kenstalker This movie is hilarious. It reminds me a classic Simpsons episode (when The Simpsons were good). In the ninth episode of The Simpsons' sixth season (Homer: Bad Man), Homer has a misunderstanding with the babysitter and the media portray him as a sexual offender who crushes cats with his car and tries to abuse a school girl, showing no respect for any law or moral at all. If you know Homer then you should've laughed your face off with this episode like I did (and I still do).That's exactly what we have here. In one hand, Tsutomu Shimomura (Russell Wong): a young and handsome hacker who works as a security expert in a very important software company, rich, successful and married with a gorgeous blonde. In the other hand, Kevin Mitnick (Skeet Ulrich): a sneaky black-hat hacker with no home, no money, no ethics, no wife, no social life and not even a nickel to make a phone call. Eventually, Mitnick meets Shimomura and feels jealous of his perfect life, unleashing a personal vendetta against him and stealing personal data which, in the wrong hands, could compromise the world's systems security. Then begins a cat-and-mouse game where the righteous Shimomura has to stop the evil Mitnick from starting a kind of digital Armageddon.And that's why this movie is so funny! It's loosely based in the books "Take-Down" by Tsutomu Shimomura and "Cyberpunk" by John Markoff, both of them no more than the authors' point of view for the chase and capture of Kevin Mitnick by the FBI at the end of the 90's. Personally I've followed the Mitnick case with certain interest and read both books as well as Mitnick's "Ghost In The Wires", and I can say that this movie is so far from reality that ends up being comical.This is not a bad movie, but that's all. It's a fictional history where a god guy tries to catch a bad guy, and if you are familiar with the Kevin Mitnick case and/or the "FREE KEVIN" movement, you're going to have a bigger picture and even enjoy the movie much more.

Fallon2000 This was a great hacker film. But as Kevin said in a Coast to Coast AM radio show "Because the movie depicted me in such a false light and because it wasn't accurate I ended up settling a lawsuit with the production company because of it and it was never released in the USA". Like i said it is a good film about hackers but there will never be a real hacker movie. See the life of a hacker is extremely dull. Would you like to see some guy or gal in front of a computer screen typing for hours on end. If you really want to see something good watch "Freedom Downtime". This movie was made by 2600 the hacker quarterly found at www.2600.com. This film depicts the Free Kevin movement. and the fact that he was held without trial for 4 years. When given a trial Kevin decided to plea out.

trgusa Not arguing technical details or realism, I feel what is presented in this movie is an all-too black and white picture of hackers, or "Crackers", as the hero refers to them. Great pains are taken to portray Kevin Mitnick as a temper-prone, reactionary, asocial neurotic, with nuances of sexual dysfunctionality thrown in as well. Whereas, the hero (Tsutomu Shimomura)comes off as being the shiniest star in the sky.I would say this general portrayal is unfair, and nearly propagandistic in its intent. The movie really becomes a base for expounding the moral issues of hacking and 'freedom of information' in a society that survives on security. It is a clear warning, and it does NOT favor hacking or hackers.I am appalled by that, because a more open picture of both sides might have been painted. "Hackers" brought the world to the standards of today, and daily test the security and limits of it... likewise, "programmers" continue to strive for safety, but also encrypt for greed, control, power, and politics. It is not all back and white.Either a hacker OR a programmer are capable of accidentally, or intentionally creating havoc in a real world of banking, traffic lights, airports, and defense systems, although the chances seem less with programmers (unless you know about "The Singularity").All I am saying is that this movie is VERY biased against hackers, it allows them NO redeemable social attributes, and it radically stereotypes them. It is intended to PERSUADE you. THAT, I regard as a THREAT to my own individual freedom of thought, and when you cross that line... alarms go off.BEWARE of this if you haven't seen this movie yet.Did "Big Brother" produce this film? ("Big Brother" is a reference to George Orwell's novel "1984") Regardless, the movie has good detail within a fast-moving and captivating plot.Lastly, NO, I am NOT pro-hacker oriented. Mitnick is clearly a criminal with a long record of convictions dating all the way back to 1981... but, I don't like being told what, or how, to think about a whole class of people.

Fenrir-5 This is a decent hacker film, in that the scenes of hacking are somewhat realistic and not the CGI-aided, flashy-screen crap that Hollywood has been foisting upon us for years. Also commendable is the manner in which the screenwriters show Mitnick's abilities to "human engineer" his future victims, cold-calling them and convincing them to give him closely guarded secrets.The movie has several flaws, because it was meant to be entertainment rather than a true story. It is also cut way too fast, with a lot of jarring editing and unnecessary blaring techno music.There are many people who feel the movie is unfair to Kevin Mitnick. In the first place, it is fiction. In the second place, Mitnick is a criminal. I lived through the whole "Free Kevin" nonsense push, and was very quickly turned off by the way the pro-hacker movement wanted to whitewash away Mitnick's crimes and portray him as an innocent victim. The man broke into numerous secure systems and stole data, hijacked cell phone lines accruing hundreds of thousands of dollars of stolen air time, infiltrated private data accounts, and electronically harassed those who were pursuing them. He broke the law, and his avoidance of prosecution for breaking the law only stiffened the fine he would pay.While I am certainly not for the unlawful incarceration of any criminal, nor the denial of their rights, we must be clear that hacking is not a right. Hacking is exactly the same as breaking into someone's house. The defense "I was just looking around" means nothing; the crime is breaking in, not what you do with what you find. That is the law. At one point in the movie the Mitnick character says "I could steal money from all these banks, but I don't!". Well, that certainly doesn't mean he won't if he needs to, or that he won't give the information to others with less scruples. It's rather like saying, "Sure I have all this nitroglycerine, but you don't see me blowing anybody up, do you?"Mitnick is not a hero, except to the rather sad hacker community who want to believe they can violate the law - because they have the ability - and not face the consequences. I am glad that he is no longer in prison, as I understand he faced some terrible events there that far outweigh what he did as a hacker. But he knew the risks when he undertook his criminal activity, and I cannot feel sorrow for him.