Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

James Bond Film Skyfall Inspired By Stuxnet Virus

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the license-to-kill() dept.

Movies 187

Velcroman1 writes "No smartphones. No exploding pens. No ejector seats. No rocket-powered submarines. 'It's a brave new world,' gadget-maker Q tells James Bond in the new film Skyfall. The new film, released on the 50th anniversary of the storied franchise, presents a gadget-free Bond fighting with both brains and brawn against a high-tech villain with computer prowess Bill Gates would be envious of. What inspired such a villain? 'Stuxnet,' producer Michael G. Wilson said. 'There is a cyberwar that has been going on for some time, and we thought we'd bring that into the fore and let people see how it could be going on.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No wonder it sucks! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910391)

It has been released in most of Europe, and from what I hear, it sucks big time.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (3, Insightful)

Grumpinuts (1272216) | about 2 years ago | (#41910429)

You heard wrong. Everyone I know who's seen it say its the best yet, critics generally very favourable too.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910479)

Did they manage to hold a shot for more than three frames without cutting in this one? We gave up on the last one within fifteen minutes because the editing make it unwatchable.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910525)

You will be pleased with this one then. The editing was particularly good.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911109)

You heard wrong. Everyone I know who's seen it say its the best yet, critics generally very favourable too.

Millions of people think transformers is a good movie.

Millions of people think jersey shore is a great tv show.

Millions of people think nickleback is a awesome band.

Millions of people think the secret is the best book ever.

Millions think tom cruise is a good actor.

Millions think mcdonalds has good food.

Etc etc etc.

Now if I disagree with all those people why in the hell would I agree with some critics who get paid indirectly by the movie studios who make movies they review? Or even pay attention to some movie goers who think the things I listed above are good also?

And generally favourable just means most critics didnt think it was total shit, but that doesnt mean they thought it was awesome.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

IAmGarethAdams (990037) | about 2 years ago | (#41911453)

Easy solution: Don't go and see it!

Re:No wonder it sucks! (4, Insightful)

SB9876 (723368) | about 2 years ago | (#41911541)

Millions of people also think the Bach Brandenburg concertos, Firefly, Aliens, Terminator2, the Curiosity rover, seasons 3-10 of the Simpsons and Raiders of the lost Ark were pretty awesome. Your point?

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

SolitaryMan (538416) | about 2 years ago | (#41911879)

... Bach Brandenburg concertos ...

I haven't seen this one, is it any good?

Re:No wonder it sucks! (2)

Lorens (597774) | about 2 years ago | (#41911257)

Yeah. It actually /is/ good. Except if you happen to know something about computers, unfortunately.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910679)

Thank you, Anonymous First Post Troll. We'll be sure to give your opinion all the consideration it deserves. I forgot what it was already.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (3, Funny)

steviesteveo12 (2755637) | about 2 years ago | (#41911155)

I for one always take my movie reviews from anonymous people who apparently live on continents where the movie hasn't yet been released.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911365)

You are welcome!! : )

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | about 2 years ago | (#41910735)

I've watched it and it was good entertainment despite. In contrast to the last one horrible Daniel Graig even does not appear entirely like a psychopathic murderer, so it's a bit easier to empathize with him this time (though still not easy). There are worse James Bond movies but also better ones, and it's fun unless you expect more than a James Bond movie.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (5, Interesting)

acid_andy (534219) | about 2 years ago | (#41910777)

...and it's fun unless you expect a James Bond movie.

FTFY.

To give an explanation, I think Craig is so far from the Fleming character and when introducting him they shouldn't have thrown out the good bits of the existing film canon.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910849)

Yes it is so boring and not even funny. Whatever, it should not be funny.
The IT stuff are so laughable.
- Q (with all the Geek-chic aparel) : "Oh my god, we have been hacked !" (And splash !, a animated 3D representation of the "thing" in your face.
        Ok, go back to school, assholes)
- James Bond (Looking at the hex representation) : "Ok, Let's try that password" (Yes, every "Virus" have a password to decypher it)
- Q : How, what is it ?
- JB : It's map !

