Customer Reviews

WarGames: The Dead Code

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

How can a studio have such a wonderful product to build upon, and screw it up so badly? The original War Games was filled with wonderful, sympathetic HUMAN characters, funny moments amid the rising drama, and a wonderful sense of pace and build. The Dead Code has NONE of this, substituting MTV-like editing, suspense-free drama, and amoral characters who you want to slap from the first moment. How to count the wrongs? The "Bimbo Bomb" at the very beginning? The completely inept chase scene where speeding cars CANNOT catch up with the on-foot suspects? The mother character who is introduced, and then dropped like a lead brick? The final scene which does nothing more than copy the original message? The non-existent chemistry between the two leads? The only good parts of this film are when they bring back elements from the original film, but those pleasures are few and far between. This one is awful from the word go. Watch the original instead.

They couldn't even get the person who played Falken to fake a British accent? Really?

This movie is riddled with plot holes so big you can drive a truck through it: It went off the mark because they tried to make it into more of a thriller/horror movie rather than Sci-Fi, and as a result, it has all the technical accuracy of a horror movie with lightning striking the ground and magically traveling up away from the ground to strike somebody on top of a two story building. Yeah, it's really that insanely wrong. Here's a partial list of the more egregious mistakes:

* A guy diagnosed with terminal pancreatic cancer is running around keeping up with a bunch of kids.

* A predator drone manages to fly from LA to Philadelphia by way of Canada, then continues to D.C. Actual range of a predator drone from L.A.: about as far as Albuquerque, NM. In the real world, it would have to land for refueling three times even if it made a direct flight to D.C. without flying through Canada.

* This missile had the ability to take out the entire population of Washington D.C. In reality, even with a Reaper, you get four missiles and two laser-guided bombs. In the best case, you'd only blow six craters that are a few hundred feet across. You might get lucky and kill a single-digit percentage of D.C. Not even close to 100%. That's just laughable. Even with six daisy cutter bombs (each of which weighs twice the total weight capacity of a predator drone), you'd only destroy a little over two square miles, or barely 5% of the area of Washington D.C., not counting nearby structural damage due to the pressure wave. The very idea that a single predator drone with a nonnuclear payload could wipe out Washington D.C. is preposterous.

* Do you honestly expect me to believe that the military would design a predator drone without a kill switch?

* Or that the military couldn't scramble a jet to shoot it down in the entire DAY it would take a predator to fly such a route at maximum speed (135 MPH)?

* Or that the U.S. military would design a system in which the destruction of Washington, D.C. would trigger a dead man's switch that nukes the planet, despite no damage to NORAD or to Air Force One, where those missiles are actually controlled?

* The computer system is in a room full of carbon dioxide. People repair it how?

* The computer system looks like it is some gamer PC blown up to room size.

* The military somehow manages to have real-time access to hundreds of security cameras in a foreign country, yet cannot figure out how to shut off a computer in the next room.

* The Canadian police can't figure out how to head someone off when they are on foot.

* Falken has to empty his gas can into his tank just to reach the power plant. How was he planning to get back?

* Why is the Canadian power plant run by a former Cosmonaut? That just seems entirely arbitrary and bizarre.

* And seriously? The U.S. government has resorted to blackmailing people for information now?

* And rather than apprehend the kid at the airport, they apprehended his friend because they thought somebody associated with a terrorist cell who was traveling on a school field trip would somehow lead them to other members of the cell despite having no history of communicating with Canadians?

* And they knowingly let a presumed dangerous person on board and did not recall the plane because?

* And in spite of the fact that the only person he led them to was the girl he flew with, they suddenly decided to move in and capture him anyway?

* And what kind of stalker geek memorizes the model of a girl's cell phone so that he can have an appropriate data cable with him just in case he has to borrow her phone to use as a network connection?

* And why did they do that when he enabled a wireless connection on the computer he was connecting to just a few seconds previous to this?

* And how can you track the location of a cell phone that is down inside a subway tunnel? Unless there are cells in the subway tunnel, you probably won't even get a ping response, much less be able to triangulate in any useful fashion.

And so on. This movie is so bad it hurts.

