The Code Conspiracy (2002) User Reviews (32)

Cheesy But Interesting Cyber-Thriller.

[meddlecore · 6/10 · 7 March 2011]

The film begins as we follow a Jewish man- we soon find out has claimed to have found mathematical evidence for the existence of God in the Torah- who is being pursued by armed Assassins. Cornered, he manages to hide a Disc and leave a message for the person he is trying to get it to, before being killed.

Our protagonist is John Davis (Jim Fitzpatrick), a wealthy computer programmer who, with his team, is trying to perfect "keyless encryption"- with hopes that it will bring "privacy" to the internet, so that people can communicate without governments, corporations and intelligence agencies knowing what we are discussing.

Turns out that the code(s) worked on by the assassinated man and his crew provides more than just mathematical evidence for the existence of God, but is also used by the Israeli government to predict future world events.

After being questioned by the police about the man's death, John finds the message that was left for him, leading him to the hidden disc. When he retrieves it, he finds out that the man was trying to reach him because the code had output his name in one of it's predictions.

Meanwhile, he is approached by a seductive woman named Rachel, who represents Microtel- a wealthy firm that purchases computer software from smaller programming companies, and is interested in investing in the work that John's company Encryptech is doing on keyless encryption. While the group of men have yet to be able to come up with code that can achieve this, they are in luck when one of the codes John discovers on the mysterious disc- the Israeli governments Torah code, from God- does exactly what they need; all they have to do is incorporate it into their code.

John brings their work (now injected with the Torah code) to the woman, who is impressed by what she sees, immediately offering them $9o million dollars for rights over the patent. But while finalizing the details of the deal with his lawyers, John and his crew get a call- their office has been raided by the DHS/NSA due to concerns of "National Security", and everything- including all their work- has been seized and confiscated.

John soon finds out that not only has his business been shut down and seized, but a hold has been placed on his bank accounts and credit cards. Luckily, though, he has stashed quite a large bag of cash that can help him get by. As he goes on the lamb, we watch as the DHS/NSA and Mossad are following his every move. Suspicious and paranoid, John pretends to flee the country on a private jet, but really doesn't board it- lucky for him, as someone shoots it out of the sky with a Stinger Missile, killing all 6 people on board.

Now a fugitive, John heads off to hide out with some old friends- the rich, influential, gun totin' anti government type. When they realize the government is closing in on them, John takes off and goes on the run. He eventually realizes that he is being tracked by a bug in his cellphone, so he hides it in an old couple's motorhome to throw them off the scent- after which he hops on his yacht to get the hell outta' dodge.

Despite thinking he has escaped, Mossad and the DHS/NSA are still able to track John down, with plans to kill him and steal back the disc. Will John be able to escape and prevent the evil military industrial complex from obtaining the code that can predict the future before it's too late? Was it really fate when his name popped up in one of the predictions? The film's conclusion is rushed and cheesy to say the least.

While by no means a masterpiece, this is one of those films that is more about the idea and storyline than it is about it's actual execution. It watches like a cheesy made-for-TV movie, but the acting isn't so bad. Life is like a badly acted movie, right? It's pretty entertaining anyways, and is definitely worth a watch as many of the concepts touched upon in the film are particularly relevant to current events and issues of political importance such as digital privacy, network neutrality, crackdowns on cyber activists, cyber espionage and the role they play in geopolitical events. (who doesn't want a code that predicts the future right?!?!) When it comes down to it, the film also has a decent message in that cyber technologies should be used to perpetuate good instead of evil...i think we can all agree with that...well most of us I hope! (call me idealistic...) 6 out of 10.

good story, bad acting

[mpapis · 4/10 · 17 November 2011]

I watched this movie only because it had good ranking (7 points).

This movie should be rated as 4 (four) only ...maybe 5. I was expecting something more.

The story indeed was quite good, even intriguing or mystique, almost like in "The Net" or late episodes of Lost.

But I can not say good word about acting.

