A lawyer becomes targeted by a corrupt politician and his N.S.A. goons when he accidentally receives key evidence to a politically motivated crime.A lawyer becomes targeted by a corrupt politician and his N.S.A. goons when he accidentally receives key evidence to a politically motivated crime.A lawyer becomes targeted by a corrupt politician and his N.S.A. goons when he accidentally receives key evidence to a politically motivated crime.
- Awards
- 5 wins & 16 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Hi - really latetotheshow once again
As for my review title . . . I edited it and my rating from a 5 to a 7 after watching special features - an action I often take once I view them and get more insight into the impetus behind the movie.
I also find that anything Jerry Bruckmeyer is behind is often top notch.
Of course, Gene Hackman could make any movie worth a high rating - and I still think there are a lot of unrealistic extremes that make this borderline comedy. And maybe they should've made this a more obvious dark comedy.
Some reviewer on here said it was 'informative & educational' . . . Good grief.
I think there are more informative & educational sources out there than a entertainment piece. That's the only thing that worries me about movies. So many people use movies for school rather than ENTERTAINMENT.
However, this subject matter is something we all think about when we zoom in on our own home in maps . . .
There's several good suspenseful moments, and again Hackman was the draw for me. I really liked how he portrayed being both very helpful while also couldn't care less about Robert at first, in one a particular fast-paced scene.
He played paranoia very realistically. Also played a highly intelligent nerd really well too. Seemed a really different character from the tough guys he usually plays.
Now I really want to see him in The Conversation, which is allegedly the prequel to his Brill character here.
Anyway, this movie provides a lot of food for thought . . .
I also find that anything Jerry Bruckmeyer is behind is often top notch.
Of course, Gene Hackman could make any movie worth a high rating - and I still think there are a lot of unrealistic extremes that make this borderline comedy. And maybe they should've made this a more obvious dark comedy.
Some reviewer on here said it was 'informative & educational' . . . Good grief.
I think there are more informative & educational sources out there than a entertainment piece. That's the only thing that worries me about movies. So many people use movies for school rather than ENTERTAINMENT.
However, this subject matter is something we all think about when we zoom in on our own home in maps . . .
There's several good suspenseful moments, and again Hackman was the draw for me. I really liked how he portrayed being both very helpful while also couldn't care less about Robert at first, in one a particular fast-paced scene.
He played paranoia very realistically. Also played a highly intelligent nerd really well too. Seemed a really different character from the tough guys he usually plays.
Now I really want to see him in The Conversation, which is allegedly the prequel to his Brill character here.
Anyway, this movie provides a lot of food for thought . . .
I remember when this came out and how much it freaked people out. Could we really be living in such a surveillance state? Could the government really be monitoring us whenever they want?
Well, over 20 years later and... Yeah, that's probably all true and then some. Still, this was a fun movie with a compelling enough story, solid acting and a surprisingly deep cast of comedians playing serious computer nerds.
Biggest downside to me was the tech itself. Movies of this nature can't help themselves from reaching into the nonsense handbag and pulling out things like the "zoom and enhance" cliché or the ability to tell exactly where someone is at all times with pinpoint accuracy among others.
Dated though it may be, this was still a pretty enjoyable watch. I'd say it's worth checking out if you have it streaming somewhere.
Well, over 20 years later and... Yeah, that's probably all true and then some. Still, this was a fun movie with a compelling enough story, solid acting and a surprisingly deep cast of comedians playing serious computer nerds.
Biggest downside to me was the tech itself. Movies of this nature can't help themselves from reaching into the nonsense handbag and pulling out things like the "zoom and enhance" cliché or the ability to tell exactly where someone is at all times with pinpoint accuracy among others.
Dated though it may be, this was still a pretty enjoyable watch. I'd say it's worth checking out if you have it streaming somewhere.
Why? Well for starters there is the best chase sequence since The French Connection. Then there is Will Smith as an actor - not just a star, though later in the movie he is admittedly overshadowed by veteran Gene Hackman.
There are two layers to this movie: On the surface is a pacy thriller with edge-of-the-seat chases but underneath lies a telling commentary on government surveillance. It is one of those truth-in-fiction stories which makes its point about government intrusion into privacy dramatically and effectively.
There are references to the classic, The Conversation: The surveilled couple talking in the park, and the Hackman character's premises are an obvious recreation of his workshop in the earlier movie. If you haven't yet seen The Conversation - see it before you see this one - you will understand the Hackman character a lot better (besides, it is a superb movie in its own right).
Oh, and Jon Voight is terrific as the bad guy...
There are two layers to this movie: On the surface is a pacy thriller with edge-of-the-seat chases but underneath lies a telling commentary on government surveillance. It is one of those truth-in-fiction stories which makes its point about government intrusion into privacy dramatically and effectively.
There are references to the classic, The Conversation: The surveilled couple talking in the park, and the Hackman character's premises are an obvious recreation of his workshop in the earlier movie. If you haven't yet seen The Conversation - see it before you see this one - you will understand the Hackman character a lot better (besides, it is a superb movie in its own right).