The most egregious mistake in the first WarGames movie (apart from the suspension of disbelief about the premise of a computer that could learn well enough to do what it did) was that an acoustic coupler modem can't typically hang up the phone, which means it generally can't be used as an autodialer. And I'm not quite clear why shorting the microphone would get you a dial tone on a pay phone. (There were ways to do it back then, but I'm not aware of that being one of them.) Both of those details are so far beyond what the average person would know, though, that I can overlook them. This sequel, by contrast was like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Every time you turned around, there was something else glaringly wrong. Why can't Hollywood writers at least hire just one person knowledgeable about technology before putting out a screenplay? These are just the flaws that were obvious off the top of my head at the end of the movie without me actively looking for flaws.... *sigh*

I must agree with all the people who reviewed this in the resounding negative. The trailer that was shown at the one night 25th anniversary showing of the original was probably better. This version had the feel of a TV movie and without the references to the original characters(WOPR/Joshua and Steven Falken)it probably could have stood on its own. Unfortunately there would not have been a reason to tie it in with the original and thus people would be confused....It was fast paced, almost too fast and predictble yet at the same time, it was longer than necessary. It was a great premise, but perhaps if directed(and written) in the same style of John Badham, it would (could) have been better. Maybe watching it back to back with the original would help it, if only for a bit. The end segment reference makes it unable to stand on its own as without the reference to the end of the original, the entire point of the movie is lost. Unfortunately, not well written, it's almost as if someone took the original screenplay, changed a few scenes, added a few (non-caring or useless)characters and then hit print and then someone greenlighted it.......I won't even comment on the B and C list actors an their acting ability, or perhaps it is the director's fault. In any case, if you are a fan of the original, I won't insult your intelligence by saying you will or won't like it. I can't assume that you will or won't. Rent it before you buy it so that you can make the decision on whether to add it to your collection or not. Fortunately, I am not out any money on this as my local library had a copy.

This is more a modernized remake than a true sequel to WarGames. But, the writers/producers very smartly, though loosely, tied it into the classic original in order to get a wider audience than a random computer hacker movie called The Dead Code would get alone. Fans of the original will also enjoy this one. Also recommended is Untraceable, another above-par computer geek flick.

Admit it--you've been sitting around for the last 20-something years hoping for an update of the 1983 paranoid fable "War Games." I knew it! If anything, "War Games" itself is a nostalgic bit of fun that is definitely more "likable" than "great." It is a cautionary little adventure that absolutely tapped into the early eighties mindset and, as such, has lived on in the hearts of those that loved it upon its release. But the world is different now--we are inherently less naive, less innocent. Might not a modernization of "War Games" be an interesting proposition? I think the answer is an unequivocal "yes." However, if the by-product of such thinking has brought us "War Games: The Dead Code," then it might be chalked up to a squandered notion. As a stand-alone film, there are far better examples of this genre on the market and as a tie-in to the original film, "Dead Code" pretty much misses that mark as well.

Matt Lanter plays the oldest high school student in Philadelphia. In an improbable bit of happenstance, Lanter diverts funds from his neighbor's bank account (which is being manipulated by a terrorist cell) to play a cash-prize Internet game called "The Dead Code" (really a covert military computer named Ripley programmed to autonomously identify and respond to possible terrorists). His mom also, coincidentally, works in a lab and brings home loads of innocuous, but suspicious, chemical compositions. Man, I just described last Thursday night at my household. Before you can whisper 9/11, Lanter is pegged as a maniacal mastermind intent to wreak havoc on ole Philly. But, don't worry, Lanter is still off to Canada on a school field trip even as authorities arrest everyone else associated with him. This bit of madness is topped by so many other great scenes like when Lanter's girlfriend distracts a wayward Internet thief at one point for a few minutes and then talks about what she Googled for the rest of the film (like she'd done hours of research).

As Ripley starts responding more fervently to the threat, her human counterpoints start to have their doubts. By far the most interesting component to "The Dead Code" is this aspect, but it's never developed into a compelling plot point. But with a little help from an old computer friend JOSHUA (remember War Games?), Ripley may still have some lessons to learn. Characterizations are flimsy, at best, and action sequences are way too familiar and uninspired. I'd be more forgiving if any of this silliness was fun--but it's not. Played way too straight, "War Games: The Dead Code" just makes you nostalgic for the cold war paranoia of your youth. KGHarris, 11/10.

WAR GAMES: THE DEAD CODE (2008) appeared on the 25th anniversary of the original WAR GAMES (1983). I do not know why this is touted as a "sequel", because it is clearly a remake. A not very good remake, but at least it introduces the modern youth to a taste of what the original film meant to those of us old enough to know better in 1983.

The message is plain: if we leave all responsibility in the hands of technology, we will have no world left to us. Then again, there should have been more of an anti-warmongering message here. The original film presented the message loud and clear.

Incidentally, that 1983 film was panned by the critics. It has a blurry, sloppy history I will not explain here...but I can tell you it was simultaneously fun, humorous, and disappointing in its day.