The dialogs were very unnatural like in "War of the Worlds 2: The Next Wave" (which I watched only because of "War of the Worlds").

Actors were rather plastic - comparable to "Terminal Invasion" or "Alien Apocalypse" There was lots of situations where you just can fell the acting does not fit to situation, there is not much emotions in actors.

Also lack of any technical/professional consultancy in the movie is just offensive, it's first movie with so low detail I've seen in long time.

The movie is switching context quite fast, actors appear without introduction, scenery changes also fast without any information about new place or actors.

And as last, sometimes the movie was looking almost like something was cut off, i was going backwards few times just to check if i did miss something.

Big disappointment

[Zjukov · 4/10 · 16 November 2008]

I like the idea behind the plot, but the execution is terrible! To give an example: The main character hurts his foot badly in one scene at the beach -- and right afterwards he runs energetically up the stairs. The script is flawed and non-engaging... The "bad guys" are awful actors, especially the boss. You never get to see him but you can hear his mean evil voice, like this was some kind of Batman movie.

=SPOILER= And what about this code? All you hear is some old rabbi mumbling about how important it is, you never get to actually see any of it. Ridiculous. And this secret agency never thought of the idea that the CD may have been copied and distributed? Enough said.

85 minutes of movie in a 110 minute package.

[stevemains · 2/10 · 24 October 2009]

I won't completely dissect this movie. It isn't worth the time, and you can get basic plot details from other reviews. Suffice to say it's exceedingly stupid. I gave it two stars largely because at times it's shot well. Some scenes look better than a movie with this budget and this much aggressive incompetence behind it should. I'll just comment on a couple of things beyond that.

The Code Conspiracy uses a lot of technical jargon, mostly in the form of cryptographic and technological talk, to try and lend some weight to its (weightless) religious message. Like pretty much everything else in the movie, it fails to do this and succeeds only in annoying and boring the audience.

Vast, brainless sections of this movie make no sense whatsoever. There's no reasonable explanation for what happens late in the movie on the beach. What goes on as people are getting on the plane, and why it does, are muddled at best. I get the sense that huge portions of the film that would have helped things to make sense were excised. But the rest of the movie is so badly paced--filled to overflow with pointless scenes and long, lingering shots we don't need--that it's hard to buy that as an excuse.

Pacing is the movie's worst failure. Any stupid flick, even a pretentious one, is more forgivable when it's short. I've seen hundreds and hundreds of awful movies, and I'm not exaggerating when I say that probably 90-95% of them clock in within ten minutes of the ninety minute mark. How on earth this movie thought it could get away with a hundred and ten mind-numbing minutes is a mystery more compelling than any Bible Code.

This movie's pretty good for laughs, though. MST3K fans may recognize David Warner from Quest of the Delta Knights. Again, though, it's paced very slowly. There will be some boring spots, but keep in mind there will be something completely ridiculous just around the bend. I especially love the awful, awful songs.

Lastly, I want you to consider all the positive user comments this movie has received here. All of them were posted in the first half of 2005, and almost every one of them--no matter what the country of origin (and there are lots of those)--misuses commas in the exact same bizarre way. Every single one of them also either has commented on no other movies, or has commented only on other movies that starred Jim Fitzpatrick. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that's not a coincidence. Thirteen reviews. Bogus. Every other review besides those? Resoundingly negative. The score this movie has is clearly equally bogus. Or maybe it's... dun Dun DUN! A conspiracy!

Wow - what a useless movie!

[pppanther2004 · 2/10 · 28 February 2012]

I came to this movie with an open mind, ready for some entertainment... I was wrong. On every turn, this flick was getting sillier and sillier and frankly, I was probably going to cut it short if it wasn't for my curiosity to see if it actually ends on a smart note. Well it doesn't.

The actors were very, very bad, dialog was flat, storyline was jumping from one thing to the other with quotations that sometimes gave out what was to happen, and there was really nothing interesting to engage your mind - no showing the actual code they talk about so much, no action, no good fighting, no special effects... But the plot holes were impressive... Don't waste your time, skip this one and move on.

