4 ms·

I watched both sneakers and three days of the condor recently. Sneakers is an OK Hollywood movie but I fail to see the reverence it has. The technical details o

I watched both sneakers and three days of the condor recently. Sneakers is an OK Hollywood movie but I fail to see the reverence it has. The technical details of the physical security systems are nonsense. Condor is a better movie. It still suffers a bit around the Condor Cathy relationship. While Sneakers is make believe, condor resonates today. The speech about oil is pretty spot on. The whole idea of releasing to the papers is a movie trope, but the antagonist casts doubt, “will they publish the story” We know today that the press is a propaganda arm of the government and the answer is probably no. They will not publish the story.

blincoln 4y ago
> The technical details of the physical security systems are nonsense. Which parts are nonsense? The details of the "man trap" (including the voiceprint) are straight out of a late-80s Computer Security book I found at a garage sale last month: https://twitter.com/0x00C651E0/status/1521690225218490368/photo/1 https://twitter.com/0x00C651E0/status/1521690225218490368/ph... There's another section of the same book that describes ultrasonic motion detectors that work more or less like the ones in Cosmo's office. All of the other details I can think of offhand make me think the filmmakers did their research at least enough to get to the level of "it's plausible that someone would sell a security product that worked this way even if no one actually did in 1992", but I work in information security, not physical security. FWIW, I'm ordering Three Days of the Condor right now. Thanks for mentioning it.