MovieChat Forums > The Numbers Station (2013) Discussion > Boring and illogical (Spoilers)

Boring and illogical (Spoilers)

posted 11 years ago by targa9
24 replies | jump to latest

Where do I start? First off, how about how incredibly messy the killing of the bartender was? These guys are professional killers? They walk up, get their fingerprints all over everything, get SEEN by several men, shoot a few, then chase a witness down...to his home, which apparently is blocks away from the bar, shoot him, but not the daughter (who would realistically be hiding in a closet, not shouting "Why did you do that??"like some retard)? Why not just take him out in a back alley? Cusack can't even do his job as a killer. OK, so he gets a non-realistic-sounding assessment from a fake-sounding psychologist, and transferred to a top-secret "numbers station" in England, which apparently only hires AMERICAN operatives who act like college lovers. And if you are not that sociable, then the cyber-cracking queen (whose skills are apparently limited to reading numbers in a sentence and typing them in to crack a code, ugh) will ride your ass like you're a bad boyfriend and party pooper. She fits the sexist stereotypes of a bimbo who needs to be coddled and protected, even though she's one of the "few in the world who can crack codes at this level". Excuse me, why does she need to be a code-breaker to READ codes on the radio? The film never explains. What about being a tough-as-nails code-breaking nerd? Wouldn't that be more realistic? No, they'd rather show her as a whiny, jilted and bored college dropout masquerading as a "spy anchorwoman", reading out numbers in a sexy voice! Oooh...

So they get shot at and have to take shelter in the building they were WAITING to open up by the former 2 guards. If they knew the code, what's with the ritual of waiting outside? So anyway, the movie continues as a MYSTERY now--we get to hear muffled dialog, screams, gunshots on tape. They call for help, and the operator says it will take FOUR HOURS to rescue them?? That's ridiculous. They're in Suffolk, UK, not Antarctica! Don't tell me MI-6 takes 4 hours to protect state secrets in Suffolk! Cusack is told to "retire the asset" as if she's really valuable, but the film forgot to convince us why she's so valuable other than her great rack. They conclude they cannot "undo" the 15 broadcasts (Cusack "assassinations, bombs" and the blonde bimbo replies, "murder"--does she realize she's working for a spy agency??) because each broadcast is a "one-time thing". So...what do they do? Try to do so anyway!
Horrible writing! When the girl starts to panic about calling help, it seems Cusack, not the girl, knows all the details about the place, the procedure, everything, even though SHE is the veteran of the place! More sexist writing.
She just stands by like a scared bimbo wanting "assurance" and for him to "lie to a gal". Isn't she supposed to know all the details? He said he is new at this, yet he acts like he knows all about numbers stations, even though he was never on the "inside" like she was.

I shut it off after about 55 minutes. It's SO boring between Cusack's gruff tough-man-but-I'm-gonna-let-you-live attitude and her spazzing out and their "relationship" and the boring tapes they are listening to--the whole thing is happening in one facility but it's boring. The girl "cracks" the code by reading some typewritten notice (from where??) with some numbers on it, and just punching the numbers from the sentence into the keypad and Voila! She's in.
Wow, what a cybersleuth! I can see why the government gave her the job!!
Cue to the cheesy, unrealistic colorful computer and its cliche sounds. Oh, and nevermind they cannot undo the broadcasts anyway (as they said)... and what are they doing anyway playing detective? Shouldn't they be fortifying themselves against the drillmaster who has FOUR HOURS to breach the door? Oh, and why do they have to drill anyway, if they were able to get inside in the first place?
I guess I would have to watch the whole movie to find that out, but one reviewer already said (after watching it) that this obvious plot point was never explained. Ugh.

Good grief, what a boring, illogical movie.

[–] Amazon421 11 years ago

I have to admit I fast forwarded through the movie after about the 30 minute mark and just read the closed captions. Not at all what I expected. It was long, boring (and if it was boring and too long in FFward, must have been horrible in regular speed), and unimaginative. Netflix recommended it and I wish I hadn't wasted a movie rental on this. Ugh.

[–] Acceler8 11 years ago

Your closed captions work during fast forward?