Boring

[EdWood-8 · 1/10 · 21 December 2006]

This movie is bad. I don't know how it got a 7.3. The vast majority of what I saw - my friend and I turned it off about half way through - was talk. And not very interesting talk. Just blather, going over the same ground again and again. David Warner, a good actor, phoned in his performance, got his check and split. Gotta pay the rent.

Stage requires a lot of talk because of the limitations its nature imposes. But when they have the power of the camera's eye which allows them to use angles, editing, etc. to create a sense of mystery and drama, why do directors just set it up and let it run while the actors talk? Don't get me wrong, there are movies out there that have a great deal of dialog and they are riveting - GLEN GARRY GLENROSS and NETWORK are two good examples. But if your movie is going to be heavy on dialog it's got to be sharp, witty, lean, in short, interesting. There's a basic rule in any creative endeavor - whenever possible, show, don't tell. Well, in this movie the characters tell you everything and show you very little. And I won't even get into how pretentious this film is.

Typical low budget "less than B" movie

[vern-729-149732 · 1/10 · 3 May 2010]

I pick up these cheap discount DVD's that have 4 movies for $5. Often you get lucky and there is one or two worth watching. This was not one of those. It was quite awful.

The main plot element regarding keyless encryption is utter nonsense as far as I know. Keyless encryption already exists but is not very secure. Also during the movie the so called "keyless encryption" required a key to unlock it which is not that far fetched.

From reading the reviews I get the impression know one knows what really happened in the beach scene. Possibly the writer knows?

Two theories Theory 1. Quantum physics and teleportation (mentioned earlier in the movie) Personally I would never get into a teleportation device. You could NEVER know for certain that you aren't just being destroyed and an exact copy is being made (any teleportation technology would involve the destruction of the "source").

Theory 2. John is a new messiah? David Warner's character mentions that John's name is in the code in reference to Jesus. John needs to release the code like Jesus spreading "the word".

Not a religious man myself, but I often wonder about "odd" things like PI and prime numbers... fractals etc. Those are mathematical and bound by rules... but also relate to the so-called "natural" world. Math itself is part of the natural world. It existed before man, or the earth. Mathematics was not "invented" by man, it was "discovered". 2 plus 2 can never equal 5 (unless you are George Orwell). So how were those rules "created"? Is there another "universe" where 2 + 2 = 7? The filmmaker missed a great opportunity to do something interesting and thought provoking without needing to talk about nonsense things like "keyless encryption" and "bible codes".

Overall, really bad movie. If a message was trying to be sent with this movie regarding the writer/director's religious beliefs as some reviewers seem to feel, the message could have been a tad less ephemeral.

Tremendously Interesting

[jcalley · 10/10 · 2 March 2005]

The Computer age has arrived. There are complex discoveries unveiled daily. Hence this recent film supporting theories of all sides. "The Code Conspiracy" is the hardest kind of movie to review-but it's also the most enjoyable kind of movie to watch...due to the depth of it's conclusions. It's been months since I've viewed this film, yet it stays with me. Before writing my slant, I wanted to let its theories, content, and characters sink into my head. The film was based on an idea of ultimate knowledge. I could spend pages discussing the techniques of Whetston's intentions and decisions, but I will not. Jim Fitzpatrick and Maria Conchita Alonso are two of the greatest actors American cinema has to offer; it's pure pleasure watching their characters clash, meld and roll. The sexual tension was more than sufficient for the story to play out.

7 out of 10? really?

[clintonkeep · 1/10 · 26 April 2010]

Clearly females were the majority that watched this horrendous film and felt it deserved a high rating. The story is vague and full of plot-holes, the acting is awful, everyone in it looks like they are in re-hab and no one told them they just don't have "the look" for movies. Especially Maria Conchina-needsta-shorten-her-name-Alonso-espresso. Her face looks like its melting. A lot of times it looked like they rubbed Vaseline on the lends to make her look better. There are many scenes that appear to be "misplaced" and make no sense. They didn't bother to edit (much). You kind of expect a sci-fi film at the start but it's far from it. I can't imagine how it got such a high rating. It's lack luster cast, it's sub par story, mediocre acting and predictable ending hardly makes this anything but a 1 star rated film.

