Hacker (2016)

While the acting and dialogue was solid, this rather cliché and moralistic tale may leave some people with a sour taste in their mouth.

It may leave an even worse after-taste when the (totally private) "Federal Reserve" banking system, becomes its own bubble and then bursts, which is something that appears to have been building in the wake of the mortgage-bubble lead financial meltdown. If indeed these predictions are correct, and a worldwide economic collapse of far greater magnitude ensues, the US citizens will probably be told that it was all due to "Russia", "China", and "Hackers operating out of Russia and China...who may be on their respective government's payroll".

I listen to people who actually know what they're talking about and not talking heads with vested interests, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to smell the faint aroma of economic propaganda (or a "contingency story" for mass consumption), which may become stronger in the years to come if these economic predictions are correct.

Just some food for thought.

However, I digress. On with the review!

Why should I give this film a better-than-average rating when the plot was weak and the main protagonist knew less about protecting their online anonymity than I do? Well, to answer that question I should say that "social engineering" is also considered a valid form of hacking. People are always the weakest point in any system, hence they are the easiest way to bypass security without having to force your way through from behind a computer.

Even with the most sophisticated of proxies and other counter-measures, there is no way to ensure something won't be traced back to you online, just as there is no assurances of remaining unrecognized IRL on a camera, even with a disguise; The latter just happens to be far more efficient, and can often be achieved by using real-life proxies to do your data-collection.

The more real life proxies that are distributing the original data in a non-pyramid/linear, distributed fashion, the less chance of one person being caught as the "ring leader", which is the exact same principle one uses when using an online proxy network. The fact they did funnel information from proxies in bottom up fashion was certainly a major security flaw that would have easily have had them nabbed for credit card fraud under normal circumstances.

If you're into the guts of how people hack from behind a keyboard, then this movie is not for you...but if you want to see a totally different type of hacking at work (predominantly social engineering), you may get something out of this film in spite of its pitfalls.

Fmovies: The movie tried to portray how a life of a typical hacker would be with the usual suspects: a migrant who is rationally sleeping till a turning point in his family's life pops us which is generally related to finance. The usual suspects suddenly decides to awaken his sleeping cyborg and decides to be utilitarian just to end up in an existential circle. Also, it doesn't really reflect the mind of a hacker but rather a mind of someone who wants to get rich and regret later. Most of the hackers fight for a cause and they wouldn't back up. There are scenes in the movie that depict a hacker as being someone who rushes in his decisions and is not proactive about what would happen and does not assess the current situation on the spot in which the movie failed to give a close-to-reality snap on how a hacker react and assess a risk.

This movie is just bad for a hacker movie.

There is no actual hacking in it. Not even script kiddie style things.

Acting is bad and without a plot, the movie just cannot touch you in any moment and just feels uninteresting.

If you ask me, you can't make a movie called "Hacker" when the closest think to hacking is a hacker social media site.

Hacker fmovies. It was entertaining enough that I didn't turn it off, but barely. If you know anything about hacking or computers in general then you will laugh your butt off at these actors who just spit out hacker terms without knowing what they mean (and it's obvious). They should have just went the route of having these actors be "script kiddies" and use that as the platform. Maybe change the title to Script Kiddies as well. At least then it would be believable.

Unbelievably, I made it all the way through this miserable movie. Half way through I literally googled it to see if it were written by a child. I wouldn't even recommend this movie for a rainy day with nothing else on TV. Just turn your TV off and stare at the blank screen for two hours, instead of watching this movie. You'll thank me.

I cannot recommend this movie. There are not any interesting characters, moments or insights. It seemed as if the directors didn't know how to use google to research even the most basic information about hackers. The use of narration throughout the film felt like I was watching an educational film in P.E. at high school. I cringed during this movie more than i did watching Adam Sandler's 'click' and 'big daddy' combined. Please don't waste your time with this movie. I can recommend the book "We Are Anonymous: Inside the Hacker World of LulzSec" on this topic.

Best Regards, H4X0R

TLDR: this movie gave me cancer.