Hacker

It's rare to find a film, as unheard of and made for such a low budget as 'Hacker' was, be made with such a high degree of quality. From the opening moments it was clear this movie was going to be told with a lot of class. I suppose a film subject like hacking really wouldn't seem right told any other way. Still, that doesn't make it any easier to achieve.

The thing that probably surprised me the most about the film was how good the acting was. Callan McAuliffe in particular in the lead role was an absolute delight to watch go about his craft. A reasonable amount of the film was narrated by him too and not since Morgan Freeman in 'The Shawshank Redemption' can I remember such an ideal voice for such a thing. Daniel Eric Gold also thoroughly impressed me and I think it's fair to say there wasn't a weak link in the entire cast.

'Hacker' was a really fun watch. The pacing is terrific. It glides effortlessly from scene to scene and there is always plenty going on to keep the viewer entertained. The story structuring was also very well handled and the film ended in a very clever and interesting way. Altogether I was very impressed by 'Hacker' and would thoroughly recommend people to check it out.

For any real hackers (aspiring hackers, hacktivists, otherwise criminally engaged computer wizards, or simply people in general who know their stuff) it's probably best not to touch this movie... but to people who hardly know anything about the world of hacking, who can enjoy a lower tier "morally justified" heist movie, it might work pretty well.

That said, the plot is dull. Really dull. Perhaps not so much the plot itself, but rather the execution of it. It's pretty obvious (from the narration, the cast) that this movie was meant to piggyback on the hype-train of Mr. Robot. Whereas Mr. Robot actually goes into detail pretty accurately, there's hardly ANY hacking going on in this movie at all. It's just a bunch of scammer kids, with a very infantile approach to the hacking phenomenon. A mash-up of jargon, combined with really poor dialogues and acting skills in general. A "hacker" that isn't familiar with the Dark Web or Onion? I mean, really?

Apart from that, it has a nice pace with just enough going on, to maintain a certain entertainment value that made me watch it through to the end. I'm glad that I did, 'cause it has a nice twist at the end... albeit pretty far fetched.

It was entertaining enough that I didn't turn it off, but barely. If you know anything about hacking or computers in general then you will laugh your butt off at these actors who just spit out hacker terms without knowing what they mean (and it's obvious). They should have just went the route of having these actors be "script kiddies" and use that as the platform. Maybe change the title to Script Kiddies as well. At least then it would be believable.

I saw this movie a few years ago. It was one of my favourites, before I became a software engineer. It's a great story and chain of events that leads to the center piece. A nice journey indeed, but this has nothing to do with hacking. I am giving it a 7 because of nostalgia. The real rating is more like a 5.9

While the acting and dialogue was solid, this rather cliché and moralistic tale may leave some people with a sour taste in their mouth.

It may leave an even worse after-taste when the (totally private) "Federal Reserve" banking system, becomes its own bubble and then bursts, which is something that appears to have been building in the wake of the mortgage-bubble lead financial meltdown. If indeed these predictions are correct, and a worldwide economic collapse of far greater magnitude ensues, the US citizens will probably be told that it was all due to "Russia", "China", and "Hackers operating out of Russia and China...who may be on their respective government's payroll".

I listen to people who actually know what they're talking about and not talking heads with vested interests, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to smell the faint aroma of economic propaganda (or a "contingency story" for mass consumption), which may become stronger in the years to come if these economic predictions are correct.

Just some food for thought.

However, I digress. On with the review!

Why should I give this film a better-than-average rating when the plot was weak and the main protagonist knew less about protecting their online anonymity than I do? Well, to answer that question I should say that "social engineering" is also considered a valid form of hacking. People are always the weakest point in any system, hence they are the easiest way to bypass security without having to force your way through from behind a computer.

Even with the most sophisticated of proxies and other counter-measures, there is no way to ensure something won't be traced back to you online, just as there is no assurances of remaining unrecognized IRL on a camera, even with a disguise; The latter just happens to be far more efficient, and can often be achieved by using real-life proxies to do your data-collection.

The more real life proxies that are distributing the original data in a non-pyramid/linear, distributed fashion, the less chance of one person being caught as the "ring leader", which is the exact same principle one uses when using an online proxy network. The fact they did funnel information from proxies in bottom up fashion was certainly a major security flaw that would have easily have had them nabbed for credit card fraud under normal circumstances.

If you're into the guts of how people hack from behind a keyboard, then this movie is not for you...but if you want to see a totally different type of hacking at work (predominantly social engineering), you may get something out of this film in spite of its pitfalls.