Despite all the good reviews here, I have to say I found the Australian "Underground: The Julian Assange Story" slow and somewhat boring. Of course it can't compare to The Fifth Estate, which I actually sat through in the movies. Thanks to whomever arranged that deal for Benedict Cumberbatch, his career almost ended.This one starts when Julian (Alex Williams) is young, and he, his mother (Rachel Griffiths) and his baby brother escape his stepfather, who wants to take the boys to a cult. His existence was a nomadic one; he lived in something like 30 cities growing up in Australia.He gets into hacking with his friends early on, and they make bets about what places they can hack, not realizing that the phone lines will eventually trip them up. While an older teen, Julian gets his girlfriend (Laura Wheelwright) pregnant, and things become difficult when he can't tear himself away from his buddies and hacking.Eventually, as we know, he hacks into military Desert Storm plans and realizes that the public isn't being told important things.The film does not go into the big 2010 Wikileaks scandal when the organization released documents of "Iran war logs, gunsight footage of the Baghdad airstrike, and the Afghan war diary. Actually the film's focus seems to be more on Assange's life.Alex Williams was very good as Assange, protective of his family, contemplative, and extremely bright. Rachel Griffiths, never one of my favorites, didn't have much to do in this. I watched nearly the whole film before I realized Assange's nemesis was Anthony LaPaglia. I feel he is one of the most underrated actors ever, able to inhabit a role and make it seem easy and natural.One of the best things about the film was seeing the old computers, the dial-ups, the enormous cell phones, all the old technology. Many of the reviews here were written before the recent doings of Wikileaks, and now we learn that Assange is somewhat selective in what he's decided to tell us about the candidates for President so that we don't get the real story. We also learned that certain emails he submitted were fraudulent. It's disappointing - he started out with some noble goals, and he was sincere. Now, I don't know.

Underground has great actors and an even better story line. This movie should be more popular than it is. I'm not sure how much of the movie is real because I'm not Julian Assange, but I can say you can tell they tried to make it as accurate as possible. Considering I grew up using computers in the late 80's and onward I can easily understand this movie. For someone that has only been around computers for the past 5-10 years might have complications trying to understand the movie. I haven't been able to get the complete story on how computers were adapted in other countries in the late 80's so that was interesting for me to see represented in the movie.I feel the pieces left out in the movie are left out for a reason. This is a movie that was made to entertain and inform. We all know if you want the full story you must read the book or do research. You have to expect some parts left out in the film.I like Underground because it is not biased. The movie gave me a story of a hacker and it let me formulate my own opinion of him. My opinion is that I cannot give this movie a bad review considering what is being played in theaters and popular today.You cannot help noticing the people that actually watched the movie gave it rave reviews. I can quote Marianno Gorgeski "He is our Che Guevara of the modern internet era." Couldn't say it better myself. Also like he said he is trying to do more for the world than Facebook and the like are trying to do. That is why he is seen as a threat. The only summary that I came up with after watching this film is Julian Assange is seen as a genius because the world has become lazy and incompetent. If the people demanded the truth like they should I think we would all praise Julian for what he stands for.

The purpose of this movie should have been to show "what makes Assange tick". The producer/director and screen writer failed in this area because they do not know the answer.Assange's nomadic lifestyle does not explain what makes him tick, nor does Assange's father, nor does his girlfriend. These are certainly external factors in Assange's childhood, but they do not explain what makes him tick. Also, the superfluous details about his girlfriend and his child were absolutely ridiculous and should have been excluded as non-essential details.The film should have focused on Assange's motive that he has held and still holds. I should have seen more about his love for freedom of speech, his ability of using the internet; and his long days and nights in front of the computer (for which he is know). The "why" was left unanswered. It is not the external factors of a nomadic lifestyle that made him what he is today. It was not because his father or step-father was strange that Assange is what he is today. It is not because of his girlfriend. But it is because he holds certain ideas. Those ideas were buried throughout the movie.What made him risk his life? What made him follow certain principles that he is known for today? What are his principles?

To start with. This TV mini film was one of the greatest i have seen. It reminds me of films like money ball and social network, but on your TV for free and a lot more intense and amazing. The true story behind this is an amazing one and i would urge you all to donate to the real life cause which has recently been cut off by VISA, mastercard and other banks from their funds and need help NOW!http://shop.wikileaks.org/donate.The storys socking revelation keeps you constantly wanting more and is just an all around film rising to the comparitive greatness of Kerry Packer's war except better. If you are a Aussei or teen with interest in the www.'s then this is for you.