Brilliant, simply brilliant!

[llaw-1 · 10/10 · 18 March 2005]

I cannot believe that there are people out in the world that refuse to accept foresight and sci-fi concepts such as these. I am currently enrolled at Cambridge, and I was absolutely enthralled with the possibilities of this prose. How can you not hope to reach a higher level of understanding and meaning. As a Bio-Physics major, I am continually searching for answers without questions first. Ideas that have spawned a thought process of imagination. I believe as do another critic which I read earlier, that ALL things are possible, if you can think it. Otherwise, how did you come up with the concept. I firmly believe, that God gives us the dreams and imagination we have, because we can achieve it. As far as the film was concerned, I watched it several times. I recognized several British actors, as well as, the American James Fitzpatrick. I saw him another British Film, called U.S. Seals. A fine actor he is. If you are going to dream...dream imaginatively...not rehashed.

One of the worst movies ever

[Lovecraftesque · 1/10 · 24 June 2009]

This movie is so bad, that I hardly know where to begin.

First, the basic premises are preposterous. The so-called "keyless encryption" is a nonsense - How do you determine who is authorized to decrypt some ciphertext? Second, the explanation given to Rachel is something embodied in lots of security protocol (e.g. SSH and SSL) and "keyless encryption" is neither necessary nor desired. Third, the way the developers at the encryption company (I forget its name) are portrayed is hilarious in its inaccuracy. Fourth, the "God's code" stuff is something clearly inspired in the Bible code nonsense, something that has been debunked as lot of silly mumbo-jumbo long ago. Fifth, the plot starts focusing on the "keyless encryption," only to be ditched halfway through. Sixth, with the exception of David Warner's, the acting is stilted and amateurish. Seventh, Ms. Alonso clearly shows that she is a "has-been" big time. Eighth, it is not good even for laughs.

This is all a shame, because it starts off fine. All in all, this movie is thoroughly deserving of the relative anonymity in which it lives. A complete waste of time.

Muuuust Resist! Do not Watch!

[jeffgentry · 1/10 · 2 April 2004]

This is one of the WORST movies I've ever seen. Why? Where to start, where to start?

How about dialogue? At one point in the movie, our hero John realizes that they are being watched by government agents. DOH! They followed them openly right to the house Why the look of shock? So, what does he do?

1 - Interrupts a conversation that sounds as normal as any in this movie

2 - Writes "Keep talking normal" on a newspaper on the table

3 - Puts his index finger to his mouth with the universal "shhh" sign (how does one "shhh" while talking normally?)

4 - Next, a looong 15 second pause in conversation

5 - Then this REALLY subtle line - "I'll be right back. Follow me. Keep an eye out" in a monotone voice; end of conversation.

Other really bad parts include the trimmed border and visible hinges around the "secret" trap door and, my favorite, a hidden CD picked up in a different location than where it was hidden in an earlier scene. Since both places had flags, I guess I wasn't supposed to notice. I could list more, but it hurts my brain to think about how bad this movie was.

So, the screenplay is bad. Cinematography is bad. DVD production is bad (what's with the Apache helicopters on the main menu graphics and not in the movie?). The acting is bad, but with this script, even Maria Conchita Alonzo and David Warner can't help it. The concept of the story is great, but the execution is simply horrible, the suspense is transparent (the sunglasses thing was SOOO obvious), and there is a lot of extraneous dialogue (keyless encryption). It wasn't a failure to suspend disbelief, it was a failure to get in the same universe with disbelief.

Maybe someone will take the works of Dan Brown and do something similar to this movie and do it right.

So bad...it's great!