[–] Amazon421 11 years ago

Yes, the DVD closed captions. But only on the first speed. So I think it is just double time. I've gone through many a boring movie that way.

[–] pkphlam-506-692376 11 years ago

It's a CIA station so it's run by Americans with American secrets. Brits know nothing about it and probably don't know it exists.

[–] targa9 11 years ago

Yeah, thanks for that. However, the US and Brits are allies, and so it does not make sense that MI-6 would know nothing about this place. It's not like it was operating out of Poland.

Another annoying moment was when he said he was "recruited straight out of college"....for wetwork? Really? I served in the 82nd Airborne division, and I learned that you don't get to even go Special Ops until you've served in a conventional military unit for at least 1 enlistment. And that's where they get these assassins: from the military. The notion that the CIA would recruit some kid right out of college without military training for CIA fieldwork is just
ludicrous.

[–] tegelane_5 11 years ago

I watched the whole thing, but Yeah few things were "bit" off. Like:
-Mac computers, I seriously doubt those stations woul'd use Macs.
-why didn't baddies just destroy equipment?
-Even bigger question: why didn't the first watch destroy codes?

[–] FigaroBugs 11 years ago

Yes the US and Brits are allies, but allies keep secrets from each other all the time.

[–] balducci2 11 years ago

He said he was recruited out of college (into the agency). Not that he was recruited and went into wet work right away.

In fact, the CIA has confirmed (you can google it) that in the 90s the CIA recruited directly out of high school.

Another possibility is that he was in the military, got training in the field, then went back to college, and was recruited later.

[–] Loincloth 10 years ago

Think what you like about the movie but you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you believe the Americans (and pretty much everyone else) don't run illegal clandestine operations in their own allies' backyards.

[–] targa9 10 years ago

Loincloth: If what you say is true, it is certainly not common knowledge that the US runs illegal clandestine operations in an allied country, esp. if that ally is Great Britain. And if it did, what is the purpose of keeping the host country's intelligence community in the dark? The film explains neither of these things. The station could well have been in Arizona, but I think the film makers place it in the UK, so that it's more credible when it gets attacked by unknown enemies, since UK is at least a little closer to our real enemies (such as maybe some Muslim baddies in Eastern Europe) than Arizona. It's a pretty lame device.

[–] MauritiusVonMailand 7 years ago

Hope you grown up in the meanwhile. While I agree on the fact that the script is mostly illogical, I have been surprised by your sentences "allies cooperate"," knowledge that the US runs illegal clandestine operations in an allied country" (this is really naive and a proof that you don't know much of what's happened in Europe). But the best sentence is "such as maybe some Muslim baddies in Eastern Europe" ... well, actually I can assure you that there are really few if any muslin in eastern Europe (unless you consider caucasus as Europe) and many more in UK and France.
Grow up kid

[–] bellapeligrosa 11 years ago

I'd never heard the term before but then I watched an episode of Spooks recently (think it's called MI-5 elsewhere) and they mentioned monitoring the number stations. The baddie of the week - the Russians in this particular ep (7.8) - had planted a sleeper who lived in the boondocks and basically spent all day listening to the number stations on his shortwave radio until he was 'activated' by hearing his code, followed by a cryptic sentence which were his instructions. Won't spoil the rest in case nobody has seen it (and it's an excellent series), but I have a feeling that episode might be more enthralling than this film!

It's too cerebral! We're trying to make a movie here, not a film!

[–] timusius 11 years ago

I totally agree that the movie is bad. However not many of your points are valid. If you had watched the end of the movie you would know the answers to many of them.

**** Major spoilers ahead ****

"The 4 hours rescue time" is explained. It's really just a *beep* number that the bad guys, who have intercepted the phone lines, tell Emerson to make him sit down and wait.

"Undoing the broadcasts" is explained. They never say it's impossible, but they need the right cipher. And they can't do it because it changes every shift. However, the woman on the previous team left them clues, so they are able to figure out the cipher.

