subject: Movie Review - Eagle Eye Needs a Vision Check [print this page] The another Shia LaBeouf flick, Eagle Eye, has been something of a destroy, although it's charting a somewhat sluggish classes to the $100 million mark with the aim of would certify it (and its star) as such. It debuted exactly a month before as this periodical is being in black and white, has earned almost $90 million nationally and has given away viewers, reviewers and studio bean-counters alike with the aim of near is sufficiently of life gone in the B-movie formula.
The story itself is nothing another, building as it does on the hottest strains of paranoia coursing through Western societies. The following short synopsis is all you need to know not far off from the story arc (all three degrees of it) in this film: LaBeouf's character, Jerry, gets an fill in of the medicine with the aim of resolve Smith's lawyer character got in 1998's Enemy of the State, connotation Jerry's being tracked by satellites, his cell phone is snitching on him and each electronic device on earth has been short of into service contrary to him.
Pawns a-plenty
Jerry is thrown mutually with an extra pawn, Michelle Monaghan's Rachel, which puts him in a soccer-mom car in place of selected chases and crashes and the obligatory smoke and mirrors. Director D.J. Caruso, who directed LaBeouf in carry on year's Disturbia, has been accused by selected reviewers of having a Michael Bay composite (Bay directed Bad Boys, nugget Harbor, Bad Boys II, Armageddon and Transformers). True an adequate amount, near were Bay-like amounts of harsh massacre, explosions, high-speed skeedaddling and snatched ammunition. Some chi-chi, cultured critics maintain called Bay a lofty director - of collection designers. Caruso's film looks fussy, too. It immediately doesn't kind much perceive.
You know, we ought to solitary call something a "spoiler" if, in verity, the in turn revealed really would spoil the film in place of you. This film in no way even makes a credible menace by the side of poorness, so it can't really be stained. Still, in legal action you really hunger to find out this flick, bring to a halt sense in a jiffy: Spoilers ahead of time. Lots of them.
Both Enemy of the State and Eagle Eye trade on the bizarre mixture - of urban myth, prohibitive knowledge and worldwide taking sides intrigue - with the aim of fuels the hottest, all-encompassing myths of totalitarian computers. And that's pardon? We unearth barred not far off from with the aim of unflappable female voice imminent on the phones in this film: It belongs to a central processing unit. See, this central processing unit unwavering with the aim of the evil, unregenerate "chain of command" - in the U.S., not with the aim of lofty bunch of unrestricted nation-builders in porcelain and Russia - had to be destroyed. So, using each crumb and byte of its 2000-IQ silicon brain, the central processing unit enlists the help of customer service reps, single moms and other "regular Jacks and Jills" who can beat up ashen House security officers and outthink FBI agents. Uh-huh. Right.
The suspension of disbelief requisite to get pleasure from this film is too much in place of too long. Notwithstanding the ridiculous notion of Jerry, LaBeouf's slacker character, outsmarting black ops personnel and spanking around both cops and robbers, the in one piece picture of prohibitive tech with the aim of this film presents is absurd. The thought with the aim of capture on tape security systems are so extensive, so ubiquitously installed and so simply controlled from single, central source is similarly outlandish. Real-world experience in the area of capture on tape surveillance is not top secret or otherwise restricted, and the in one piece humankind can estimate in place of itself the achievement of large-scale operation of surveillance cameras in both London and other cities.
Real-world questioning
Clothed in London, writes Colby Cosh of Canada's National Post, "It's pardon? Skeptics maintain so-called all along, and in a jiffy it's representative: Cameras don't catch crooks." Reporting on a seminar with the aim of took place in London in May of this time, Cosh quotation marks Detective Chief Inspector Mike Neville, head of the Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office of Scotland Yard, as aphorism with the aim of the city's testing with closed-circuit television surveillance cameras (CCTV) has been "a fiasco."
Right on the heels of with the aim of article, a encircle of Muslim doctors - sure, doctors, the ones who vouch "first, resolve rebuff hurt," by the side of smallest amount on this piece of the pond - was fixed planning mayhem and murder of selected infidel Brits. CCTV did not catch the perpetrators. They gone selected cellphones in the cars they had bowed into mobile bombs and the police force "rang them up," as they say on near, and kaput them, as we say on at this point.
"Perhaps with the aim of explains," muses theNew York Times, "why this plot has not collection inedible an extra in circles of calls in place of increased capture on tape surveillance in Britain. Or maybe it immediately shows with the aim of similar to a decade of spiraling this society into a kind of round-the-clock, communal mother country film, little is gone outside the camera's eye." Whichever of these guesses is factual, it doesn't say a in one piece fate not far off from British backbone. It is powerfully to believe with the aim of John Locke, David Hume and Adam Smith came barred of with the aim of milieu.
Americans, in place of the nearly everyone part, don't know who John Locke is. Neither resolve they know with the aim of London has not far off from one-fifth of all operating CCTV cameras in the humankind, or with the aim of the government is expanding the installation of speakers with folks spycams. Now, as they're taking your picture biting your nails, they can roar by the side of you, "Remove your fingers or we will send out a constable!" Video security with the aim of helps you with your individual hygiene - in a jiffy there's a Big Brother move the American taking sides elite can really contract behind.
Does this film mean no matter which?
Frankly, near is still selected lasting resistance to authority between Americans, and it may well take a crumb longer (or an extra 9/11-level incident) in place of many Americans to roll on and theatrical production numb in place of government surveillance on a 24/7 basis. What resolution does a film like Eagle Eye theatrical production in this in one piece, great big, simmering vat of controversy? Again, like the script itself, the message is muddled, and can be spun each which way.
There is, however, single overriding perceive not far off from the flash and third tiers of citizens the film introduces us to, mostly cops and FBI agents and martial. Sure, the central processing unit may well be acting up, but they pretty much like all this lofty gear, and they all kind it seem as forbidding or threatening as a Nintendo GameBoy or iPhone. There's rebuff snag with the knowledge, it's the abuse citizens (or abuse totalitarian computer) using it. There's rebuff snag with power, you immediately need better citizens with their fingers on the nuke buttons. And maybe an "off" switch in place of the central processing unit in legal action it comes down with a Caligula composite and tries to take on the humankind (again).
The argument on state power - allot the superlative men a fate of it, restrain the most awful impulses of man by restricting it - has used up on in place of thousands of years. But at this point the question is not treated respectfully - or some kind of "fully." D.J. And Shia maintain teamed up to harvest a insubstantial, fast-paced, no-cogitation-required popcorn flick with the aim of doesn't respect the subjects it brings up an adequate amount to deal with them honestly or maturely. It's a comic put your name down for of a film, which is gloomy, since the subject matter and story line to be had sufficiently of opportunities in place of real insight, even selected controversy. There will be selected dramatic nationwide debates in the opportunity, not far off from immediately how far capture on tape surveillance ought to function in the U.S., not far off from limits on shared and exclusive capture on tape security measures and pardon? Kind of failure to notice is basic to keep government spies in check (both carbon- and silicon-based).
Unfortunately, Eagle Eye will add nothing to the conversation. Rather than venture some unique statement not far off from the proliferation of surveillance cameras or the intrusion of government and computers into our lives, it chooses to blow up an extra car or reveal our out-of-shape, 20-something slacker of a hero beating educated agents in hand-to-hand combat. The height of unreality, single might say. Too bad the film didn't take a shot by the side of dealing with the truth of capture on tape surveillance by the world's governments. Perhaps we ought to stay in place of the sequel.
