The Great Hack (2019)

Bradshaw finds the documentary gripping and chilling, a forceful exposé of data-driven political manipulation. He singles out its account of a campaign in Trinidad and Tobago that encouraged targeted voters not to vote.

The critic calls the documentary a terrifying warning about information mining. The review singles out its focus on data as a valuable commodity and David Carroll’s quest to obtain his own data.

The review presents the documentary as an essential look at data theft. It singles out its globe-spanning scope and timely subject matter.

The review finds the documentary worth watching, though it never satisfactorily examines whether Cambridge Analytica actually changed voters’ minds. It praises the film for prompting viewers to reconsider data use and the powerful’s willingness to corrupt.

Turan finds the documentary timely, significant and unsettling, with an involving account of how personal data can be used to influence elections. He especially praises its clear explanation of Cambridge Analytica’s data harvesting and its consequences.

Mayer gives the documentary a positive assessment, arguing that its visual approach makes digital surveillance newly legible. She especially praises its seamless animation and graphics, while noting that its human drama has limits.

Fienberg finds the documentary persuasive and frequently gripping, though occasionally redundant and conflicted. He praises its character study of David Carroll and Brittany Kaiser while warning that its concerns about data collection also implicate Netflix.

The article text was inaccessible, so its verdict cannot be determined. I cannot reliably identify what the critic singled out for praise or complaint.

The critic finds the documentary an un-cinematic and ultimately frustrating primer on the Cambridge Analytica scandal. He singles out whistleblower Brittany Kaiser’s conflicted presence as its most compelling element.

The critic finds the documentary meandering and elusive, arguing that its focus on Brittany Kaiser undermines its treatment of the scandal. They fault its failure to explain Cambridge Analytica’s methods in detail, while singling out the filmmakers’ apparent effort to rehabilitate Kaiser as the film’s most revealing subject.

Gleiberman finds the documentary intelligent but infuriating, arguing that it oversimplifies the causes of Trump’s victory and treats regulation as the answer. He praises its energetic, skillful explanation of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, while faulting its cloying fight-the-power framing.

The critic calls the documentary an essential, eye-opening explainer, despite occasional difficulty holding together its multifaceted narrative. They praise its effective visual metaphor for the personal data traces people leave behind.