Takedown (2004)

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

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.

as i am a crime writer, and know all about... movie is a great to watch, simply because you know what you are going to watch. There is so many titles with great plot, but actually nothing going on inside. The only movies which can be connect with this one as I know are:Thief (1981) -- zero points Swordfish (2001) - great movie Hackers (1995) - waste of the time The Conversation (1974) - fantastic Torrente - funny movie ...probably there some more. including TV episodes which are for kids mostly...I would like to see more of it based on electronic crimes... if you know some you can post me.About the movie. Production is fine. Actors could be better but is fine... About the plot, fine, but telephone phreaking will not work out at my knowledge. The schematic which is shown in the begging has nothing to do with it. They sucks his information from laptop* with some device like a ??? yea right.... laptop generate signal just which they want...He can not connect with somebody if he has computer turned of and having a sex with his girlfriend? I HATE THIS IN THE MOVIES! (using stand by on LAN?)The same with the ending of the movie -- o common? Is there any better ending than that? The way how they get the factory information... it is great thing'' - no doubt. Score 10.How to found a hacker: talking at chatting rooms... this is true!Having a free tel access... putting a bug /worm/ inside... I will let somebody else to judge about it. quotes: ''i know the guy who knows the guy'' they have trace him by original forwarded ip receive from the server - that is how they catch

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.

Although when i first watched the film i liked it. although i then found out the truth about the Kevin Mitchnick story. And this film is bull Pooh and doesn't portray the truth. if your interested watch freedom downtime i have seen it and they interview Kevin in it to get the truth don't go by the plot of this film. Also if anyone has any more information about Kevin and general stuff along these lines you can send to me greatly appreciated i thought id clear the rumour about it being a follow up of hacker its not can people please not make that assumption its not its an independent filmthanks Yoda_the_jedi Northamptonshire u.k