Talk:WarGames: The Dead Code

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Sequel?[edit]

Is this movie really a sequel? It looks like a remake of the same plot, and there are no characters from the original. Dom316 (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a semi-remake, following a similar plot, with even Doctor Falken appearing (played by Gary Reineke) and the original WOPR. For all the fancy graphics, the new one doesn't hold a candle to the original. --70.189.79.142 (talk) 00:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WOPR is decommissioned and being used as a 25-year-old, but significant, plot element. All of the events take place after WarGames, containing elements from the first part, so technically, it's a sequel. Stoney3K (talk) 10:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leak[edit]

Can anyone confirm the leak? I added a refimprove tag to that section for now. --mauler90 (talk) 07:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know if it's up to your standards of proof, but here is a link with 18 people claiming to have downloaded it. (Copyvio removed by Celarnor) 221.144.169.93 (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't post more copyvios. One was bad enough. :) Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 04:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cetegory Update[edit]

Since this movie came out yesterday, I removed the future films category and added the 2008 films category. ThomasOwens (talk) 14:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reception, etc?[edit]

Missing? 125.238.20.95 (talk) 12:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References to original and realism[edit]

There are numerous references to the original film that, perhaps should be added:

WOPR, Dr. Falken returning
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play"
etc.

Also, there are numerous flaws in terms of technological realism. Should we consider outlining those?

Lgrinberg (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Falken's Accent[edit]

Could anybody provide a little clarification on this point please:

"Contrary to the original Dr. Falken is not British and has an English accent."

It's perfectly possible for someone who's not British to have an English accent - but the use of 'and' seems to imply that the one fact goes along with the other... England is part of Britain so if Falken is English then he's also British. If he's not British then the statement might be better to say "Falken is [for example] American, but has an English accent". - Skadus (talk) 21:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Even with the comma now added - "Contrary to the original, Dr. Falken is not British and has an English accent." - the meaning of the statement isn't clear. Okay, he's not British. Do we know how he came by an English accent, in that case? Should it not be "but has an English accent"? - Skadus (talk) 00:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, given that Falken's appearance is meant as a surprise plot twist, shouldn't this point just be deleted? – ianfarrington —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianfarrington (talk • contribs) 14:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"is a 2008 film that was the sequel"[edit]

In the first sentence, I suggest the part quoted in the section header of my post here might be good to change. The part says the film "was" the sequel, but I assume the film still is the sequel. Just wanted to mention this. 62.16.242.174 (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The plot..[edit]

Is it just me, or does the plot section have some missing text? --98.248.172.133 (talk) 14:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Falken's cancer was pancreatic cancer, not prostate cancer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.216.190.229 (talk) 05:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I just watched this again to verify that Falken did indeed say pancreatic cancer. --Kacela (talk) 11:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable "BUKK" term[edit]

In the plot: "Falken instructs Joshua to attack R.I.P.L.E.Y. with a faux script full of cultural references; Joshua is instructed to "BUKK" R.I.P.L.E.Y. with games, using variables named ABSOLUTE_TAKEOVER, JDI_MINDTRICK, MAKE_ME_SWAY, TAKIN_CARE_OF_BUSINESS, PILLOW_TALK, and GAME_THEORY.[2] ". The citation does include the mentioned variables, but I don't see how Joshua was instructed to 'BUKK' RIPLEY, leading to the article on bukakke . Should the sentence be reworded with the wikilink removed? 24.13.180.54 (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. I watched this movie last night, saw the scene, and at no time was it mentioned, whether with on screen writing or with spoken dialog that this instruction was to refer to the action wikilinked here. The other variables did show on screen, but were not referred to as such in dialog. I am removing the wikilink, and if someone relinks, I would consider it to be vandalism. Erpbridge (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Improper exchanges of WOPR and Joshua?[edit]

I find it quite interesting how the plot overview notes that the WOPR is destroyed, but from them on, WOPR is (ab)used in places where it should say "Joshua"...because, yanno... It said the WOPR was destroyed pretty plainly, but then somehow this WOPR, which was just destroyed, somehow seems to either still be in operation... or someone forgot that the hardware (WOPR) was destroyed, and the program (Joshua) was saved...

Not that I've ever SEEN or even heard of this movie, but... that's pretty inconsistent :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.151.18.119 (talk) 17:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Improper Terminology[edit]

Let's not aid in the improper terminology of the press. I will now change the improper terminology of "hacking" (which is constructive) to the proper terminology of "cracking" (which is destructive).Xoviat (talk) 00:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on WarGames: The Dead Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.movieweb.com/dvd/news/64/19164.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:06, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]