There not a single gram of Ian Fleming novel' spirit in that movie, such a shame. This is just a giant advertising for Omega® and Sony® for zombie audience eating pop-corn.

You can leave it.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (5, Funny)

CodeheadUK (2717911) | about 2 years ago | (#41911111)

Don't forget:

Q: "We're under attack! Strip the headers and find the source!"

Bad Guy: "Good luck, I'm behind seven proxies!".

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 2 years ago | (#41911447)

Oh.

Ow.

My brain.

Oh god.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (2)

Type44Q (1233630) | about 2 years ago | (#41911907)

Why does that remind of this?

In A.D. 2101

War was beginning...

Re:No wonder it sucks! (5, Informative)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about 2 years ago | (#41911485)

There not a single gram of Ian Fleming novel' spirit in that movie, such a shame. This is just a giant advertising for Omega® and Sony® for zombie audience eating pop-corn.

You can leave it.

I'd be curious to know if you think any of the Bond movies have featured a portrayal of 007 that is true to the novels. Outside of Sean Connery, Daniel Craig's Bond is fairly close to the source material. Where Craig excels is in his physical portrayal of Bond: not only does he have the physique, but he moves like Bond: an operator, an athletic pugilist, with just a hint of the street; he looks and acts like a hard case.

The fact is, the Bond portrayed in the books is a thug, and at least initially, he lacks sophistication. He is provincial, and somewhat racist (though not consistently so, and actually irrelevant). So if you think that earlier portrayals of Bond (Connery excluded, of course) are somehow more accurate... I don't know what to tell you. Methinks you protest too much (and that you don't know of what you speak).

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41912005)

There not a single gram of Ian Fleming novel' spirit in that movie, such a shame. This is just a giant advertising for Omega® and Sony® for zombie audience eating pop-corn.

You can leave it.

I'd be curious to know if you think any of the Bond movies have featured a portrayal of 007 that is true to the novels.

None of them is close to the idea I have of James Bond from the novel. Georges Lazenby and Daniel Craig are the closest ones though. The others being pure jokes (Sean Connery included).
I think a movie like The American is very close to the spirit of the novel. The main problem in the JB movies : there are way too much dialogues, no suspens and they are not subtle for a penny.
In the last one, the references to the Sean Connery era are so lame. What the point ?

A good James Bond adaptation needs more than an actor that fit well the suit. Everything should be in the atmosphere, not in a avalanche of dumb gadgets and unacurate clichés (Martini, casino, James-bond girl, skiing, car, watches, you name it).

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#41911633)

My favorite was dude's data-center with all the empty racks save those ridiculous cables and odd blinking red light. Also the part where the new "Q" plugs evil dude's laptop directly into the main Mi6 network.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

DamageLabs (980310) | about 2 years ago | (#41911995)

Well, he is just a kid. Probably had some imaging tools on the local server and couldn't be bothered to get the disk out. A beginner's mistake!

But you didn't look closely enough. Those were open racks with motherboards on them. The red lights provide a nice movie style heartbeat status display.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911157)

I had low expectations for this film but came out of the cinema impressed. I wouldn't say it's a Bond film in the classic mould, but a really good, entertaining film.

Re:No wonder it sucks! (2)

egamma (572162) | about 2 years ago | (#41911433)

It has been released in most of Europe, and from what I hear, it sucks big time.

I think I know what you are trying to do [xkcd.com]

Poison? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910423)

Is it really necessary to prove it's possible to ruin a James Bond movie by taking all of the fun out of it?

Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (4, Informative)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#41910441)

I don't think I'm spoiling anything by saying this -- there's ~30 minutes of ads before the movie even starts. Not coming attractions, not "go buy some popcorn," but television-style ads for products.

Seems MI6 has been hit hard by austerity!

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (2)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41910669)

Well, you can always come 20 minutes after the announced showtime. When you rent it on disc, you'll get the same half hour of ads, and they'll disable fast-forward to make you watch it.

