Content deleted Content added
Auto-assessing |
|||
Line 16:
== Plot question ==
Why would the boy be considered a threat rather than an asset? Surely if he can crack a government supercode, he should be recruited '''immediately''' , put into protective custody or something, and used to crack everyone else's codes. Surely that would make more sense.--[[User:80.43.60.43|80.43.60.43]] 20:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
:That's a great point. It almost seems obvious if you know anything about intelligence. But I liked the movie for different reasons. The FBI and the NSA are creepy bedfellows anyway. They have a long history of inter-agency squabbles. I liked the scene where Bruce Willis was demoted at his new job "listening in" with that old school reel to reel tape player while the NSA was using mainframe computers and an underground base.
:The code is a [[McGuffin]]. - [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster]] 00:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
The boy is a threat to the officials at NSA who approved the supposedly unbreakable code for use (there is a scene near the beginning where they give assurances that it is secure) and whose careers are at risk if it is discovered that the code can be broken. More responsible employees of NSA would have admitted the error and possibly recruited the boy, as you suggest, though the Bruce Willis character might have found that fate objectionable as well. --[[User:ArnoldReinhold|agr]] 01:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |||