Talk:Eagle Eye

Unintelligible English

Anyone know what "$101.4 mit hd x with moeythe United States and Canada" in the Box Office section is supposed to mean? Dargueta (talk) 00:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Headlines

• Actor LaBeouf arrested while in Chicago to shoot 'Eagle Eye'
• West tribute in works

A couple of headlines -- they did film in Chicago, but apparently California later. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

• Eagle Eye Set Visit! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

- Your link to the Chicago Tribune turns up a blank page - clearly a conspiracy covering its tracks. Noaqiyeum (talk) 01:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

"respectively"?

Eagle Eye is a 2008 action/thriller film directed by D.J. Caruso and starring Shia LaBeouf and Michelle Monaghan. The two portray a young man and a single mother, respectively

• Who is honestly going to think Shia LaBeouf is playing a single mother...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.40.112 (talk) 19:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
  • The word "respectively" means that LaBeouf portrays a young man and Monaghan portrays a single mother. --Pixelface (talk) 17:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Or that Michelle Monaghan is playing a young man. "...framed as people they aren't", the lead probably needs to be cleaned up to get rid of some of this silliness. TransOceanic (talk) 04:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

um

Kay, why was the part about the similarities to other films removed? It's a legitimate criticism... 74.37.159.6 (talk) 04:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

—We probably just need specifics. How about Colossus: The Forbin Project for a start— —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.158.4 (talk) 02:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

- Agreed. The similarities to other films should definitely be mentioned. Rip off/homages - like the concert ending to Hitchcock's The Man Who Knew Too Much - should be noted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.152.211 (talk) 04:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

death to super computer

should it not be mentioned somewhere that Perez eventually defeated the computer herself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.93.242.200 (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I've just watched this and i think that it was amazing. It was probably the most intense on the seat film i've ever watched and i absolutely love the happy ending. So aside from the epicly excellent film, do you want me to help with this page? I've got the film on my laptop so i could take pictures. Also if you want me to refine details then i can.

Regards, The parkster (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Plot hole

Maybe I'm slow, but this film seems to have a gigantic plot hole. The whole plot revolves around the supercomputer maneuvering Jerry into position to 'unlock' the supercomputer and allow it to follow through on its plan. But everything that the plan requires to execute the coup is either already in place or occurs prior to the unlocking. If Jerry got shot in the face in the first scene, everything else would have happened as planned. This film is retarded. Jherico (talk) 02:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually I think the problem was, while the supercomputer could prepare the detail of the plan, it couldn't initiate the final stages, I.E. The setting up of the explosive and the killing of the cabinet with being unlocked. Ztyran (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

And ARIIA wouldn't need to eliminate the rest of the ENTIRE Cabinet, since the Secretary of Defense is SIXTH in line (behind the Vice President, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Secretary of State, and Secretary of the Treasury). The rest are irrelevant. TyVulpine (talk) 15:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I think killing just the first 5 in the succession line so that the Secretary of Defense, who is supervising ARIIA, will assume leadership would seem too obvious. Also, eliminating as many incumbent politicians as possible would minimize risks to the planned succession or even perfectly prepare for a militaristic dictatorship to be followed. FetteK 04 Nov 2010

• To me it#s not only a plot hole, it seems to be a plot worm. From the end told, the story is content, but in lining there are extrem lacks visible. For example I didn#t get the necklace in the trumpet and reading that on the page; a faboulous reciepient is writing an unvisible story. So i did#nt understand the involment of rachel in FBI intrigues from the first point!

The paranoic construction of the overwhelming global village lead by an unknown female voice implies a fatal believe: that a monitor is a camera; and so told realistic figures don#t have to be chased or afraid... I think- you t(h)ank!--Raskollnika (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Introduction

Is talking about the "corrupted artificial intelligence system" not giving away too much, especially in the introduction to the film? If I remember correctly that is the punch line of the whole movie..? Fp8 (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Similar to Portal?

Doesn't the super computer with a female voice that gets destroyed at the end sound similar to the video game Portal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.84.121 (talk) 02:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

• Other similarities include having an advanced AI with a spherical "eye" and computerized female voice going rogue and killing off it's creators. The AI also instructs the main character what to do, and discourages/threatens them from deviating from her instructions. I have not heard if Portal has been an influence on the film, but it's interesting to note the similarities between the two. 71.231.69.53 (talk) 11:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

All the Troubles of the World

Did anyone else see the connection to Azimov's All the Troubles of the World?

RE: Edit about filming

I recently added the edit claiming that the film shot a scene on New Jersey Avenue SE in Washington, D.C. and that Democratic National Committee staffers were notified as such.

This is, indeed, a true statement as I was working there at the time the e-mail received and still obtain a copy of the e-mail from the head of the Human Resources at the DNC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.227.162 (talk) 02:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Medals & Awards

How do we know what medals they were given? All I could make out was that they were in black cases. While it makes sense that Ethan would get the Medal of Honor; Jerry could have gotten the Congressional Gold Medal, but the Presidential Medal of Freedom would make more sense to me.
On top of that, the medal they do show given posthumously to Morgan appears made up (or at least it does not match any award I can find)
Since the Secretary of Defense is giving them the awards—rather than the President, or the Speaker of the House—perhaps it is meant to be a DOD equivalent to the Presidential and Congressional medals. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 17:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. The one medal they show (Morgan's) is a six-pointed star, possibly in a laurel wreath. The ribbon is dark (blue?) with white edges, and five or six fine gold lines running down the center. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 17:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

P.P.S. Perez also got a medal, but her's was easy to identify as an Airman's Medal. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 18:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Similarities to 2001

It is worth mentioning under "critical reception" the (not unjustified) accusations from several critics of plagiarism from 2001: A Space Odyssey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.213.52 (talk) 23:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect?

The article says that Perez destroys the computer by impaling its main infrared camera with a metal rod. She does indeed do this, however to actually destroy it they drain out all of its cooling fluid. Logicman1966 (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No, because when they did, ARIIA started uploading herself to an off-site satellite. So even if that computer was destroyed by the lack of cooling fluid she would have escaped. TyVulpine (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Naming of article

Propose that the article should point to the disambiguation page as this is not the only use of this title.

Haphar (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Derivative of what?

According to the summary, critics found the plot unoriginal.
Perhaps, but what is the plot derivative of? If the critics made this point explicit, that didn't make it into the Critical reception section.
Manchurian Candidate? Demon Seed? HAL from 2001?
Yeah, there are similarities but the resemblance is not so strong.
This sounds like another case of critics having seen way too many movies and spotting "unoriginality" behind every rock and tree.
So, if a list of original sources for the "unoriginal plot" could be produced, that might be useful for viewers who found this film suspenseful and entertaining.
And why are only US critics represented?
Varlaam (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Citation Needed for soundtrack recording of earthquake

The session was interrupted by the Chino Hills earthquake on July 29, 2008—and a recording of the quake hitting the scoring stage is online.
This recording can be found at http://www.scoringsessions.com/news/156/ ("To listen to exclusive audio of the earthquake, check out the MP3 player at the bottom of the page!") and can be used as the citation needed for this section of the article.
I don't know how to add/edit citations and don't want to irritate the mods, so I'll just leave this link here for someone who can do it properly.
Thanks, 71.163.128.20 (talk) 19:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification! I used the URL to add a reference for that passage. Erik (talk | contribs) 19:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

$751,000

At the ATM the balance states $751,000. Before the ATM shows the balance Jerry puts a check into a slot of the machine (a $1,000 check from his father). Question: Is it possible an ATM can read the sum of the check and deposit it immediately to your account? Because later he is asked "who deposited the 750" (not 751) - and on the other side, why wasn't he able to pay his rent the day before, when there where already $1,000 on his account? So I figure the missing $1,000 must come from the check - or maybe I just don't understand a point or missed something?