Oliver Stone's "Snowden"

"Snowden" hits movie theaters today.

NYT Review

But while the script, which the director wrote with Kieran Fitzgerald, dutifully footnotes the more abstruse references — and explains the mechanics of surveillance with admirable clarity — Mr. Stone remains an old-school humanist, a poet of flesh and blood rather than a deep thinker about technology or politics. Nearly all of his films are ultimately about taking the measure of a man, and “Snowden” is most effective as a character study. As ever, Mr. Stone’s interest in women is limited. They provide pictorial variety and emotional complication, challenging and humanizing the heroes as the story requires. Ms. Woodley [as Snowden's signifcant other] has more screen time than Sissy Spacek in “J.F.K.” or Joan Allen in “Nixon,” but she is, in effect, portraying an updated version of the loyal, long-suffering, uncomprehending wife.

Still, the relationship between Lindsay and Edward is the key to the film, since it establishes what is at stake for the hero as he faces the conflicting demands of love and duty. It also affirms that he is a nice, normal, humble guy, neither a zealot nor an egomaniac. Not everyone will agree with this [...] but “Snowden” makes its case with skill and discretion.

[...]

This movie won’t necessarily dazzle or enrage you, and I’m not sure that it wants to. What it wants — what Mr. Snowden himself always claims to have wanted — is to bother you, to fill you with doubt about the good intentions of those who gather your data and tell you it’s for your own protection.

  NYT

From this and the trailer, it seems like the movie is heavily involved in Snowden's personal life with Lindsay Mills. I might have wanted to see this movie a few years ago when there wasn't much information about Edward Snowden, the person. Now it just seems like old news. If you haven't already figured out his personality, you haven't been watching any video seminars or interviews with him. And, for what he was after - focus on the message, not the messenger - it's really not necessary that we know him personally.

Still, I imagine there are lots of people out there who never saw Laura Poitras' documentary "Citizenfour", and some of them might be more inclined to go see an Oliver Stone movie. So, go for it.

Also, the unlikely to be granted petition for pardon is here.  Since he's not imprisoned, he can't be pardoned.  I'm not sure why they've worded it as such. [UPDATE:  How wrong I am.]   I'd think the proper request would be to have the charges against him dropped, and since the president doesn't bring the charges - the attorney general does - this seems like an exercise in futility, but perhaps it's theater in the service of eventually getting Snowden's charges dropped.  It also surprises me that the ACLU itself is sponsoring the petition.  They surely know the technicality.

Coincidentally, a House panel just released a report to the president urging him NOT to pardon Snowden.

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence urged President Barack Obama on Thursday not to pardon Edward Snowden, concluding in an unclassified summary of a two-year investigation that the former NSA contractor was “not a whistleblower”—echoing what White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said during a press briefing earlier in the week.

[...]

The entire panel — Democrats and Republicans alike — signed a letter sent directly to the president, asserting that Snowden is “not a patriot.” The unclassified summary of the report, disclosed alongside the letter, is just three pages long; the classified version is 36 pages with 230 footnotes.

[...]

The report appears designed to directly refute some plot points in Stone’s movie.

[...]

“Edward Snowden is no hero – he’s a traitor who willfully betrayed his colleagues and his country. He put our service members and the American people at risk after perceived slights by his superiors,” said Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., in a statement about the report on Snowden’s disclosure of documents on NSA worldwide surveillance programs.

[...]

Ben Wizner, Edward Snowden’s lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, argues the committee’s calculation of how many documents Snowden took is actually a vast overestimate, judging from how many documents they think he may have had access to. “The assertion that he took 1.5 million documents is nonsensical,” he told The Intercept during a phone interview.

Moreover, to claim the documents he did disclose aren’t “mostly about surveillance is bad faith on top of bad faith,” he said.

[...]

The report also fails to acknowledge the substantial changes that have taken place as a result of Snowden’s disclosures, including a global debate about domestic and foreign surveillance, the death of Section 215 bulk collection, which was ruled illegal, and increased transparency requirements for the entire intelligence community.

  The Intercept

It's obvious the report relies on information (including lies) from the NSA. Snowden has tweeted some corrections to the summary, but he nor we get to know any details.  Secret, don't you know?

Lots of Snowden activity for the show's premiere.