Same with this film, exactly the same. The steaming hunk known as Matt Lanter (yet another victim of hapless guesses as to whether or not he's gay) plays Will Farmer, 2008's version of Broderick's David character. He is annoying, intelligent, bored and his beauty is godlike. Naturally, this means he will automatically head into trouble on the internet.

There he finds RIPLEY (yes, a sort of tribute to Sigourney Weaver and ALIEN), a supercomputer program run by the DHS to find terrorists on the internet, and tempt them into a game which will ultimately get them caught. It works brilliantly until the annoying Will begins playing. Later, the government will be shocked to know he got his PC prowess from his late father, and his planetary knowledge of warfare from video games.

Big shock. The government designs video games to teach warfare, and have been doing it since video games first appeared. But then, this is a Canadian production, and that is perhaps its only saving grace. Canadians do what they do very well, and this film wasn't all bad. The acting is particularly good, though it felt wooden at certain moments. Its weakest point, in fact, was in trying to be too 'American'.

A swaggering stud like Will, who goes on the lam, tries to defeat RIPLEY, grabs himself a girlfriend on the way (Amanda Walsh), meets Prof. Stephen Falken (an impressive Gary Reineke) and gets the old W.O.P.R. (a/k/a "Joshua") in with the bargain...well, how can you beat a straight white boy like that??

The rather predictable and at times confusing film goes in for the American-style music video genre, which annoys me to no end no matter what the film is about...and the sagging scenes are precisely due to that nasty habit of doing a music video instead of good cinema. Directors, be warned. If you cannot learn from this galactically stupid impasse, and keep repeating it, you'll find the box office take will surpass the dismal economy.

All in all, I'd say this was an interesting one-time watch, for 'old time's sake' I guess, and it isn't a bad update. Cheap and sloppy, yes, too geared toward teens, yes, missing the big picture, also a big yes. But it is fun enough, it can be followed by those in the know, and it is fun anyway even if you didn't see the original.

It made me want to see the original again--it's a favorite in our family.

I wasn't sure what to expect whern the DVD arrived but I was pleasantly surprised. The movie was quite good fun and wasn't boring. It was good. I did notice by the end of the movie that it share a little similarity with the movie Eagle Eye I did not let that get in the way of my enjoyment of the film. I think this film help up well on its own merits.

For one I wasn't bored. I was kept interested throughout the whole movie watching what Ripley would do next. The opening scene for instance with the terrorists was quite good. That scene alone got my attention. The rest of the movie then followed.

it was nice to see things from the original Wargames in this like the WOPR computer and Dr. Falken so that kept my interest too.

Overall 3/5 and a definite repeat viewing or two later on.

This film holds the distinction of being the only film I have ever seen which seems to be both a remake and a sequel at once. It is presented as a sequel to the original 1983 WarGames in that it builds upon events which transpired in the original film. It comes across as a remake in that Dead Code essentially warms over the plot of the original substituting modern elements into the same storyline with an identical ending.

The many subtle references to the original film are commendable. Making a sequel with essentially the same plot and ending as the original is not. Dead Code is hardly a worthy successor to the classic original.

I have mixed feelngs about this movie, or at least what they aired on TV. I liked that R.I.P.L.E.Y. (whose acronym is never explained, to my knowledge) is tied in as an extension of the W.O.P.R. and that a character (or perhaps two, including Joshua) from the original classic is included for additional continuity. I wish they could have used the same actor and even the same voice synthesizer, but those are the least of the problems with the movie. I don't like any of the main characters who, unlike Broderick, Sheedy, Coleman, Wood, Clay, and others, are rather two-dimensional and not partcularly likeable. Worse, they who don't learn a darn thing from their experience, and end the movie as self-absorbed and self-interested as when it began. In the original David and later Jennifer realize for what they are fighting and the dire consequences of failure, and evince that understanding during their meeting with Falken at his Goose Island retreat. In this sequel the two fugitives are out to save themselves through most of the movie, and arguably up through the end as well. Even the concern the hero has for his ailing mother and the "untold-hero" story of his father seems tacked on rather than an integral part of the character or the plot.

I'll probably purchase this DVD when the price drops a bit more just to have both halves of the story, but won't watch it anywhere near as often as the first movie.

One star would be too low as it had two redeeming moments, but I'm comfy with two stars. A straight to DVD film - it's obvious why it made no sense to release it to theatres. They tried to take the original film, and update the politics and technology, but didn't pull it off. A couple good ideas in the script, and a couple of good moments, but they're outnumbered by a hundred bad ideas. The ending stole too much from the original. If you loved the original then just keep your expectations low and you'll have a good time. If you're on any kind of budget, the only winning move is not to press play.

GREETINGS PROFESSOR FALKEN.