I was expecting thrill, excitement, suspense. It seems like it was being built up, then nothing. As if the movie was just a story told be someone’s life instead of a madeup story. And the ending, “exposing” the two guys....... exposing what?!..... and then a bright light fills the screen. That’s it?!
This movie was not as bad as I was led to believe by the critics. I found it very informative and believable about how social media outlets and technology in general can be both a good and a bad thing.
I wasn't impressed with the acting but that not why I watched the movie, I wanted a good storyline that toward the end of movie gave me something deep to think about and I got that after the movie finished.
Privacy verus security. Though the conflict between the two we see in this movie may never reach the exaggerted level we see here; this is a very real issue that is already working itself out in the real world.
This movie gives the viewer a lot to think about. The above record is rather limited in information I just checked the reviews on the book and they are well done. From what I can tell without having read the book the movie seems to have followed the story of the book very closely so if you want to know more check-out the record of the book by Dave Eggers; also available from SPL.
Most of The Circle Employees seem to accept that everybody should know everything about them. It is like they have been seduced by a crazy religious cult.
Perhaps Tom Hanks' most villainous role.
Ends suddenly and without a satisfactory resolution for all the suspense it built. The acting is good, but the story just lacks something. The main character doesn't actually learn anything or challenge anything that scares her about this social media-dominated world; in fact, she buys into the propaganda that social media makes us happier. She only changes who the doorkeepers for the information are; this seems stupid and counterproductive, which our main character has proven over and over she is not.
There was very little connection between all of the scenes in the movie. The plot was very thin and the actors themselves didn't even seem to want to do this movie. Not good.
The Circle is a classic example of how social engineering can use an on-line social program to create group think. Several movies were referenced: Manufactured Consent, Shadow Government and Soylent Green.
The dark database lurked beneath a face plate where input could be restricted access at the flip of a switch. A green substance consumed by the main character without much hesitation, contained sensors to track the subject via biometrics. A Phase IV Pharmaceutical trial was being tested with Adderall.
Several Patent Developments were prevalent throughout, from Google to a top executive who was a former US Government employee for defense related issues, Tommy Thompson of Verichips to the HHS and Hin Kai to the Army.
This reads as a Manifesto for a totalitarian regime. It attempts to create a new age belief that worships technology. This is the type of thing that keeps me in constant prayer!