Films are a product of their time but some of those films represent the age they came from more than others, whether of good quality or not. WarGames is certainly a film for its decade, made in a time where computers for the home were growing in popularity but before the Internet (in other words, a time before my time). The story for the film was done by Walter F. Parkes and Lawrence Lasker, who developed their script over the course of a few years beginning in 1979. The original core involved a "dying scientist and the only person in the world who understands him - a rebellious kid who's too smart for his own good." Three people would play their part in shaping the film with computers: a meeting with Peter Schwartz, then of the Stanford Research Institute, shaped the film with hacking, since he felt a new subculture was arising in hacking with kids. Willis Ware of RAND Corporation helped inspire the idea of hacking into the computer with remote access (whether military or not). David Scott Lewis (a real-life hacker would eventually move to clean tech) would be the model for Broderick's character, and he had argued that the film has the most accurate representation of hacking. The character of Falken was originally inspired by Stephen Hawking, while the character of Beringer was inspired by then commander-in-chief of NORAD General James V. Hartinger. The original director for the film was Martin Brest, who shot for a few weeks before being let go by the studio, owing to his dark approach to the material, for which Badham would go the other way (treating it as a film to look fun and exciting rather than a dark rebellion). Noted writer and script doctor Tom Mankiewicz would also make contribution to the film, albeit without a screenplay credit.
Honestly, I was okay with the film, albeit with the observation that it just seems like a spunkier version of another film about hacking that would come out twelve years later with Hackers (1995), which also dealt with a high school hacker inadvertently getting his way into a deeper mystery. Actually, that isn't too far off, since Parkes and Lasker would return to write another film together that dealt with hacking (in this case security) with Sneakers (1992). After all, the film proved an influence to others in higher places of civic authority in the danger of "automatic dialing and access capabilities of the personal computer." In other words, it spooked President Reagan about hackers. Ten years after the release of this film saw the first ever convention dedicated to hackers with DEF CON (which happens to have attendance from folks interested in hacking alongside federal agents). This was the first major role for Broderick, who had started acting with stage and TV work two years prior. He does well what is needed here in wistful curiosity, where one cares to see where the line goes with hacking rather than wanting to see him get stuffed in a prison locker (one can only wonder what would've happened with the dark interpretation of the script by Brest, which might have been weird or really stiff). Coleman, a character presence in film and television, does well with what is needed in an authority foil with keen sense to go with what is needed in the scenes spent in the war room. Wood, known for his work in the theatre since the 1950s, does well with sardonic charm that lends itself well to the second half in maturity and futility. Sheedy (also in her second role, having appeared in Bad Boys less than two months prior to this film) is fine, breezy in those moments spent with Broderick, but the true presence of mind comes with Corbin, who provides booming bravado that is crisp in those moments spent in wavering circumstances with computers and choices. Admittedly, the one thing that sticks out to me regardless of age is that NORAD command center set, which is elaborate with all of its technological gizmos and lighting that probably makes the actual NORAD seem strange in comparison. Of course, it just happens to be a movie that tries to have a bit of adventure with hacking that will hit its target more so than missing it. In other words, it works for what it is without looking like a stodgy relic, walking that fine line between casual and tense in undertones that work for whoever wants to see where it will play out in 114 minutes. It is a movie about tech and the danger that could come from an over-reliance of it when faced with requirements of something as deep as nuclear war scenario-making. John Badham certainly made an eclectic range of warm films over the course of three decades, and while this might not be his greatest effort, it certainly stands well among his line of work in solid entertainment for engagement in tone and execution.
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment