Slashdot Mirror
James Bond Film Skyfall Inspired By Stuxnet Virus
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.'"
You heard wrong. Everyone I know who's seen it say its the best yet, critics generally very favourable too.
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!
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
The name is BIND, James BIND
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.
...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.
Your ad here.
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.
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.
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?
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
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.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Is Vladimir Putin still playing James Bond?
We need a Bond that looks more like Bond and less like a Bond Villian.
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
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
Don't forget:
Q: "We're under attack! Strip the headers and find the source!"
Bad Guy: "Good luck, I'm behind seven proxies!".
I for one always take my movie reviews from anonymous people who apparently live on continents where the movie hasn't yet been released.
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?
Everything is better with chainsaws.
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).
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?
It's a long known observation that the more you know about something, the more errors you will see in someone else's version of that thing, e.g. news stories about something that happened to you or a friend.
Accurate technical detail is usually too boring or irrelevant to most of the audience - look at Top Gear's version of The Sweeney car-chase with Clarkson's insistence on getting the technical detail correct that the Jag's traction control needed to be disabled and that in turn required holding down a button for 10 seconds. By showing what a movie would be like if they stuck to such facts, the showed (in an amusing way) why it is a very, very bad idea.