I do feel a bit odd in there though because I am one of those sacrilegious readers who has a Kindle *gasp!*. I love the ease of use of it and the portability, but I have to admit, being in a bookstore surrounded by thousands of actual, physical, paper books did make me miss the sensation of holding one in my hands as I read.
I don't judge books by their cover, but I also can't deny what a catchy cover can do for a book. Case in point, The Circle. It's pinkish-orange exterior with a silver, intricate symbol at its center is immediately striking and I found myself envious and wanting to add it physically to my book collection. Low and behold, when I looked on Amazon the physical version was actually cheaper than the Kindle version so I bought the paperback novel and made a commitment to buy highly-rated books in paperback if their price was comparable to the Kindle-digital version.
Interesting then that I subverted technology in a place where I often use it for a story like this. Also interesting is that my intrigue for this book started a few months before I knew it would have a movie so I was luckily able to read it a while ago. I did enjoy the book, but it was flawed in its execution. Seeing author Dave Eggers name on the screenplay gave me hope though that he'd maybe want to take this "second chance" to fix some of the things I didn't like about the novel.
Unfortunately, The Circle (movie version) ends up being a bit of a mess for a variety of reasons. I still enjoyed it probably because I read the book and it was interesting to see things make it to the screen, but I imagine others were lost, confused, or not compelled.
![]() |
"Dammit, Tom. Just because you have a beard does not mean you're Dumbledore." |
![]() |
Emma Watson surrounded by a new kind of magic: social media! |
There are some good things in The Circle though. Overall, it's still a very interesting premise and some of the ideas brought up are thought-provoking. Extreme, but not entirely impossible either which is a nice balance. I also enjoyed most of the cast in this one. Watson is a joy, as always (but I'm very biased there), and Hanks was a stellar pick for the personable, charismatic CEO. It's easy to see why Circlers (employees at the Circle) drink the Kool-Aid so heavily when their CEO can present somewhat-horrifying ideas with the most positive spin possible. Everyone else does fine in their limited roles, except for Ellar Coltrane. Despite my absolute disagreement that Boyhood is as good as everyone thinks it is, he's just very awkward for most of his screentime here. There was an over-dramatization of nearly every line and it drew me immediately out of the film which is a shame because I do think he was great in Boyhood. Finally, I really dug the original score. It's not iconic by any stretch, but it does help to move the film along and has a technology "theme" (if that's a thing) to go along with it.
![]() |
"C is for coffee!" [off stage] "Dammit, Tom. C is for the Circle!" |
CONS
- The screenplay lacks a lot of the context the book provided which leaves a lot of audience members in the dark or wondering why things are happening
- The ending directly contradicts some key character beliefs and is an unfortunate blemish on an otherwise very interesting story
- Ellar Coltrane's super weird acting
- Ultimately forgettable
- Strong cast. Watson an Hanks lead the movie effortlessly and I think they were good choices
- Intriguing premise with some neat, but dangerous/radical ideas sprinkled throughout. Room for thought after you leave the theater
- Nicely-fitting visuals with a lot of the social-media zings and pings
- Cool original score
- If you've read the book, you'll get more out of this than most
Rath's Review Score | 6/10
Great review. Makes me want to read the book!
ReplyDelete