UnCivil Liberties (2006) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Indie Feel but Quality Message
pootzboy26 November 2007
The plot was everything to this film...the common poor picture/cinematography is forgivable as it is an budget indie, the acting is not top tier but what they lack in polish they made up for in passion.

And it really is "Passion" that this film is all about...the passion of cast, directer and writers to send a passionate message. Now, if you are not a person who wants a film sending messages, or demanding you do some political thinking, and just want to the entertained, pass on this flick and go back into your one dimensional coma.

If however you are a thinking person and take citizenship and patriotism seriously, this is a film that emotes the question of our age. Its about who the terrorist really is....is it an overbearing state gone rogue? Is it people who take the words of the patriotic founders seriously? Or is all this issue of "terrorism" just a misnomer for the age old struggle for liberty? A struggle in which many people get lost and end up serving forces which deny liberty. This story makes you honestly explore the definition of terrorist...is one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter? That seems to have been the Zeitgeist of 1776 as it is in this imaginary future USA under martial law...but can the fight for liberty take a despotic or inhuman route? Good questions.

Watching this film I was struck by the realization, that by the standards of the security agents of this imaginary US martial state, the very men who founded their nation would be classified as terrorists.

Watch this film....it will bother you...you'll mull it over in your mind a few days afterward...and maybe see it a second time.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
"He who is secure is not safe."
Bishop8321 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Ben Franklin once said, "He who is secure is not safe." I think that summarizes "Uncivil Liberties" because it means that if we blindly hand over all of our own personal security to a bureaucracy, we will have lost everything that makes this country great. And instead of making this one of those political films where the government is the good guy and the "terrorist" is the bad guy, this film has no absolute heroes or absolute villains on either side.

Keep in mind, neither myself or this film are condoning terrorism or anarchy.

This film is strikingly relevant and a breath of fresh air. Instead of a bloody and violent film with little plot, this film deals with the social issue of our security. And having spoken with Mr. Mercer, it was clear this movie was right on the forefront of the matter. And considering the nature of this film, I can foresee it being relevant in five, ten and maybe even twenty years from now. Personally - I would like to see this film shown in American History as well as Sociology courses, as I think it might spark a very interesting debate on personal freedoms verse Personal Security.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good movie that seems to have "Down to Earth" feel to it
compmend22 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
The "Indie" feel of this movie as some say, made this movie even better in my opinion.

Acting - The acting wasn't up to blockbuster standards, but, I could relate more to the characters in this movie, than let's say Brad Pitt or George Cloonie. In real life many of us stumble with day to day conversations and are not the immaculate orator's Hollywood would have you believe. There seemed to be a great effort by the actors to get the point and emotion across, though it was easy to see the actors where inexperienced. I was able to easily watch the movie and keeping an open mind the acting wasn't so bad.

SPOILER BELOW******************** Plot - This movie I thought had a pretty clear story, despite other reviews to the contrary. A computer programmer working for Homeland security doing what she thought to be her patriotic duty,by designing and implementing a tracking program and a militia type organization fighting to stop the programmer's tracking program in an extreme and some might say "hippocritical" way. As to unanswered questions and gaps in the story, it seemed to me that the "missing" information was irrelevant to the storyline and didn't take away from the movie. I also really enjoyed the "party" scene as it was a party that seemed down to earth and realistic, kind of like a family get together, not like the usual Hollywood depicted stuffed up swanky party.

Overall - I would say that if you have some time to watch this movie, it is worth it. Don't go into it expecting too much and you won't be let down.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Could have been waaaaaay better -- totally crummy.
Mik_In_Montague22 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Man, I had high hopes for this film, but it was a total let down.

I completely agree with the subject matter and applaud the concept, despite the completely awful acting, directing, lighting, videography, editing, and just about everything about this movie. The only one in this turkey that could act apparently was Yvonne Perry.

I watched it till the end and holy cow it was painful, but I was hoping for some redeeming moment or something to make it all worthwhile.

Forget the fact that there's a spoiler in here. It's fairly predictable. They don't blow up the building. Not so much because "there is no system... there is only people" but because "there is no budget". Yes, there is only one scene with explosions, and it was obviously fireworks... possibly even some small town's July 4th finale. If the producer had more money there would have been more effects.

Of course, that's not what makes a movie, the writing does. And this movie certainly didn't have that. There's all kinds of weird scenes, bad editing, loose ends, you name it.

It's unfortunate, really. I agree with the other writer. This topic should be discussed in all classrooms, and all town meetings / town halls across the country. We're heading down a bad path, thanks to Cheney, Rumsfeld and Poindexter.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
independent film-making with a message and meaning
jesshorowitz7 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
My biases up front: my taste in movies runs toward independent films and documentaries. I like indy films because you can get a breath of fresh air and a perspective that's NOT all about mainstream and corporate interests. I like docs because they focus on important issues of our day and give you facts to back up their point of view.

The reason I really like this film is because it is a great combination of what I like best in both of my favorite genres: dramatic storytelling about an important issue facing our society today.

It's true: in this movie there are no car chases, steamy sex scenes, or aliens blowing up buildings. But why would I want there to be? This movie is about a serious issue -- how far will the public be willing to accept the government's "war on terror" as it takes away more and more of our rights? (Right to privacy, freedom of speech, right of assembly, etc.) And the filmmakers and actors treat this important topic with respect and artistry. And I applaud them for their efforts.

Most of the films about this topic are documentaries. I was delighted to find a thoughtful, dramatic, and well-made fiction film on this issue. I respect filmmakers and casts who take risks and who give me thoughtful fare in the process.

This is a low-budget film made by a group of resourceful, thoughtful people about an important topic that affects all of us. I for one would like to see more of these efforts in general, and would be happy to see future work by these filmmakers.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed