The entire plot is made null because... - Eagle Eye (2008) Discussion

[–] bivil 15 years ago

...if the computer can control a jet with missiles (as it did in the tunnel scene) then the computer could have EASILY just made the jet bomb the state of the union address.

But then it's an attack on the President with U.S. military hardware instead of a mysterious terrorist bombing. That would open a huge can of worms and instantly derail the plan to put Defense Secretary Chiklis in control. I think the goal was to make him a puppet ruling over an unending state of martial law. Using the robot plane would create the equivalent of a short-lived coup d'état or, at the very least, put the biggest security failure in the country's history at the Secretary's feet. Either way, the computer doesn't get what it wants. But I agree that the plan was unnecessarily complex. Why not just get real terrorists into the country and give the money and equipment to them?

reply

[–] erikriveros 15 years ago

i think what the OP is saying, and what i agree with is, ARIA was so advanced, so techinically superior, that she didn't need anyone to help her....(the genius that would allow something to get that advanced that humans didn't need to be in the loop, should be shot)

if she was THAT far ahead of everything else, from facial recognition, to picking up sound from vibrations in a coffee cup and apparently every single computer system, then they wouldn't need anything....

also, did ARIA really need/want to make it look like terrorism...seems she was far more interested in killing the chain of command, PERIOD, and putting The Thing in charge?

it is better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it

reply

[–] bivil 15 years ago

i think what the OP is saying, and what i agree with is, ARIA was so advanced, so techinically superior, that she didn't need anyone to help her....

She couldn't have accomplished her goal without human aid because (aside from the fact that she needed Shia LaBeouf's head) the Capitol Building had to look like people blowed it up. To be clear, I'm not defending the convoluted plot. I thought the movie had a dumb message presented dumbly, but it does follow an internal logic. What the OP said is that the complex plan wasn't necessary because the evil computer lady could've easily used missiles, and what I said is that such an overt act would've negated the desired outcome.

also, did ARIA really need/want to make it look like terrorism...seems she was far more interested in killing the chain of command, PERIOD, and putting The Thing in charge?

The real trick would be keeping him in charge. There are five people in the presidential line of succession before the Secretary of Defense. If all those people were killed by a department within the Secretary's purview, questions would arise. A terrorist explosion is a logical way to get Chiklis in the White House and even expand presidential authority. It's a big show with an obvious explanation made even obviouser by the surge in terrorist activity resulting from the blowed up funeral.

If Ariia just wanted to kill those people, PERIOD, she could've used traffic signals, robotic construction equipment, or that ridiculous exploding power line trick. Also keep in mind that she was trying to stay hidden, and Billy Bob Thornton was onto her just because she messed with the traffic cameras. If the heads of government died in five enigmatic accidents, questions would arise.

reply

[–] tiger3000 14 years ago

You all are talking as if she was conscious. While being very intellegent, it was Artificial Intellegence. She was a computer using the United States Constitution as her program. According to her programming she, or really it, was acting in what it was programmed to see as the best interests of the country. She wasn't evil but she was stupid in the fact that she could not see the situation in the way that the real people could. All she could do was analyze the situation and follow her programming

reply

[–] immortal005 14 years ago

The Thing....

Hahahahahahaha!

And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make.

reply

[–] catarinacortes 12 years ago

I was wondering if nobody else got the reference ;)

"and putting The Thing in charge?" :D

But I have my own opinion. This is all about Americans taking action against rulers that are doing bad decisions about strategies of defense putting at risk their own people.
The act has to be done by Americans, Aria believes she is following the American constitution. This is referenced several times in the movie (ex: when they are in the store changing clothes what we see in the screen is supposed to be words from the American constitution).
I’m not an American, but we learn this from Nicolas Cage in “National Treasure”.

So is up to the American People to overthrown the government, and also mentioned in the movie, Aria thinks of itself as a part of the people.

I think the plot stands as is it based on a random character analysis to find compliance personalities (in the case of the girl). For the guy: there were at least two people that could block her plan the twin and Major Bowman. (I don’t remember what they called themselves) The plan was in motion only with the kid and mom concept, and was on that day so they all (the government) would be together. She had, from the beginning, permission to do it, as Aria considers herself “American people”. But one of the two (the twin) was cathing up to what Aria was planning and blocked it that’s why he died (he was not compliant) and that is why the twin was needed. Major Bowman could have been another person to block it but he was unaware.
The only other person that could overwrite her was the president, and that was what happened in the beginning and that was the moment she measuring all scenarios got to the conclusion that the government as bad for the country’s interest and safety and had to be overthrown.

For the rest: If I’m a computer I’ll be doing a backwards plan I need to kill them all, best to do it when together, this sets date, best way a bomb, I need one that is undetected, this sets means, this bomb needs to be activated by sound, being the national anthem is just poetic, its needed some way to reproduce the specific frequency, this leads to a musician, then it is picked the one that would probably be most compliant, the boy and mother scenario…

(And the fact that the jeweler is of Arab descent is only just poetic, he is a part of the plan exactly because Aria thinks of him as another American person with stone cutting abilities and compliant.)

reply

[–] terryperring104 11 years ago

With the president and numerous heads of state present, I would imagine a high state of security alertness in the Pentagon and also in the airspace around it?

reply

[–] kkarma2 11 years ago

ARIA could have done that by simply getting so many other things ram into them. She did not need anyone. So this argument is Moot.

2 planes were flown into twin towers nobody blamed the airlines companies right it was blamed on terrorist(and even that is controversial).
So how hard would it be for ARIA to show that the Iranian guy who deliver the package overode the Drone and flew it remotely into the white house.

ARIA could have much easily got all evidence including tapes to show he did it. He had a bone mic implanted or something.

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

The lock prevented Aria from directly causing, or allowing, the deaths of the targets of Project Guillotine.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

The "lock" is a pretty flimsy premise considering the computer was able to set in motion all the gears that would cause the Cabinet-killing explosion without being unlocked.
1 - the crystal and vibrator-thing was obtained from the government and sent to two separate people who specialized in gem-cutting and musical instruments.
2 - kid's trumpet stolen, delivered to musical instrument specialist, vibrator-thing installed, trumpet returned to baggage claim.
3 - crystal set into a necklace and delivered with evening wear to security guard who delivers it to kid's mom who wears it into the Library of Congress since her kid is being held hostage by super computer.
4. BOOM!!

- all while computer stays locked. There's no need to frame Jerry and get him involved. This movie could've been another "mom runs all over the place in order to get child back" movie.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

The lock prevented her from causing their deaths. She could plan all she wants.You don't get arrested for murder just because you buy a gun and bullets.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

As I stated before, her plan was already in motion while the lock was still engaged. Jerry seems like a subplot that's totally unnecessary since all the lock prevents Aria from doing is making a Kill List complete with pictures. In that sense, Aria comes across as an obsessive compulsive computer who cannot finish her own plan without first having made her list.

Aria sends crystal and detonator to specialists. Specialists put detonator in trumpet and crystal in necklace.
Rachel gets call that son's train will be derailed unless she complies. She dresses and goes to Library of Congress.
Son's band gets diverted to Library of Congress.
Son's trumpet = detonator. Mother's necklace = crystal.
Detonator+Crystal = BOOM!! All targets dead despite lock.

It's not as if everything happened all at once when Jerry spoke the phrase - the necklace was already made and the trumpet was already tampered with.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

Without Jerry removing the lock she couldn't have activated the explosive.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

See and this is where it gets fuzzy. Did Aria need to activate the detonator or did it simply need to vibrate to set the crystal off? I think the detonator just needed to vibrate.
If that's not the case and Aria couldn't activate the detonator while locked, I'm shocked that she couldn't use another computer to activate the detonator. I mean, she can hack into the computers of cranes, traffic lights, airport scanners, shipping container locks, baggage routers, fighter jets, random retail/garage marquees, phones, etc all while being locked. It seems silly that she can't just access another computer...

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

She couldn't cause the deaths of the targets of Project Guillotine. She could do anything else (and it appears anything) except that.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

Ok, I get that. But, in the movie, in the actual progression of events, she sets up everything except for the list. It doesn't matter that the story says Aria can't kill everyone - she does a pretty good job of setting up the situation in which they will be killed. My argument is that, even if Aria had stayed locked, she probably could have killed everyone anyway.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] vedeshel 14 years ago

Actually Aria doesn't "set up everything except for the list". Remeber that she does not send Rachel to the Kennedy Center until she gets unlocked. So while she is locked, although everything else was set up (for this plan or for any other plan - drop a bomb on Kennedy Center or whatever), ARIA cannot proceed on an course of action that will have as a possible effect the execution of Project Guillotine.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

Just for a second, imagine this is a different movie and erase everything having to do with Shia LeBeouf. There's no backstory of a twin brother who dies in a car accident, no annoying subplot about his relationship with his father and how he dropped out of school, no obsessed pursuit by Billy Bob Thornton.

The movie then becomes a story about a woman who puts her son on a train and then gets a call from a woman saying obey every order or I'll derail your son's train. Mother goes along because she loves her son. She's told to go into a store to shop for clothes and visit a jewelry store to pick up a necklace. Meanwhile, the trumpet is rerouted to a musical instrument specialist who fits it with the detonator and sends it back to the train. The children are rerouted to the Library of Congress and the mother is told to be there at a certain time.

Okay, let's go back to Eagle Eye - the computer is still locked but everything that's mentioned above still happens without Shia having to unlock it. Before she's unlocked, ARIA calls both Jerry and Rachel and gives them orders. ARIA sends Jerry and Rachel into a store to get clothes. ARIA sets up the plan with the crystal and the trumpet. ARIA has Jerry and Rachel pick up packages and reroutes the children. And, last, but certainly not least, ARIA gives both Jerry and Rachel specific instructions on where to be and when to be there. She does all of this even before she's unlocked so it's logical to assume that, if we remove Jerry and their whole trip to the Pentagon, we're left with a mother obeying a locked computer and walking into an explosion. It would still look like a terrorist act and no one would ever suspect ARIA, but she'd still be locked. Hell, without Jerry and his whole family subplot, you don't even need the plot device of having the computer locked in the first place! We could see her arguing with a random soldier who is then killed, his death rationalized as collateral damage in protecting the Constitution.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] vedeshel 14 years ago

Leaving aside the whole idea of the movie, what I want to say is that the plot makes sense:

I am ARIA.

I am allowed to do
A) "ARIA sends Jerry and Rachel into a store to get clothes."

I am allowed to do
B) "ARIA sets up the plan with the crystal and the trumpet."

I am allowed to do
C) "ARIA has Jerry and Rachel pick up packages and reroutes the children."

I am allowed to do
D) "ARIA gives Jerry and Rachel specific instructions on where to be and when to be there." (of interest here is the instruction for Rachel to go to the Kennedy center)

BUT while I am locked I am not allowed to do A AND B AND C AND D because this will produce E: the president gets killed. I am allowed to plan for E, I may execute A, B and C but while locked I cannot proceed to execute D because this will trigger E.

........................ARIA gets unlocked....................................

Now I am allowed to trigger E. I will do it by executing D, because everything is set in place, although now that I am unlocked I could have done it in any other way.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

But A+B+C and a little reworking of D would eventually lead to E with the computer never being unlocked. If the computer weren't allowed to do anything that would result in the death of the president, ARIA never would've been able to get the crystal with its intended purpose.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] vedeshel 14 years ago

why not? ARIA is not allowed to execute the president for the moment, why not preparing for the execution and wait for approval? it´s like ARIA is aware of the lock it has, but also aware of the maximum permitted amount of initiatives and actions it/she can perform without violating the lock. so she is interpreting the lock to a maximum allowable extent that would favor project Guillotine without producing its complete execution.