A clever person can get around this crap, but the sheer arrogance of an industry that wants to treat you like Alex being brainwashed [youtube.com] makes me crazy.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (3, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | about 2 years ago | (#41910879)

Downloading from The Pirate Bay doesn't take a lot of smarts. Pay to watch ads, or see the movie for free without them? The industry is brain-dead, this is the kind of crap that drives people to the very piracy the industry hates and was the sort of thing DeCSS was written for.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (2)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#41911047)

Or if you want to support the artists (or, to be more correct, the god damn middlemen) you can buy this disk AND download it.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911263)

Or, God forbid, you buy the disk and rip it yourself.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911095)

It's funny, you're still sticking with this argument. We're in the post-piracy era. People have realized that being a self-centered shithead means everyone loses.

I don't expect you'll pick up on that, though. You've made it perfectly clear just how much of a self-centered shithead you are over the last several years.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (2)

aztrailerpunk (1971174) | about 2 years ago | (#41911261)

It's funny, you're still sticking with this argument. We're in the post-piracy era. People have realized that being a self-centered shithead means everyone loses.

I don't expect you'll pick up on that, though. You've made it perfectly clear just how much of a self-centered shithead you are over the last several years.

Post-piracy era? Maybe for music but definitely not for movies. As for being a "self-centered shithead", I believe that piracy is a form of civil disobedience. The mafiaas have paid for laws that have robbed from us and try to artificially enforce their broken business model. The people fight back by not playing by their rules.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910813)

Those ads are the cinema's, not the film studios. They show them from a separate reel.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#41910975)

Again, I don't want to post any spoilers here, but the ads are most certainly attached to the film.

You'll see. Or if not, you could google it.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#41910827)

That's not exactly new ... car commercials, coca cola, banks, cell phone companies ... all sorts of extra ads and crap has been shown before movies for quite some time.

Re:Exploding pens have been replaced with ads (1)

too_old_to_be_irate (941323) | about 2 years ago | (#41911305)

Je m'appelle Bond. James Bond.
Saw this last night here in France. No 30 minutes of adverts, just on with the film.
And just for the /. crowd, there was a laconic, throw away reference to 'security through obscurity'.
That's all I'm saying.

BIND movies (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910475)

The name is BIND, James BIND

Re:BIND movies (5, Funny)

NotTheNickIWanted (614945) | about 2 years ago | (#41910699)

Agent BIND, it is imperative that you contact MX immediately. It would seem that the DNSSEC has been found dead.

Re:BIND movies (4, Funny)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 2 years ago | (#41911033)

Agent BIND, it is imperative that you contact MX immediately. It would seem that the DNSSEC has been found dead.

Did someone use to many AAAA records on him? Or will we have to wait for the CNAME resolution to find out?

Hopefully we'll get our answer before the MPAA assaults the NAME CACHE to once again lock down the world with their RIAA allies...those fiends.

Re:BIND movies (2)

zlives (2009072) | about 2 years ago | (#41912061)

Need I remind you, ::1, that you have a license to Resolve, not to break the traffic laws.

huh? (2)

schlachter (862210) | about 2 years ago | (#41910481)

The "brave new world" is "smartphones" (and tablets, wifi, etc.)

It has a PCI bus. (4, Funny)

concealment (2447304) | about 2 years ago | (#41910489)

Can't wait for another stunning Hollywood interpretation of computer science. Maybe this time when he flies up to the spaceship and hacks it with his MacBook, it will show a virus check on screen and tell us that it's the Matrix.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

AshFan (879808) | about 2 years ago | (#41910797)

This is not the first time a computer virus was the inspiration for a movie, anyone remember, "Shakespeare in love?"

Re:It has a PCI bus. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910807)

I'm not sure that even Hollywood could make a make command exciting. I guess we'll take what we can get, which in this case in a terrestrial instruction set architecture.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910825)

My personal favorite is when you can read the contents of a monitor that's reflected off a person's face.

They do the same with physics (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910833)

How often do we see someone being shot where they get thrown back and yet the shooter goes nowhere?

Or where the bad-ass good guy walks away from an explosion that should have turned him into jelly?

Or fighting on a floating piece of rock in a lava stream? AND they don't burst into flames themselves?

Or spacecraft maneuvering like airplanes?

And lastly, sound in space.

Re:They do the same with physics (4, Interesting)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#41911667)

There's a good one in Skyfall too, if a bit cliche. Towards the end of the movie a helicopter crashes into fairly large building made of stone and blows it completely apart.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910841)

For what it's worth, ID4 does establish (in the second act, I believe?) that our technology is replicated from the alien designs. From a storytelling perspective, it's not much of a stretch, then, to make a "virus". Something that simply moves along byte by byte making copies of itself wouldn't be that difficult a thing to figure out, if you had access to one of their computers on the ground (Which they do, in Area 51) and it's further not much of a stretch to imagine that their admins might have left access a little *too* open.

Sure, he's shown using his PowerBook running MacOS, but it's probably just a terminal window of sorts into the guts of the alien computer, because the PowerBook is designed for a human, and the alien systems are not.

Most movie portrayals of computing are pretty far fetched, but this is one I'm actually willing to forgive. It doesn't seem implausible in the least to me that someone faced with impending annihilation would figure out how to do this. Hell, I bet the guys at Area 51 might have even had a compiler for the damn thing, they have had it for a few decades.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 2 years ago | (#41911057)

For what it's worth, ID4 does establish (in the second act, I believe?) that our technology is replicated from the alien designs. From a storytelling perspective, it's not much of a stretch, then, to make a "virus". Something that simply moves along byte by byte making copies of itself wouldn't be that difficult a thing to figure out, if you had access to one of their computers on the ground (Which they do, in Area 51) and it's further not much of a stretch to imagine that their admins might have left access a little *too* open.

Sure, he's shown using his PowerBook running MacOS, but it's probably just a terminal window of sorts into the guts of the alien computer, because the PowerBook is designed for a human, and the alien systems are not.

Most movie portrayals of computing are pretty far fetched, but this is one I'm actually willing to forgive. It doesn't seem implausible in the least to me that someone faced with impending annihilation would figure out how to do this. Hell, I bet the guys at Area 51 might have even had a compiler for the damn thing, they have had it for a few decades.

But you think they'd have closed that security hole in 50 years time. It's not like they were Microsoft....

Re:It has a PCI bus. (3, Interesting)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#41911683)

Depends. If you're civilization that's millions of years old that has encountered little, if any, resistance out of the countless conquered planets, you might actually become a bit overconfident and neglect to patch things on a timely basis.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (2)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 2 years ago | (#41911877)

Depends. If you're civilization that's millions of years old that has encountered little, if any, resistance out of the countless conquered planets, you might actually become a bit overconfident and neglect to patch things on a timely basis.

More like they'd be mired in the red tape than overconfident...

Re:It has a PCI bus. (2)

tragedy (27079) | about 2 years ago | (#41911913)

But you think they'd have closed that security hole in 50 years time. It's not like they were Microsoft....

They were a telepathic species. It's quite possible that, in their society, there were no private thoughts. Given that, it's quite possible that they didn't even have any computer security to speak of.

That's the justification I use anyway.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

future assassin (639396) | about 2 years ago | (#41910847)

RISC architecture is going to change everything.
RISC is good.
?????
Hackers

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

wed128 (722152) | about 2 years ago | (#41910953)

To be fair...it kinda did. Not to many CISC (to the metal) machines around anymore...

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about 2 years ago | (#41910895)

Can't wait for another stunning Hollywood interpretation of computer science. Maybe this time when he flies up to the spaceship and hacks it with his MacBook, it will show a virus check on screen and tell us that it's the Matrix.

to resist the urge to critique Hollywood's dumbed down portrayal of things related to computing: programming, what software can realistically do, cracking, etc.