"Why do the baddies need to drill?" Well, at some point Emerson and Katherine discuss that they are early because the shift schedule have changed. So one possible explanation could be that:
1. Bad guys enter the station somehow, do their broadcasts, and kill the first team.
2. Bad guys go out, and are about to leave, because they think the station will be empty for hours.
3. Emerson and Kathrine arrive "early", and will thus discover what's up.
4. The bad guys, who are now outside, and unable to get in using the old key code, must use other methods to enter.

"Why does she need to be a code-breaker to READ codes on the radio?" Emerson explains this somewhat in the movie. He tells Katherine that she is chosen due to her personal profile. Being a high-IQ-number-geek also makes her less social, so she is perfect for a job that requires secrecy. Probably a bit stereotypical... but it's a movie.

[–] targa9 11 years ago

OK, the 4hrs was given to them by the enemy. But if I were Emerson, I'd be screaming about how we don't have 4 hours and WTF, the guy's going to bust in here and kill us all. Instead, Emerson accepts the number as if it's normal. If he's so booked up on how numbers stations work (as he reveals to the numbers station girl herself), he should know that this number is bogus, or at least raise a fit.

Undoing the broadcasts was impossible because each broadcast was a one-time deal, unconnected with any other broadcast. But all of a sudden Katherine finds an e-mail and "guesses" the numbers in the e-mail is the cipher? And with that passcode, she's able to undo everything? How silly is that? Also, do you think those transmitting the code (probably top govt officials) would allow low-level code READERS to get a cipher and undo the orders? If it's so easy for the code reader to countermand an executive order like that, it defeats the entire purpose of the numbers station, where the occupants only exist to broadcast what they are told, not to make decisions themselves and be able to repeal broadcasts.

Why baddies need to drill: Those are nice guesses, but when Katherine and Emerson show up, they are immediately shot at from a distance. Why did the bad guys leave and why are they at a distance from their objective? Why did they leave one of their own in there? And most importantly: from where are they talking to Emerson on the ultra-secure line in the station? And even MORE importantly: who were these bad guys and what did they want? I think the entire "bad guys" story was flimsy and lazy writing, as if the director thought that the mere presence of bad guys at the station and trying to take it over was enough.

Katherine: another poster said she wasn't a code-breaker, just a reader. But she was played up at being at a "high level" as if she was some code guru. When we actually meet her, she is an insecure and needy college student who just wants male attention. Terrible.

There was a much better movie about this same topic: SAFE HOUSE--with Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds. The bad guys written into that were much better
and credible, and there was a much greater variety of scenery, not some one-act stage play in a basement.

[–] alblmfld-1 10 years ago

OK, the 4hrs was given to them by the enemy. But if I were Emerson, I'd be screaming about how we don't have 4 hours and WTF, the guy's going to bust in here and kill us all. Instead, Emerson accepts the number as if it's normal. If he's so booked up on how numbers stations work (as he reveals to the numbers station girl herself), he should know that this number is bogus, or at least raise a fit.

Undoing the broadcasts was impossible because each broadcast was a one-time deal, unconnected with any other broadcast. But all of a sudden Katherine finds an e-mail and "guesses" the numbers in the e-mail is the cipher? And with that passcode, she's able to undo everything? How silly is that? Also, do you think those transmitting the code (probably top govt officials) would allow low-level code READERS to get a cipher and undo the orders? If it's so easy for the code reader to countermand an executive order like that, it defeats the entire purpose of the numbers station, where the occupants only exist to broadcast what they are told, not to make decisions themselves and be able to repeal broadcasts.

Why baddies need to drill: Those are nice guesses, but when Katherine and Emerson show up, they are immediately shot at from a distance. Why did the bad guys leave and why are they at a distance from their objective? Why did they leave one of their own in there? And most importantly: from where are they talking to Emerson on the ultra-secure line in the station? And even MORE importantly: who were these bad guys and what did they want? I think the entire "bad guys" story was flimsy and lazy writing, as if the director thought that the mere presence of bad guys at the station and trying to take it over was enough.

Katherine: another poster said she wasn't a code-breaker, just a reader. But she was played up at being at a "high level" as if she was some code guru. When we actually meet her, she is an insecure and needy college student who just wants male attention. Terrible.

There was a much better movie about this same topic: SAFE HOUSE--with Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds. The bad guys written into that were much better
and credible, and there was a much greater variety of scenery, not some one-act stage play in a basement.

Only 3 voices were heard on the tape, 2 of them got killed inside. My guess is the 3rd one went outside whento kill the other lady broadcaster. When Emerson goes outside for the phone, one guy goes in. At this point it was my guess that there was only one person left, the guy that was shooting at them when they first arrived.

[–] megha206 11 years ago

The biggest problem for me was...once they figured out that the the 4-hour rescue time was nonsense and no one knew they were in trouble, why didn't they just freaking broadcast that they were in trouble? They have who-knows-how-many CIA operatives listening! Why couldn't they just broadcast that they were compromised and ask for the cavalry?

[–] balducci2 11 years ago

It's not a private frequency. All sorts would be listening. You do not want to broadcast to your enemies and the media and casual listeners that your base is under attack etc.

[–] megha206 11 years ago

No, actually, that's just it, you DO. You want the whole world to know who you are and why you are there at that point. Makes you a lot harder to kill. If BBC came knocking and asking questions, all the better.

There would certainly be some civilians who heard the transmission, but it would mostly be people with certain...skills...who were on my "team". They would be the most effective in getting me rescued in the short term.

[–] SkyfireX 10 years ago

Jeez, they broadcast assassination orders the whole day.. It does not matter who is listening because without a decipher code, they are just random numbers..

My job is to watch stupid movies and complain about them on IMDB

[–] Legion303 11 years ago

Fair points. Here's what really sank it for me:

1. One-time pads are useless if you can reuse them (hence the name), so figuring out the previous shift's code wouldn't do any good.

2. Ignoring that, why would the professional wetwork agents not follow Katherine home on the train instead of waiting until she was back in the fortified bunker, if they knew they had to eliminate her to cancel the previous broadcasts?

3. Ignoring both of the above, why would the "bad guys" not just destroy the broadcast antenna to prevent any cancellation broadcast?

4. Not important to the badly written plot, but it bugged me every time it happened: that obvious side-address microphone wouldn't have picked up voices very well from the top, as every single technical worker on the film (camera operators, sound people, etc.) would have known.

[–] don_shawzo 11 years ago

I will agree that I thought this movie barely made any sense and worst of all it was boring.

I waa expecting a Bourne style action movie revolving round the great conspiracy topic of number stations. As it was it was a low budget, physicological thriller with some terrible acting.

Thats 2 hours im not getting back.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] targa9 11 years ago

I can't understand what your post is saying:

"they can air decades of strings of seemingly meaningless alpha/numeric and google gives nothing but vague BS"

What on earth does that mean?

[–] tiger01 10 years ago

Sometimes, I can forgive a movie for being illogical or even downright inaccurate in terms of historical or scientific facts; however, it has to have some redeeming quality in terms of great entertainment, music, acting performances, etc. As you said though, this movie was just plain boring and never really engaged the audience (at least in my case) in an entertaining fashion.

I actually appreciate movies that take place in one or two locations and use small casts normally. Much of the time this can allow the writers and director to focus more on characters and story rather than action/locales/etc. The characters in this movie however were all pretty one-dimensional and cliche, imho. John Cusack's character was curious in that he was supposed to be border-line autistic in terms of his lack of empathy yet ends up caring for these weak, helpless females.

Normally I love Liam Cunningham, but he obviously called it in on this one. His role probably only required like a few days of work max anyway. Everything about this movie just seemed lazy and as the OP mentioned, illogical. The Dharma stations in LOST were far more interesting to me than these short-wave broadcast stations.

Lastly, the ending just kind of happened and was absolutely underwhelming. The part with the "head honcho" of the infiltration team hiding in plain sight as a simple motorist was interesting but then he is just quickly disposed of like an idiot leading to no significant revelation about the counter-organization. This then makes me question as to what the movie was truly about: a character-study or the personal journey of John Cusack's character? Fine but honestly, this isn't really interesting enough to carry this film as written.