Comments
10 Cringe-Worthy Tech Moments In Movies
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Angelfuego
50%
50%
Angelfuego,
User Rank: Moderator
9/8/2014 | 9:15:55 PM
Re: Movie technologies
I thought that when the character played by Vin Diesel in The Pacifier, cracked the code using the Panda dance. That was pretty cringe worthy.
Thomas Claburn
IW Pick
100%
0%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
9/8/2014 | 4:42:34 PM
Re: Movie technologies
We could go further and say that any use of technology that depends on getting something done in a specific amount of time is wrong. There's always some driver to install or update or connection issue or incompatibility that makes it take longer than it would on screen.
PedroGonzales
50%
50%
PedroGonzales,
User Rank: Ninja
9/8/2014 | 2:52:27 PM
Re: Movie technologies
you forgot to mention the latest james bond movie.  In one scene the computer expert types away on the keyboard like a maniac trying to break an encription of an algorithm which changes very.  Such encryption happens to be in the shape of a cube.  That is why movies are called fantasy for a reason. 
Reilly Kerr
50%
50%
Reilly Kerr,
User Rank: Strategist
9/8/2014 | 12:30:58 PM
Movie technologies
Mr. Endler - I'd like to know your take on the TV series "Extant." (And no, I don't mean whether or not Halle Berry is a hot astronaut. =:0 ) I see too much 2004 IT and not enough 2040. For example, why does robochild Ethan house his own CPU? Wouldn't the kind of scalar processing required be better provided through the cloud, itself not even evident in the show? I'd also think Ethan's form factor (i.e., human child) would more or less make him an irregularly shaped PLC sausage, just to reproduce physical reactions to external stimuli accurately and/or in a genuinely human-like manner. They can't be programmed to accommodate anything indeterminate in a way that would offer the variability and randomness required for learning indirect sequences and even tolerating anything irrational.

Okay, so I nitpick. Just wonderin', you know. 

Best,

jdf (a k a Reilly Kerr)

 
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
9/4/2014 | 12:29:02 AM
Re: Doesn't "War Games" Explain Ferris' Feat?
Hmmm, I hadn't thought of Ferris as a nod to War Games. That's an interesting observation. As I said in the article, it would have been feasible for Ferris to pull it off. I still think it would have been out of character for him to go to that much trouble without letting us bask in the details of his prankster genius-- but then again, playing it cool and making it look easy fits his style too.

 
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
9/4/2014 | 12:24:14 AM
Re: "Mission: Impossible" = "Technology: Ridiculous"
@Susan,

Great question! I'd say that, yes, cynicism can be warranted some of the time, but not always. A lot of factors are at play.

Regarding movies set in New York, yes, its population is a factor, but so are its demographics. Houston, Dallas and Atlanta are big cities too, but they historically aren't as big for films as the Bay Area, New York, or Los Angeles. A little over 6% of U.S. citizens live in the New York metropolitan area, but I'd bet well over 6% of domestic movie ticket sales come from that region. That reality gives filmmakers some incentive to tell stories that appeal to the ticket-buying population. As the international market has grown more important, we've seen evidence of this sort of thinking. Transformers 4 was likely partially set in China because the producers anticipated that it would increase demand there. Iron Man 3 was different in China than in the U.S.; in China, it includes scenes that showed off local attractions. So there's definitely a precedent for choosing a location because a certain part of the audience happens to live there. You can also see version of this kind of thinking in the way movies are filmed. Back in the 50 and 60s—lots and lots of wide shots, because movies were really trying to differentiate themselves from TV. Today, producers know if a movie is going to earn more money in theaters, or on TV, and since it's increasingly the latter, you see way more films that are largely  a collection of close-ups—stuff created more for the relative intimacy of TV screens, instead of the overwhelming scope of cinema ones.

But the above observations somewhat conflate setting a movie in a country versus setting it into a city. With New York, it's not just the population-based appeal; it's also New York's status within American mythology and iconography. The "idea" of New York comes packaged with notions about "making it," immigrant stories, an architectural sense of spaces and style, and a million other factors. Likewise, Los Angeles has a distinct place in filmic mythology. Filmmakers set stories in these cities because of their thematic value to audiences in general, not just local appeal. The fact that Blade Runner is not only set in Los Angeles but also includes several distinctly real Los Angeles buildings adds a texture to the film's dystopic vision, for example. Likewise, you could have set, say, Big in Houston instead of New York—but would it have been the same movie? You could move The Big Lebowski to San Francisco or Miami—but would it have been remotely the same? Likewise, The Big Sleep, a movie to which Lebowksi  unexpectedly owes a great deal, is a story that relies on Los Angeles as a symbol. You'll find that LA-based movies usually visualize sprawl, with pockets of corruption separate by distance, whereas New York movies tend to emphasize verticality, with the elite looking down on the conquered. The cities are, in short, a convention as much as a real location.

There are other reason for filmic bias toward certain cities—by virtue of having more people, more industries, and more spaces, cities naturally open themselves up to a different range of narratives than, say, a small town in Central California or West Texas. Granted, filmmakers can certainly tell great stories outside of cities (see No Country For Old Men, for instance), but the pace and activity of cities can be conducive to cinema, which is, after all, distinguished by motion among all of traits.