To put it in perspective, imagine a combat veteran's reaction to any number of films involving gun fighting and war. A lot of these people are probably bemusedly shaking their heads at a minimum.

I remember reading a thriller centered around a 'revolutionary' piece of software -- it was described as a 'firewall', but it really sounded like some kind of penetration tester suite. I "know" the author knows better, but he made a (lazy?) choice to entertain over being technically accurate, and that was correct.

TL:DR
Above all else, your first job as a creator is to entertain.

P.S.

"Killer refresh rate!!" Derrrrpp!

Re:It has a PCI bus. (4, Interesting)

jgtg32a (1173373) | about 2 years ago | (#41911395)

I actually had this conversation with a violinist. String instruments in movies annoyed her because she could see how they were being played and the sound wouldn't match up at all.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#41911405)

To put it in perspective, imagine a combat veteran's reaction to any number of films involving gun fighting and war. A lot of these people are probably bemusedly shaking their heads at a minimum.

That's going to be true of almost any plot device which which involves domain-specific knowledge.

I used to do some work in the airline industry, and the maintenance guys told me numerous tales about stuff that was shown in movies that was wrong for the kind of aircraft being depicted (the cabin isn't hat big, that panel doesn't do that, that's not where the lav is).

If they go much beyond doing to the most mundane of things, someone will watch it and be able to say "hey, that's incorrect".

A you say, the movie creators are more worried about pacing and their plot, and the technical details often get glossed over. And, as Myth Busters has shown up ... even simple physics can fall by the wayside.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | about 2 years ago | (#41911975)

My wife hates watching military movies with me because even just the 4 years I did in the USAF allows me to spot tons of inaccuracies that are typical in movies (the way actors salute is probably the most obvious and annoying one). On the other hand, it's fun to watch those movies with a group of prior military folks because the plot falls aside while we poke fun at the poor representations of military personnel and operations.

Re:It has a PCI bus. (1)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#41911653)

It'd bad. It's really bad... but it's so bad it's actually funny this time. Just bring a friend and poke fun at it together.

What? (1)

theRunicBard (2662581) | about 2 years ago | (#41910703)

So, the movie's interpretation is that we should be fighting hackers with our fists and they're calling that MORE realistic than previous Bond films? Yes, I'm sure the next time someone from China hacks the US, we can just send someone over to punch them. And that will not only stop them, but undo the virus, somehow. Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter was more realistic than this.

Re:What? (1)

Nadaka (224565) | about 2 years ago | (#41912059)

To its credit, Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter had one of the most innovative fight scenes I have ever seen. The one in the herd of stampeding horses. Not realistic, but it was certainly made of awesome.

Re:What? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#41912109)

So, the movie's interpretation is that we should be fighting hackers with our fists and they're calling that MORE realistic than previous Bond films? Yes, I'm sure the next time someone from China hacks the US, we can just send someone over to punch them. And that will not only stop them, but undo the virus, somehow. Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter was more realistic than this.

Well, which is more effective against an attacker controlling a botnet? Attempting to neutralize each bot and C&C system, or finding the guy(s) who pulls the strings and take him out? Sure, you still have the botnet in the second case, but nobody's telling it to actually do anything anymore. Plus, if you take out the botherder, you can always take his place....

Bill Gates? (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 years ago | (#41910713)

Last time I checked, Bill Gates wasn't a computer genius at all, unlike Steve Wozniak.

Re:Bill Gates? (5, Interesting)

Empiric (675968) | about 2 years ago | (#41910877)

He could code (and in multiple languages), in contrast to, say, Steve Jobs.

From what I've read of the experiences of other coders/designers/architects, he had the in-depth technical acumen to make a one-on-one development review a very detailed and rather harrowing experience, as well.

Re:Bill Gates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910947)

I know, right?
I had to contain my laughter when I read that line.

Bill Gates was a genius in another sense. Just like Steve Jobs was.
The people behind the scenes are the real smarties. The dark developers stuck in the closets working day in day out.
They never get any of the glory. Without them, we'd still be looking at cheap drawings on cheap paper in the morning.

Re:Bill Gates? (5, Informative)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 2 years ago | (#41911091)

Last time I checked, Bill Gates wasn't a computer genius at all, unlike Steve Wozniak.

Check again.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates [wikipedia.org]

In his sophomore year, Gates devised an algorithm for pancake sorting as a solution to one of a series of unsolved problems presented in a combinatorics class by Harry Lewis, one of his professors. Gates's solution held the record as the fastest version for over thirty years; its successor is faster by only one percent. His solution was later formalized in a published paper in collaboration with Harvard computer scientist Christos Papadimitriou.

and

During Microsoft's early years, all employees had broad responsibility for the company's business. Gates oversaw the business details, but continued to write code as well. In the first five years, Gates personally reviewed every line of code the company shipped, and often rewrote parts of it as he saw fit

Re:Bill Gates? (-1)

scribblej (195445) | about 2 years ago | (#41911775)

So he wrote a single algorithm, 30 years ago, and did some code review, 20 years ago, and this makes him a computer genius? No.

Re:Bill Gates? (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 2 years ago | (#41911845)

So Woz built a computer, 30 years ago, and built another one 20 years ago, and this makes him a computer genius? Apparently no.

Stupid Gadgets (1, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41910739)

Even though I was 12 years old when I saw it, the ejector seat in Goldfinger impressed me as the dumbest gadget ever. "OK, Bond, we've killed two of your Bond Girls in absurd ways, now get in the back of this truck." "Oh gee, is it OK if I drive myself?" "OK, we'll have a henchman accompany you, just promise us you don't have an ejector seat."

Even dumber (though more low tech) is the part where the limousine gets reduced to a metal cube for no obvious reason.

Re:Stupid Gadgets (2)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#41911023)

You know, for all the old nostalgia about old movies and all the crap we give new ones, I think this is a golden age. Even 5 or 10 years ago I never had access to so many unique films from around the globe. There are more people making smarter, better-acted movies than ever.

And since we're on James Bond, I'll even speak up for today's blockbusters; the huge sums spent on making films today *does* create a bigger stage. I re-watched Avatar the other night. I know the plot bothers people but, man, I just think the visual spectacle, and the detail in the world they created for that film is amazing. It was never possible before. I sit through a Bond film and think, "yeah, I can tell they spent $1 million per minute on this."

Re:Stupid Gadgets (2)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 2 years ago | (#41911539)

I'd strongly disagree on Avatar.

They used a lot of resources creating a world, and forgot to make it interesting or have a story. For all the CG effort on that movie, they still didn't come up with anything that isn't roundly trounced by many real world locations in terms of spectacle. Technically impressive yes - but ultimately pretty dull.

Re:Stupid Gadgets (1)

plover (150551) | about 2 years ago | (#41911505)

Bond films were generally filled with stupid gadgets. The Roger Moore era was particularly straining of whatever willing suspension of disbelief I was able to muster, from the gadgets to the villains, to the very worst of the worst, Jaws the Henchman.

Where the Bond films always shined brightest was in their exotic locales, the beautiful women, and the chase scenes. The location shots were always gorgeous, and watching one was like taking an exciting vacation. But the soundstage shots were generally painted cardboard, reflecting the best sets British filmmakers could produce, and the plots went from "ludicrous" to "plaid". Casino Royale actually had me believing that they could start making plausible films again, but then out came Quantum of Shame and the inexplicable Hotel In The Desert Made Entirely of Explosives. I can only hope Skyfall isn't as bad.

Re:Stupid Gadgets (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#41911717)

Yeah, the hotel in the desert strained the bounds of credulity. Were hydrogen fuel cells really more effective than, I dunno, solar panels?

Bill Gates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910773)

Bill Gates would be envious of any kind of computing prowess.

