Aparantly the more accurate game design is, the less people liked it

I mean for some reason everyone liked that trashy grandma's boy joke of a film, but gave this one a 2 rating.

This movie wasn't bad at all. It had some great supprises as far as real actors go. I.E. the guy that chews gum in Explorers. The tech talk in the movie was not inaccurate. I mean big budget jokes like Hakers were written by guys in suits, this film as actually written by video game geeks. Only thing is they said the word Render once too many, but who cares. It's a crappy sci-fi movie and as far as crappy sci-fi movies go it was top of its game.

A super computer is given a.i. and it decides that it likes video games. So it uses a computer developer next door to feed it's fixes. Meanwhile an internet police entity is trying to use the super computer for its own gains. And there's even a minor love story sub plot that adances very well.

Now when they describe the super computer, it's all meaningless jargon. Like holographic memory discs, and reprogramming a video game to steal information from other countries. Obviously some things, like the internet police, were science fiction. That happens some times in the sci-fi genre in case you didn't know. But seriously the super computer started writing it's own code, created it's own virtual reality in which it threw over top of the existing game's engines. That was actually pretty cool that they threw in an explanation for that. Most movies and shows, like the x files, just take for granted putting real actors into their video game segments and never offer an explanation.

I just enjoyed that some nerd on the staff paid attention to details. Once agian, obviously the supercomputer was not realistic, but everything else stayed down to earth.

---
Babies:
Fun to make
Even more fun to eat