Oh, and Jon Voight is terrific as the bad guy...
This is a pretty good flick that I caught at the time in my room at the Pittsburgh Hilton. A really good cast helps it along, aided by a very small but effective (if not completely soaked in sweat) role from Tom Sizemore. What really gets me now is what followed in the few years after its' release. The motivation for the story is the ruthless push by the NSA to get approval for a bill that would allow them to spy on anyone at anytime using any method they deem necessary with unilateral and total approval issued by the NSA itself. Little did we know at the time that just a few years later President George W. Bush would do that very thing, with a nice, catchy, flag waving title. We all know it by its' minuteman moniker - The Patriot Act.
Enemy of the State (1998)
Review: This is a different direction for many. Will Smith for one and some noticeable comedic actors are here, but this is no comedy.
Enemy of the State is quite a movie. What is the main point of this is the plot. It works in many ways. In a situation like this, anyone with connections and power can have access to such technology to track down anyone who knows far too much. It's quite real. Scary in a real sort of way.
Another truly strong point here is the acting. Will Smith and Gene Hackman deliver excellent performances. Smith showed great emotion and Hackman had conviction. Not just these two were great, we have Jon Voight as well. But what really got me is the acting from other characters as Seth Green, Barry Pepper, Jake Busey, and even Jack Black. These people are great especially Black who is really acting here! Black should have realised that comedy is not his thing if suspense and drama are as he is great here.
Overall, we get great acting, a fine plot, and fast, character development and fast and intense action as well. Sound like a winner to me. Enemy of the State is fresh and original and clever. One of Smith's finest movies.
The Last Word: Don't miss. Gripping and Suspenseful.
Review: This is a different direction for many. Will Smith for one and some noticeable comedic actors are here, but this is no comedy.
Enemy of the State is quite a movie. What is the main point of this is the plot. It works in many ways. In a situation like this, anyone with connections and power can have access to such technology to track down anyone who knows far too much. It's quite real. Scary in a real sort of way.
Another truly strong point here is the acting. Will Smith and Gene Hackman deliver excellent performances. Smith showed great emotion and Hackman had conviction. Not just these two were great, we have Jon Voight as well. But what really got me is the acting from other characters as Seth Green, Barry Pepper, Jake Busey, and even Jack Black. These people are great especially Black who is really acting here! Black should have realised that comedy is not his thing if suspense and drama are as he is great here.
Overall, we get great acting, a fine plot, and fast, character development and fast and intense action as well. Sound like a winner to me. Enemy of the State is fresh and original and clever. One of Smith's finest movies.
The Last Word: Don't miss. Gripping and Suspenseful.
Did you know
- TriviaGene Hackman turned down this movie several times, but was ultimately convinced to sign on after a phone call by director Tony Scott. Will Smith later signed on at a relative post-Independence Day : Le Jour de la riposte (1996) bargain price because he wanted to work with Hackman.
- GoofsWhen Dean is running on the hotel roof after Brill leaves him, the surveillance team reports that the satellite is coming on-line with "one meter resolution". One meter resolution indicates that the smallest pixel (detail) that can be seen is 1 meter by 1 meter while the film clearly suggests that the satellite has enough resolution to see Dean running. Assuming you would need at least "web-cam" resolution (75 pixels-per-inch), the satellite resolution would need to be roughly 2,800 times higher than one meter (38 inches x 75 pixels per inch = 2,850).
However, the full text is "one meter res grid frame", which is not equal to the image resolution. It suggests that the camera is able to zoom in to 1 x 1 meter. At a typical resolution of the period, this would make a single pixel about 1/8" or 3 mm in size, which is more or less the minimal resolution you would need to read a license plate. In the period, that was military-grade technology only.
- Quotes
Robert Clayton Dean: What the hell is happening?
Brill: I blew up the building.
Robert Clayton Dean: Why?
Brill: Because you made a phone call.
- Alternate versionsAlso available in an "Unrated Extended Edition" which features some new/extended footage (ca. 7 minutes) like some explicit shots of the senator with his secretary or Dean finding his dead ex-girlfriend covered in blood.
- ConnectionsEdited into 24 heures chrono: 12:00 a.m.-1:00 a.m. (2001)
- SoundtracksO Come All Ye Faithful
(Also known as "Adeste Fidelis")
Music attributed to John Reading (uncredited)
Arranged by Margaret Dorn, Linda Lawley, Danny Pelfrey
Performed by The Accidentals
Courtesy of Amusicom Records
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Enemigo público
- Filming locations
- 1633 Connecticut Avenue Northwest, Washington, District of Columbia, USA(Zavitz gets hit by a car)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $90,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $111,549,836
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $20,038,573
- Nov 22, 1998
- Gross worldwide
- $250,849,789
- Runtime
- 2h 12m(132 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content