Re:Bill Gates? (-1, Flamebait)

RevSpaminator (1419557) | about 2 years ago | (#41911093)

No sh**! There are 10 year olds with more coding skills that Bill Gates has.

fu3ker (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910839)

are SHe had taken

"Computer prowess that Bill Gates would envy" (3, Funny)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | about 2 years ago | (#41910859)

Oh, so the villain in this movie goes *further* than creating a monopoly, using its power to force suppliers to put competitors out of business, using a file-system hack to implement long filenames, having Notepad write a BOM to UTF-8 files, and, finally, choosing Ballmer to run the business into the ground?

How will Bond ever defeat a villain with such technical skill?

Re:"Computer prowess that Bill Gates would envy" (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41911311)

Oh, so the villain in this movie goes *further* than creating a monopoly, using its power to force suppliers to put competitors out of business, using a file-system hack to implement long filenames, having Notepad write a BOM to UTF-8 files, and, finally, choosing Ballmer to run the business into the ground?

How will Bond ever defeat a villain with such technical skill?

By throwing a chair, duh.

Re:"Computer prowess that Bill Gates would envy" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911591)

I Think you are referring to A view to a Kill where Christopher Walken plays the meglomaniac Techno-Monopolist Zorin and his ridiculous plot to destroy silicon valley with an explosion, causing the san andreas fault to to trigger causing an earthquake supposedly which make Zorin Industries the leading supplier in microchips, well that is until bond stops him with that hilarious perfomance with Tanya Roberts.

the love interst (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910905)

I can't wait to see Bond and his 'modern' love interest, a mysterious blond PHD computer scientist named Kitty Scripter, code up some GUIs in visual basic to save the day

Re:the love interst (2)

plover (150551) | about 2 years ago | (#41911563)

I can't wait to see Bond and his 'modern' love interest, a mysterious blond PHD computer scientist named Kitty Scripter, code up some GUIs in visual basic to save the day

I would pay full price at an IMAX theater to see that movie!

Re:the love interst (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#41911773)

I LOLd, but considering this is the franchise that brought us Pussy Galore and Plenty O'Toole, it's not entirely implausible.

It Sucked! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41910997)

Watched it and fell asleep twice. No one liked bond because he got things done. They like him because he got things done with innovation and flare.

New Bond? (5, Funny)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#41911079)

Is Vladimir Putin still playing James Bond?

We need a Bond that looks more like Bond and less like a Bond Villian.

Re:New Bond? (1)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about 2 years ago | (#41912025)

Is Vladimir Putin still playing James Bond?

We need a Bond that looks more like Bond and less like a Bond Villian.

When some says "we", they usually mean "me". Let's give it a try:

"We don't want you here." Translation: I hate you, Jan! (Brady Bunch anyone?)
"When are we going to eat?" Translation: I'm hungry (and lazy).
"We need a diaper with long-lasting absorbency." Translation: when will this damnable infant-centric technology be incorporated into Depends?

It Sucks! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911177)

I fell alseep twice during the movie. No one liked Bond because he got the job done, they liked him because he did it using innovation and flare. Take that away and he's just a pompous over achiever haha

Didn't they do this already? (3, Informative)

Antipater (2053064) | about 2 years ago | (#41911211)

I seem to remember Bruce Willis doing this five years ago, against a Timothy Olyphant "who hacked the Pentagon with just a laptop!"

I also seem to remember Jeff Goldblum disabling an entire civilization's computer system with a computer virus so that it could be destroyed by nuclear weapons, about sixteen years ago.

A computer virus is a brave new world for filmmaking now?

Re:Didn't they do this already? (1)

realsilly (186931) | about 2 years ago | (#41911343)

I seem to remember Bruce Willis doing this five years ago, against a Timothy Olyphant "who hacked the Pentagon with just a laptop!"

I also seem to remember Jeff Goldblum disabling an entire civilization's computer system with a computer virus so that it could be destroyed by nuclear weapons, about sixteen years ago.

A computer virus is a brave new world for filmmaking now?

You mean in Die Hard 4, Die Harder? or Independence Day? Or The Net? or Hackers? etc....

I remember in Die Hard 4, a computer virus made a house blow up! Does Skyfall one-up this?

Re:Didn't they do this already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41912023)

I remember in Die Hard 4, a computer virus made a house blow up! Does Skyfall one-up this?

Not sure if you are intentionally being obtuse, but to be fair, in Die Hard 4 that was a video of a prop blowing up. So, in other words, the virus did the equivalent of playing a video file on your computer. Also, not sure if it was actually a virus or just a telecoms hack of some sort (haven't seen it since theaters).

Re:Didn't they do this already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911347)

I think you may be the only person left that doesn't remember that within the continuity of Independence Day, all of the technology in that laptop (hardware and software) was developed by reverse engineering the crashed ship from Roswell. Within this fictional framework, it makes perfect sense that the laptop would be able to upload a virus to the mothership because they're based on the same underlying technology.

Re:Didn't they do this already? (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 2 years ago | (#41911565)

When does that show up?

You're the second person to mention this, and I've never seen anything like it in the movie. In the movie it's the satellite signal which serves as the reverse engineering basis.

The whole "source of the modern age" thing was from Transformers.

Re:Didn't they do this already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41912101)

Deleted scenes.

Never seen them personally, but I've heard reports they exist far too many places. Nothing in the movie contradicts it, just wasn't left in.

Bethesda (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about 2 years ago | (#41911309)

I wonder how long it will take for Bethesda to start suing [tumblr.com] over the name, particularly when the inevitable video game comes out. I mean surely the typical gamer will confuse Skyfall with Bethesda's trademarks "Daggerfall" and "Skyrim".

remember when we had (2)

nimbius (983462) | about 2 years ago | (#41911423)

state sponsored torture prisons? it was hollywoods job to normalize and flavor it for consumption by the american public using shows like 24.

now we're getting to the point where "cyber" is the new war, and so it must be sold accordingly.

Re:remember when we had (1)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#41911823)

24 Glorified torture? Really? Did you actually watch the whole of a season? The whole series? Bauer even becomes a fucking Muslim in the end and Islam is portrayed as a "religion of peace" framed for violence by a corrupt and conspiratorial US government. It even turns out the president plots to detonate WMDs on US soil to justify his wars. Defense contractors are portrayed as in a conspiracy to take over the country. It doesn't get any more ridiculously PC. The few instances in which torture is used it turns out to be a mistake. It's a parable against torture, not a commercial for it.

An exercise in suspending disbelief.. (2)

Trevelyan (535381) | about 2 years ago | (#41911599)

To enjoy the film, which I did, I had to actively ignore anything that was said in relational to IT. Something that I find hard to do.

The concept behind the plot, while at the most extreme of technical possibility, was a valid idea to explore in a piece of fiction. The Iranians would likely have never detected stuxnet if its 'herders' had kept a better control on its spreading. Imagine something like that in a western government (as the victim). No, what annoyed me most is that they didn't even bother. Simply swapping some of the IT buzzwords in the script for ones that actually meant something in the given context, would have greatly improved its palatability. However that would mean employing someone with real IT knowledge on the writing team. Such a person might have gone insane or have made the script 'boring' with too much attention to accuracy, who knows.

One theory I had when leaving the film, was that maybe the makers didn't want to give the general public any ideas or tips in how someone would go about achieving any of the anarchy portrayed in the film. The more misinformed about computer 'hacking' the safer we'll all be...

Re:An exercise in suspending disbelief.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911871)

The Iranians would likely have never detected stuxnet if its 'herders' had kept a better control on its spreading.

[citation needed]

Wait... didn't Brosnan do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911821)

SPIKE!

Um, lawl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41911997)

"...and let people know what could be going on."

The only thing I have ever been sure of in a 007 movie, is that the people making such movies have no idea how real life combat works, or computers, or military service, or anything really.

Thanks for showing me all the made up bullshit that "could" happen.

Someone show these people where they can buy a fucking clue, they clearly have the financial resources to do so.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?