Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Roman Sampson One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Peter Downey Being a redditor, and being just an avid internet consumer, led me to follow what happened to Aaron Schwartz, and going into this film I was already disgusted by what the DA had done during his investigation and prosecution. Therefore my expectation for this film were minimal; I just wanted to be informed about the aspects of the case that were did not pop up in the shallow articles on the net. And in that aspect the film doesn't fail.Brian Knappenberger reveals the case against Schwartz chronologically, so as each piece of Schwartz's case was pushed against him we cut to reaction or an interview with a family member or friend who was there for these revelations. The feeling in the film is one of frustration, exhaustion and anger; Schwartz's family seem particularly distraught by the whole experience, and this is conveyed well through the talking head format. Knappenberger structures the documentary in black and white terms though. Schwartz is given this messiah like platform in the film, each talking head that speaks about his youth sing nothing but his praises. He is given no flaws at any stage; genius, family man, best friend one could have, etc. This created a sense of disconnection, and I felt that in showing the loss of a "great man" we are supposed to be more outrage than the loss of a "human".The documentary's black side; the villains, the betrayals etc. I would also consider a distraction. Quinn Norton is given a particularly difficult time and coming away from the film she easily became a lightning rod for people's anger. A conversation I had a few days after watching the film focused mainly on how stupid she was, and only briefly spoke about the structures of society that allowed Schwartz's to end up this situation.Splicing the film with homemade footage and only speaking from personal experience about the events that transpired, also made the structure feel shallow. Exposing exactly what went on seems like a secondary objective for Knappenberger, and can't understand why this is. After the film do I feel like I know more about the Aaron Schwartz case? A little bit more. If this is a biographical documentary do I feel like I know Schwart more? Nope. This feels like something emotionally cathartic than an actual informational film.

paul2001sw-1 Aaron Swartz was an internet hacker and activist who committed suicide under pressure from a U.S. government attempt to prosecute him for a crime (stealing data) where he meant no harm and sought to make no money. I certainly agree that the legal case against Swartz was absurdly overcooked; but the film throws up a number of interesting issues about theories of government in general, and the techno-utopian world-view that Schwarz subscribed to. Technological advance can make previous ways of doing things obsolete, and measures of control superfluous and/or unnecessary. They threaten vested interests (or, more probably, they threaten to replace an old elite whose interests are vested in the old technology with a new one unencumbered by attachment to the past). One can believe these changes are good in themselves; one can believe the death of the old control structures is an added bonus; one can believe that the changes are good precisely because they lead to the end of the old control structures. And this way of thinking (in the context of technologies for the storage and dissemination of data) leads to the idea that 'data wants to be free'; and that any attempt to restrict data availability is a form of human rights violation. This leads to some strange positions. For example, academic journals have existed, in some cases for hundreds of years, because publication has been intrinsically difficult. Now, it's easier, the traditional model may be obsolete, and of course, the publishers fight changes that threaten to end their cosy oligopoly. And yet, for an academic journal publisher to seek to defend their copyrighted material is not evil (unless one believes in the complete abolition of intellectual property, which is a different kind of argument). Being on the wrong side of history is ultimately a practical matter, not a moral one. And new models of publishing still come at a cost and still have to be paid for - data is not free (in that other sense of freedom) and in a world with differential ability to pay, that means it cannot be universally free in the other sense either.And as a scientist, supportive of the principle of open access, I find myself in agreement with most of Swartz's positions; and yet alienated by his friends and collaborators, who insist that the government should not have prosecuted Schwarz at all, basically because he was right and they were wrong. One really doesn't need a very advanced theory of power to see that this is a naive way of looking at the world, or an advanced theory of psychology to consider it an arrogant one. The world needs its Aaron Swartz's, and a wise and humane government would not seek to hand down excessive sentences on such people merely to assert its own right to make the rules. But the world also needs people to (mostly) obey the law, and while there may be many decisions of government that people might justly object to on grounds of conscience, Swartz's objections to copyright law lie mainly in the fact that it prevented him from doing cool and interesting things. I find myself in support of most of Swartz's specific views, yet sometimes I feel as scared of libertarians of left (like Swartz) and right as I am of the big government they oppose, whose optimism is invigorating yet in some senses selfish, with their apparent belief that government's worst crime is acting to prevent brilliant and privileged people from reaching the height of their potential. Whatever, it's a documentary that certainly makes you think, but one should screen the views of Scwartz's acolytes before swallowing them in their entirety.

Mr-Fusion I don't know why the Aaron Swartz story was never on my radar, which is one of the reasons why The Internet's Own Boy was an eye-opener. His is a tragic story, and although the filmmakers secured screen time with (almost) all involved, it's sad that all we have from Swartz is archival webcam interview footage. The movie makes a persuasive case for his being made a high-profile example by the justice system, and there's enough here to leave you either irate or fearful (or both).Whether or not you agree with the man's politics, he made a difference - hell, he was instrumental in getting SOPA struck down, so he deserves our respect for that - and his story brings to light the need for fine-tuning the ancient copyright laws. Either way, this documentary delivers.7/10

nmlal68 The story is interesting enough for a documentary, well filmed, made a little bit boring at times though. But it is wounded from the beginning by an inescapable contradiction.Aaron Swartz was a brilliant engaged young man who wanted to make this world a better place. He had a relentless energy and this rare capacity of combining deep technical knowledge with charisma, rhetorical power and strategical planning. He wanted to make a difference and wanted you to be part of making that difference. He seemed to be marked for greatness.And then he is indicted by the government, implicated in a promiscuous process absolutely out of proportion, which thought to make an example out of him. And he gets depressed. And who wouldn't if you were facing the spectrum of 35 years in prison? The next thing you know he commits suicide.Well, I will never judge someone who takes his own life. I'm not a moralist. What I judge is this. Here is a guy, an activist, no doubt a fantastic human being, whose apparent message was let's fight, fight, fight. We can beat and change the system, do good things. Let's not give up. And then he commits suicide? He does in fact give up? Are you kidding me? What about the glowing ideas? What about the inspiring speeches? What about the final message? When the chips are down, blow your brains out?For me he is not a martyr. Nor a victim. Not even a dreamer. For me he is someone who betrayed everything he stood for.True heroes that really make a difference are Assanges and Snowdens, not Swartzes.