Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

RobertHouse Underground has great actors and an even better story line. This movie should be more popular than it is. I'm not sure how much of the movie is real because I'm not Julian Assange, but I can say you can tell they tried to make it as accurate as possible. Considering I grew up using computers in the late 80's and onward I can easily understand this movie. For someone that has only been around computers for the past 5-10 years might have complications trying to understand the movie. I haven't been able to get the complete story on how computers were adapted in other countries in the late 80's so that was interesting for me to see represented in the movie.I feel the pieces left out in the movie are left out for a reason. This is a movie that was made to entertain and inform. We all know if you want the full story you must read the book or do research. You have to expect some parts left out in the film.I like Underground because it is not biased. The movie gave me a story of a hacker and it let me formulate my own opinion of him. My opinion is that I cannot give this movie a bad review considering what is being played in theaters and popular today.You cannot help noticing the people that actually watched the movie gave it rave reviews. I can quote Marianno Gorgeski "He is our Che Guevara of the modern internet era." Couldn't say it better myself. Also like he said he is trying to do more for the world than Facebook and the like are trying to do. That is why he is seen as a threat. The only summary that I came up with after watching this film is Julian Assange is seen as a genius because the world has become lazy and incompetent. If the people demanded the truth like they should I think we would all praise Julian for what he stands for.

Elsa Braun The actor playing Julian is riveting. The storyline about early hacking attempts and Woz' "blue box" used to intercept the old phone company mechanical relay system by spoofing tones was interesting to see. The movie was heavy on technology specifics without giving short shrift to the storyline of Julian's life.I loved the review of emerging Computer technology and the realistically portrayed old hardware.I was amazed how often the "white hats" were forced to play catch up with the techniques of the early hacker culture.

Marianno Gorgeski close to truth, excellent biography movie and no matter how low the budget for the movie was the acting was so strong that after first 15 minutes you start not to notice the lacking of resources invested in the project. The story itself is inspiring fact that there are much more brilliant causes in this life than creating apple or face-book. He is our Che Guevara of the modern internet era. Love this movie. Unfortunately enough its not a Hollywood production, and will never gain the popularity of our facebook generation, and many mainstream thinkers will simply vote this down. I would classify this on the ranking list above pirates of the silicon valley with respect to screen shot and acting as well as historical value and society importance. Bravo for our fellows Australians that have made such a wonderful movie four digital hero of the century for our digital robin hood.

Alice Wilson The purpose of this movie should have been to show "what makes Assange tick". The producer/director and screen writer failed in this area because they do not know the answer.Assange's nomadic lifestyle does not explain what makes him tick, nor does Assange's father, nor does his girlfriend. These are certainly external factors in Assange's childhood, but they do not explain what makes him tick. Also, the superfluous details about his girlfriend and his child were absolutely ridiculous and should have been excluded as non-essential details.The film should have focused on Assange's motive that he has held and still holds. I should have seen more about his love for freedom of speech, his ability of using the internet; and his long days and nights in front of the computer (for which he is know). The "why" was left unanswered. It is not the external factors of a nomadic lifestyle that made him what he is today. It was not because his father or step-father was strange that Assange is what he is today. It is not because of his girlfriend. But it is because he holds certain ideas. Those ideas were buried throughout the movie.What made him risk his life? What made him follow certain principles that he is known for today? What are his principles?