Commerce of course plays a role. Shooting in New York is expensive—upwards of $1 million per day just in location costs if you want to shut down a block in Manhattan. Consequently, Vancouver often stands in, with some CGI or second unit helicopter shots thrown in to smooth things over. Does this affect your identification, as a viewer, with the film's settings? I'd say yes, but I'm not sure what the average viewer might say. Whether a city offers subsidies can also play a role—Chicago, for a while, was getting a lot of movies by advertising itself as a cheaper alternative to New York. And the zeitgeist can play a role, too. San Francisco is a very expensive place to shoot. Only New York is more densely populated, so any time you shut something down, you cause a lot of problems. Nevertheless, more and more productions are setting up in SF, and I think rising popular interest in tech companies has increased interest in the city, which is going to look increasingly like Manhattan as Salesforce keeps building skyscrapers downtown. Lots of big movies that would have typically used New York have opted for SF instead—the recent Godzilla and Planet of the Apes movies, for instance. Then there's stuff like "Silicon Valley" and "Looking" on HBO.

Cities have also been used for ideological purposes in films, too—visions of both utopia and dystopia that rely on some link between a real location, and a cinematic reassembly. Sometimes, the cinematic city isn't a real-world city. You get Gotham instead of New York, for example. But these fictional cities still take on ideological weight by using real-world locations. The Dark Knight trilogy, for instance, was shot mostly in Chicago, with some stuff in New York and Pittsburgh also standing in for Gotham in the third film. This creates a different phenomenology of viewership, and a different set of themes around the cityscape, than Tim Burton's Batman films (which mostly used soundstages) did.

For anyone who finds this sort of stuff remotely interesting, I strongly recommend a documentary called Los Angeles Plays Itself. It's incredibly thoughtful, and frequently hilarious.
Susan_Nunziata
50%
50%
Susan_Nunziata,
User Rank: Strategist
9/3/2014 | 7:40:46 PM
Re: Destroy the... monitor?
@Michael: Ha! I hope that you'll present your defense of Snakes on a Plane in your next article, I'd like to hear that one. 

So, in essense, you're saying that NCIS and CSI fill the same primal need for fantasy escapism as did the Hollywood musicals of the 1940s and 1950s? Makes sense! 
Susan_Nunziata
50%
50%
Susan_Nunziata,
User Rank: Strategist
9/3/2014 | 7:37:04 PM
Re: "Mission: Impossible" = "Technology: Ridiculous"
@Michael: That's a fascinating perspective drawn from the Transformers success in China. Taking that a step further, and down a path of cynicism, do you think that the size of the potential audience factors into the creative decisions about where a movie is based? that would explain why so many films are set in NYC, where the potential audience is a good bit larger than just about any other major metro area in the U.S. I shudder to think that there's a marketing exec sitting around during the creative sessions helping to decide what the best setting is for the maximum possible audience...but it is Hollywood we're talking about. 
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
9/3/2014 | 7:34:58 PM
Re: No Sandra?
That would have been a good one! It would probably need its own article, if I remember it correctly.
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
9/3/2014 | 7:31:59 PM
Re: How Did You Do It?
@Reilly:

Ha! Great thinking with the Einstein suggestion. You're absolutely right.

Regarding being too soft on Hollywood-- former NY Times tech guru David Pogue didn't like Firewall, but was astonishingly positive about the movie's "realistic" use of technology. You might be right.

In the case of Die Hard, I have to defend the first film. The series eventually became over the top, as I noted in the article. The lighter-jet trick is in the second one, which, while fun, isn't nearly as good a movie as the first one. With the first one, yeah, it's not exactly realistic-- as you point out, John McClane evidently has the most indesttructable feet ever. But when Die Hard came out, there was a sort of competition going on in Hollywood to achieve the most preposterous violence, orchestrated by the most indestructible of heroes-- think of all the bad Shcwarzenegger and Stallone films during the 80s. For its era, Die Hard seems refreshingly grounded in the real world. I still crack up at the end of the film, when McClane, all beaten to hell, limps toward his wife and the villain, and says, "Hi, honey." Compared to the iconography of its genre, this was a pretty unique image. John McClane evolved into something else over the course of the series, but in the first movie, he was an ordinary action hero-- one of the reasons that, for my money, Die Hard is one of the best action movies of its decade.
Page 1 / 3   >   >>


The Business of Going Digital
The Business of Going Digital
Digital business isn't about changing code; it's about changing what legacy sales, distribution, customer service, and product groups do in the new digital age. It's about bringing big data analytics, mobile, social, marketing automation, cloud computing, and the app economy together to launch new products and services. We're seeing new titles in this digital revolution, new responsibilities, new business models, and major shifts in technology spending.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest - September 10, 2014
A high-scale relational database? NoSQL database? Hadoop? Event-processing technology? When it comes to big data, one size doesn't fit all. Here's how to decide.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Archived InformationWeek Radio
A look at the top stories from InformationWeek.com for the week of September 7, 2014.
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.