Like you prepare food in order to eat it. You have your meal on the table, but you cannot eat for while it´s hot, you´re locked. You know the food will be hot, but this did not prevent you from preparing it with the purpose of eating.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

But if the lock is meant to prevent you from eating, it would logically follow that any action involved with eating would be prevented, therefore making it impossible to even gather all the ingredients let alone cook.
There's the inherent flaw in the story regarding the lock - the computer is still able to kill despite the lock's supposed ability to prevent the computer from killing certain people. Why can't we assume that ARIA's whole goal is to kill Rachel, incidentally causing the collateral deaths of the president and his cabinet? By that reasoning, ARIA can circumvent the lock by exploiting a loophole - she's not technically killing the president, she's killing Rachel; the president's death is just bonus like that of Billy Bob Thornton.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] vedeshel 14 years ago

anyway, it was not a really good lock if it allowed for it to be broken:)

reply

[–] Mandy_Whitsands 14 years ago

You don't get arrested for murder just because you buy a gun and bullets.

Shia did. (And he didn't even buy them actually.)

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

He wasn't arrested for murder.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

Or better yet, why didn't Aria just prevent the jet from sending the missile that killed the alleged terrorists in the first place?

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] blufpandserge 14 years ago

The reason for making it look like terrorism is simply because ARIA did not want to take over rule of the country, but hand it over. She was bound by a set of rules like every computer, be it the constitution or rules with which is was programmed. And after the executive branch has been beheaded she (ARIA) does not want total Anarchy but instead everybody pointed in the same direction and that is actually why I thought the movie was quite fantastic

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

I understand that and it makes sense, but that has nothing to do with my point.
Since no one outside of the people who work with the computer itself know about ARIA, no one would suspect it wasn't a terrorist act. And even those who work with ARIA didn't suspect that she was doing anything other than her normal programming.

By setting the events in motion (crystal necklace, detonator trumpet, rerouted children's band, mother in Library of Congress with necklace while son plays detonator trumpet), ARIA already enacts her plan to kill the president and his cabinet and could have continued to have done so without being unlocked. This is the point I'm trying to make and feel that I have successfully done so with the minor detail of whether or not the detonator had to be activated first before being vibrated. eh

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] Progeny51 14 years ago

The detenator had to be activated. Without that none of it mattered. She couldn't do that with the lock.

reply

[–] cinemajunky 14 years ago

I'll allow this train of argument until I can watch the movie again since I don't remember whether or not it gets activated before it's vibrated.

__________________________________
I ain't your friend, palooka.

reply

[–] TheKingOfYorkshire 12 years ago

The detonator didn't need to be activated by aria, it was the sons trumpet that detonated the crystal when it got to a certain note.

reply

[–] Progeny51 12 years ago

The detonator ("trigger" is more acurate) was set to be activated by the trumpet when it plays a high "F". Not the explosive. The trigger had to be activated first.

reply

[–] jpowers4667 12 years ago

I agree with the original post. This film tried so hard to be smart and elaborate, it was ridiculous. The ending solidified what I already had a feeling about while watching this nonsense. Oh and I hate Shia...such a douchebag

reply

[–] futuremoviewriter 12 years ago

ARIIA's programming made it so even if she could plan for the bombing for all she wanted, she could not execute the bombing unless the lock was removed. case closed. it's as simple as that.

The Judge: Tear down the wall!

reply

[–] MrJJay 7 years ago

She couldn't. That mistake had to happen in order for Aria to take control of everything.

reply

[–] REPetzoldt 8 years ago

Virtually all movies call for some suspension of disbelief. This one is at the very top of most unbelievable movies ever. However, I forced myself to suspend and I enjoyed the movie.

reply