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
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.
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 . . .
Sucessful lawyer Robert Dean is passed information by an old friend without noticing. Seconds later that friend is killed and Dean is targeted by a group within the Government who wish to cover up a conspiracy involving the murder of a congressman. With the Government's full weight of surveillance equipment brought to bear Dean turns to ex-NSA agent Brill to help protect him, find the information and get it out into the open.
This is much better than the ususal summer crash, bang, wallop stuff we usually get fed. It's greatly helped by the sense of paranonia that runs through the whole story from the Government's power and corruption at some levels. The film starts well, with 'everyman' Dean being drawn into a game of cat and mouse, framed for a crime he didn't commit and forced to go on the run from Government agents. Will Smith carries the film only so far but it realy gets interesting when Hackman turns up as Brill. He casts light on the ability of the government and is almost able to play them at their own game. Brill makes an appearance when the film starts to become too much of a staight chase movie.
To me the use of Hackman as Brill is the best bit of casting ever and makes this film stand out as being clever. In the 70's Hackman played a surveillance expert in Copolla's The Conversation. The film ends with Hackman being monitored himself, with him ripping his house apart looking for the bugs. What makes his casting as Brill so good is that Brill is where Hackman's "The Conversation" character would be 20 years on - it feels like it's the same character again. The director also deserves a lot of praise - he manages to keep the pace up throughout the film, whether it be scenes of chasing action or technological pursuit. The script helps as well - the conspiracy and the paranoia is strong throughout.
Smith is good in the lead, but he isn't quite as good an "everyman" as classic actors as Cary Grant or James Stewart were. Smith also struggles to carry the whole movie and the chases do get a bit samey after a while. Fortunately Hackman is brilliant as Brill, he is a classy actor and brings a lot of weight to the film just as Smith begins to feel the strain. Jon Voight is also good as the villian of the piece. The supporting cast is deep! There were so many famous faces in small roles that I really felt this was an allstar cast, despite the fact that it's a Smith vehicle. Gabriel Byrne makes a fleeting appearance, Ian Hart is there, Jake Busey (son of Gary) shows up, Jason Lee (actor in many Kevin Smith films) witnesses the murder, a gorgeous Lisa Bonet has a small part, James Le Gros, Regina King etc etc. The cast is well packed with famous faces - they don't all get the chance to put on a show but it adds quality at all levels.
Overall this is a fancy chase movie, but good direction, a strong and deep cast and a fantastic Hackman all make this film much better than it could have been. The last scene of the film is a little too upbeat but other than that it's pretty good stuff.
This is much better than the ususal summer crash, bang, wallop stuff we usually get fed. It's greatly helped by the sense of paranonia that runs through the whole story from the Government's power and corruption at some levels. The film starts well, with 'everyman' Dean being drawn into a game of cat and mouse, framed for a crime he didn't commit and forced to go on the run from Government agents. Will Smith carries the film only so far but it realy gets interesting when Hackman turns up as Brill. He casts light on the ability of the government and is almost able to play them at their own game. Brill makes an appearance when the film starts to become too much of a staight chase movie.
To me the use of Hackman as Brill is the best bit of casting ever and makes this film stand out as being clever. In the 70's Hackman played a surveillance expert in Copolla's The Conversation. The film ends with Hackman being monitored himself, with him ripping his house apart looking for the bugs. What makes his casting as Brill so good is that Brill is where Hackman's "The Conversation" character would be 20 years on - it feels like it's the same character again. The director also deserves a lot of praise - he manages to keep the pace up throughout the film, whether it be scenes of chasing action or technological pursuit. The script helps as well - the conspiracy and the paranoia is strong throughout.
Smith is good in the lead, but he isn't quite as good an "everyman" as classic actors as Cary Grant or James Stewart were. Smith also struggles to carry the whole movie and the chases do get a bit samey after a while. Fortunately Hackman is brilliant as Brill, he is a classy actor and brings a lot of weight to the film just as Smith begins to feel the strain. Jon Voight is also good as the villian of the piece. The supporting cast is deep! There were so many famous faces in small roles that I really felt this was an allstar cast, despite the fact that it's a Smith vehicle. Gabriel Byrne makes a fleeting appearance, Ian Hart is there, Jake Busey (son of Gary) shows up, Jason Lee (actor in many Kevin Smith films) witnesses the murder, a gorgeous Lisa Bonet has a small part, James Le Gros, Regina King etc etc. The cast is well packed with famous faces - they don't all get the chance to put on a show but it adds quality at all levels.
Overall this is a fancy chase movie, but good direction, a strong and deep cast and a fantastic Hackman all make this film much better than it could have been. The last scene of the film is a little too upbeat but other than that it's pretty good stuff.
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...
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
- How long is Enemy of the State?Powered by Alexa
- is Gene Hackman playing the same character from The Conversation?
- What is 'Enemy of the State' about?
- Is 'Enemy of the State' based on a book?
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
- Runtime2 hours 12 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content