Algorithm
- 2014
- 1 h 31 min
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA freelance computer hacker discovers a mysterious government computer program. He breaks into the program and is thrust into a revolution.A freelance computer hacker discovers a mysterious government computer program. He breaks into the program and is thrust into a revolution.A freelance computer hacker discovers a mysterious government computer program. He breaks into the program and is thrust into a revolution.
- Direção
- Roteirista
- Artistas
- Friendly Guard
- (as John Gilligan)
- Bitchan
- (as Paulina Laurant)
Avaliações em destaque
The most notable thing about the movie is that the screenwriter took the time to research some coherent information about how hacking and related technologies work, although that said they still manage to get a large number of things wrong or only partially correct. So for instance they reference a security flaw present in many devices manufactured during a certain time range which, unfortunately, is all too real.But then the protagonist mentions that a mystery program was written in a proprietary programming language, which is possible, but very unlikely for quite a few reasons not worth going into here. And then the most important hack is completed by obtaining the username and password of the head of a government agency from just some guy he knows. I can't even begin to tell you how many layers of wrong that is.
But movies rarely get the technical details right, so all of those issues could probably be overlooked if they enabled an interesting story. Unfortunately, they don't. The acting is just so, so bad. And the ever present monotone voice narration is incredibly overused as a lazy exposition tool. Finally, the visual appeal is zero. Every scene feels like it was shot in someone's apartment building under harsh fluorescent lights.
The bottom line is that this just isn't a good movie and I wouldn't recommend wasting your time or money on it.
About 30 minutes in, I started wondering if it was actually a cheesy parody of a "hacker" film. The dialog is poorly written and delivered with some of the worst acting I've ever seen. I felt like I was watching the product of a high school introductory film class.
The cinematography showed promise with some beautiful shots, but then degraded into very questionable angles and layouts. There's a scene where we get to stare at the back of the head of the main character for an oddly long period of time. I wondered why the director didn't have the cameraman just swing around to his front.
There were almost believable technical aspects of some scenes, but for a "hacker" movie with its overriding theme of "the NSA is watching everything", some of the technology in play should have been focused on more.
In light of the Snowden revelations, and some other stuff that was later revealed to have gone on in the past decade or two, the premise of this film could have resulted in a great product. It's really a shame that the movie was so badly written, poorly acted, and shot so oddly.
For a start, it's really slow. This film could have easily been shortened down to half an hour without losing anything important, because there are countless of slow pans that feel like they are there to just because they look good and take up time. Also, many scenes could be skipped entirely.
The story's message has a good intention, but is badly delivered, partly because you don't care about the characters, because you don't get to know them. You get bored by watching it. And that's a pity, because it feels like it has the potential to be a good movie, at least if you know something about the hacking stuff they are referring to. Right now it mainly wakes thoughts (and even that it somewhat fails to do, because of the above mentioned reasons), rather than being a enjoyable movie to watch. I have to say that I find the constant voice-over pretty good. Most of the things said feel meaningful and sound credible, and that is what saves the movie.
The cinematography looks like you would expect from a student, with more bokeh than thought going into the shots. It often looks pretty good, though. Unfortunately, the nice shots don't make up for the bad editing and the lack of camera angles in many scenes.
Many cuts are poorly made and makes it harder to follow the already not-so-great story. Also, you can clearly see many mistakes; the one time CGI is used, it's laughably obvious, for example. Another fail is in the very first scene where it looks like they remembered to add an effect halfway through the scene.
The sound editing is the worst I've ever heard. Terrible ADR, awful L-cuts and clumsy and audible switching between different microphones. I also miss music, especially in some unnecessarily long scenes, and when there is music, it's the same feeling throughout the whole movie.
I don't find the acting as bad as many other things in the movie, although it would probably not be considered acceptable in a good movie. I'm not that fussy with actors, though.
-------------
To summarize, this movie is not worth your time, even if you are into hacking movies. It fails to deliver an enjoyable experience due to shortcomings in many areas. However, there is a small chance that you like the pacing and the way they try to deliver a message. Up to you if you want to risk 90 minutes of your life ;)
As an expert/author in the area of privacy/security/abuse of power issues, the film is an important and useful glimpse into the perils of our electronic society, and how insecure you really are, especially from hackers, and more so from government agencies who exceed their charter.
I especially recommend the film to targeted individuals, activists, non PC types, anyone involved in a large law suit, working for a military contractor, holding a sensitive position within any firm or agency involving secrets, proprietary information, etc. YOU are far more likely to benefit from this movie than the average Joe Citizen. But Joe has much at stake, too.
This film will give you much to think about, with little worry that the technical information presented is inaccurate or invalid for the sake of story telling, as is common with most such works, especially on TV. Heed and take care.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesIn the scene where the prison officers are looking at security footage, one mentions "enhancing" the image. The other officer states that he can't add resolution. This is a reference to futuristic police TV shows and movies where they can "zoom in" and "enhance" an image.
- Erros de gravaçãoat 1:12:00 While Will is waiting to get Hash out of the DHS facility (with the DHS Receptionist) it's daytime, at the same time the 2 agents getting from their office to the interrogation place it's night time. In both scenes there are windows facing out, clearly showing the time of day.
- Citações
Decimate: I don't go dates. I don't go clubbing. I don't care about celebrity hookups or which sports teams just won. My universe exists entirely within computers.
Decimate: The moment we come up with a way to not have to eat, or sleep or any of the other things required to stay alive... I'll be the first in line.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosWhen the agents in the prison facility reviews the CCTV recordings after the escape, the left big screen shows a menu of computer games from the movie WarGames.
- ConexõesReferences Jogos de Guerra (1983)
Principais escolhas
- How long is Algorithm?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração1 hora 31 minutos
- Cor
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1