How realistic is the surveillance in the movie "Enemy of the State"?
I was watching "Enemy of the State" last night and at one stage I was convinced some of the stuff (such as the satellite tracking) was a bit far fetched. But given the age of that movie and the fact that terrorist attacks are often foiled it's probably not unrealistic to an extent.
How realistic is that stuff and given that the movie is so old, are techniques even further advanced than they are portrayed?
Best Answer
Technology will have moved on in even the 15 years since Enemy of the State was being put together, and much of that movement has been in precisely the areas you mention.
For example, this paper includes a chart showing how satellite camera resolution continues to improve, and this article confirms the increased military use of "drone" (unmanned) planes, which are more often configured for surveillance than attack.
Police forces in the UK are or soon will be using small drone helicopters that will be too high up and quiet for you to hear, but easily capable of seeing when you illegally drop a cigarette butt on the pavement.
According to statistics, the average [UK] citizen is caught on CCTV cameras 300 times a day, and according to that BBC link, analysts expected a tenfold increase in the next five years after 2002 when that article was written.
I can't find a source, but I recall reading a few weeks ago of plans install dozens of sensitive directional microphones in Wembley Stadium, that with a bit of trivial processing power will enable operators to focus on a whispered conversation while 90,000 other people are shouting "Goal!"
You might also consider Francis Ford Coppola's 1974 movie The Conversation, where Gene Hackman brilliantly portrays a paranoid and personally-secretive surveillance expert. I'm not convinced the technology at the time was actually as good as what was portrayed, but it's much better today.
You don't have to be particularly paranoid to see the direction things are headed. Many "possible" technologies are never really taken up, but surveillance equipment is definitely on a roll.
Pictures about "How realistic is the surveillance in the movie "Enemy of the State"?"
Is the movie Enemy of the State a true story?
Sonia Kennebeck's \u201cEnemies of the State\u201d spirals and swirls in a way that's meant to enhance the \u201cisn't this crazy\u201d aspect of its true story, but its filmmaking tricks have become cliched in the era of True Crime obsession.Is Enemy of the State a spy movie?
Enemy of the State is a 1998 spy-thriller film directed by Tony Scott, written by David Marconi, and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer.Where was the enemy of the state filmed?
Production. The story is set in both Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, and most of the filming was done in Baltimore. Location shooting began on a ferry in Fell's Point.What is enemy of the state based on?
Enemies of the State is a 2020 American documentary film directed and produced by Sonia Kennebeck. It follows Matt DeHart, who says the U.S. government has invented sex crime allegations against him in retaliation for having confidential documents alleging misconduct by the CIA.Enemy Of The State - The NSA Can Read The Time Off Your F**king Wristwatch!
More answers regarding how realistic is the surveillance in the movie "Enemy of the State"?
Answer 2
As a machine learning and Image Processing specialist, I would argue that this is the least of your worries. I personally can automate any task, and lower resolution can actually be helpful in accurate identification. This could mean that camera picking you up littering could eventually result in you being mailed a ticket every time. Worse is the prospect of cheap fmri, if that ever happened we could potentially identify when someone was about to commit a crime and call an alert or police.
Sources: Stack Exchange - This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Exchange and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
Images: Tuur Tisseghem, Sebastiaan Stam, cottonbro, cottonbro