Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

The Internet is under attack. This award-winning documentary explores the threat Internet censorship imposes on free speech, innovation, and democracy.While not an expert on the Internet, I feel I have a pretty god handle on technology. This film still taught me a few things about certain laws and regulations that affect how the online world works, and how much influence the MPAA has. (And I apparently forgot that Chris Dodd was involved.) The reason I can't give the movie a full endorsement is that it is so obviously one-sided. I tend to think it is on the right side, but even so, a great documentary should be a little bit more fair. There is no attempt at an argument about the violation of ownership rights.Although the focus is "censorship", we also dip into the idea of information monopoly (the Western Union and AT&T examples), and even the private funding of public campaigns, which seems like an entirely different issue. But for Lawrence Lessig, it is very much inter-related.

Killswitch is an unmissable documentary that gives insight into the political battle for the internet and how it effects free speech across the globe. Even if you are not an avid user of the internet, the attempts to regulate the internet has the potential to destroy a major part of communication. Killswitch evaluates many famous controversies in which the American government clashes with citizens over their rights on the internet. The lively narration and beautiful imagery breaks the stereotype that documentaries are purely informative, lacking the entertainment value that blockbuster movies are accompanied with. There is no doubt that you will be questioning the way the American government and how to take action to reform the way the government works.

The concept of 'net neutrality' was something I had heard mentioned a few times, but had no idea of the meaning. It seems liked it was important but I wasn't tech-savvy enough to understand it in any sort of detail. This film efficiently explains the situation, and its importance, by explaining the very real dangers of having the internet turned into a monopoly; into a place that is not free as we know it to be now. While using three excellent talking heads, the film also uses two major examples to strengthen its argument; the cases of Edward Snowden and Aaron Schwartz; both extremely bright young men within the IT sector, both vilified as traitors, targeted simply due to their politics and ideals.Now there is no question – this film is biased as all hell. It doesn't approach ZEITGEIST levels of bias, but obviously intends to hammer its ideas home in the most efficient way possible. This didn't bother me at all though, as it revealed so much to me that I did not know. It also doesn't seem preachy at all, and factually it checks out with global rumblings I was already aware of.The biggest part of this story is that of Aaron Schwartz. Programming code at the ages of 14 and 15, once Aaron matured he became almost a crusader, a selfless leader in the charge for information to be free. It is stated at the start of the film that information is like the new world's gold, and whoever controls it can control almost anything. Schwartz defended his ideals with his life, downloading thousands of scholarly articles without paying and then sharing them across the web. It was an act of civil disobedience, but the reaction to it was almost like he'd committed a terrorist attack. This section of the film is also emotionally stirring as one of the professors interviewed had met Aaron at 14 and had watched him grow up, doing these marvelous things that affected his own way of thinking. Snowden's appearance wasn't as well done as the part about Schwartz, mainly because there wasn't a close relative or friend offering comments. The information he offers is far from useless, but it is all from other videos and was mostly things I had already heard him say. His points stand though; guilt is not needed anymore, as simply matching the description of a suspect is all that is needed for your every click on the internet to be combed through and scrutinised. Not to mention the flagrant ignorance of privacy his revelations brought into the public eye.The NSA is not protecting the US in any way, and the film makes a good case for the opposite to in fact be true.Before watching this I had never really thought of the two men in the same light. IT is a big sector these days and the two young men were in very different areas. However, the issue of a free internet over a controlled internet is a powerful one that I now feel I properly understand. It didn't matter what areas of IT Snowden and Schwartz worked in – both were targeted because they used the freedom of the internet to do what they thought was right for the public.This is why the inherent corruption within US governments is also brushed on, but not elaborately, as it is the government that stands the most to gain from having someone like Aaron Schwartz silenced. The same applies to Edward Snowden - I'm sure the US would be very happy to know that he isn't telling any more of their dirty secrets – secrets that were vital to public awareness, kicking up a dust-storm over the NSA's activities. The film is surprisingly broad in the issues it covers without feeling cluttered or messy in any way. This coherent feeling is thanks largely to two things – the editing, which looks subtle yet modern and results in a compact (under 90 minute) film – but also the three talking heads that are used throughout: Tim Wu, Peter Ludlow, and the man who was close to Schwartz, Lawrence Messig. They all offer very different views, and they all obviously know what they are talking about. They may all be on the same side of the argument, but their different backgrounds mean that their input is unique and doesn't overlap or repeat itself.While not the perfect documentary, I feel the information within KILLSWITCH is something almost everybody needs to see, as the issues it deals with can affect almost anyone using the internet. It is an important film. The excuse, "I have nothing to hide so I don't care if the NSA spies on me," simply is not good enough anymore.www.epilepticmoondancer.net

Killswitch is an excellent film, managing to be both informative and entertaining, with superb pacing and a strong voice.As "Food Inc." and "Inside Job" are to the food and financial industry, "Killswtich" is to the Internet. Arguing vociferously for a free and open internet, it pulls no punches on Republicans or Democrats, going after politcians and media giants with vengeance. Despite this fact, none of the film seems heavy handed, perhaps this is because soft-spoken sage, Harvard Constitutional Law Professor carries the film with an intellect that is difficult to argue against. The way the film is able to capture the intricate mentor/mentee relationship between Internet prodigy Aaron Swartz and Lessig takes the film to new heights. Without giving away the ending, let's just say the director took me on an emotional roller-coaster, that left me inspired by the end of the film. If you are looking for the film that successfully humanizes the Internet and will make you feel like doing whatever is necessary to protect it, this film is for you. I give it a 10/10.