[nvarea · 3/10 · 18 September 2004]

Hmm...where to start? Well, start by reading shayhugi's review of the movie. When you are done reading it you get this sense of confusion, like you should have understood it, but you just didn't. So you are tempted to read it again to see what you must have missed, however, you don't, because you come to your senses and don't want to waste your time. That's exactly the feeling you'll get while watching this movie. Try chugging a beer each time someone in the movie stiffly says "keyless encryption," and you'll feel much better. The acting is so poor the script reaches the level of self-parody, which is tough to do by mistake. However, writer/director/exec. producer Hank Whetstone has no problem. (See his other credits...oh, umm, there are none. This will remain his greatest achievement.) Yes, the cover has Apache helicopters, although none appear in the movie. Yes, ending the movie in the Bahamas was just an excuse to take the crew on vacation. Yes, when a plane gets blown up by a rocket, the entire sequence takes place off camera, saving the FX dept their whole budget. But it's the script that brings the real laughs. If I was running from someone w/a gun, would I run to an empty beach? What on earth went on with that beach scene? All of a sudden there are two-discs? Am I missing something? Ahh, someone just said "keyless encryption." Another cold one downed. I was tempted to rewind it, but came to my senses.

Upon reading some of the newer high praise for this movie, it have recognized that: A. Almost all were written in the first few months of 2005, many in March. B. Almost all have overseas cities listed. C. Almost all of the glowing reviews look they were written by dweebs on shrooms.

From this I can only gather either that: 1. This movie has authentically reached cult-status for its poor quality. Or 2. A bunch of nerds got together and watched the movie on the TV in the back of one of their mom's garage, and the one girl invited there who was not half good looking but the rest wanted to make out with in the back of their '97 Neon anyway said something remotely positive about the movie and they wanted to impress her with incoherent dribble posted online. We can only be so lucky as to read their endless wretched blogs. But no amount of intercontinental praise will improve this waste of film.

A Prime Candidate for MST3K Treatment

[tomservoca · 1/10 · 26 July 2004]

Oh I wish that Joel, Crowe and Tom were still in business.

The repeating shots of food being prepared (slice the deer, slice the chicken, slice the fish, slice the vegetables) would make excellent MSTie fodder

This movie is disjointed, filled with ham fisted acting and was an absolute waste of 90 minutes of my life. Thank the gods that I only paid $0.95 for it (The rental store was cleaning out their tape collection).

It ranks down there with the "Manos, Hands of Fate". *barf*

In short, unless this howler of a movie has been MST'ied, avoid this dog at all costs.

If you get this tape as a gift, send it immediately to your local HazMat handling unit.

Trying to make a point out of pointless movie

[piela · 6 May 2002]

I got to a video rental store with my friend to take a dose of "hacker-films". Unfortunately we picked a title called "Kohtalokas koodi" (which translates as "The Unfaithful Code") which is better known over-seas by the name The Code Conspiracy.

The film is all about this magic encryption algorithm, or code as it is referred in this film, that somehow can reveal the future and the past of entire humankind and present the scientific evidence of God's existance. FBI and The President wants that code and are willing to kill everybody for it. So there's the plot.

The plot summary (read it from the top of the page) is pretty much the same as the backside of the video case and as mine above and has just about nothing to do with the actual script. This film is just SO frustrating to watch. Acting is terrible, soundtrack is terrible, camera-work is lousy, pretty much everything in this movie is bad. But the worst, is definitely the script. It is _amazingly_ bad. It does not make _any_ sense at all.

All the time, all through the film, it's all about this keyless encryption algorithm which is scratched on a CDR. Viewers of this film get to see a video clip played once in a while out of this CDR and some guy says that "HEY! This disc has the code!" And that's it. What was the mystery code? How does the code reveal our future? How does it prove that God exists? What conspiracy? This film is nothing more than pointless mumbo-jumbo about all these big words and running around, hiding from The Feds.

Avoid this film. I'm still devastated yet amazed of how bad this film eventually turned out to be (it gets worse and worse..). My comment might seem confusing, even stupid, but believe me, no straight-thinking man can write any intelligent critics about this film.

cod confusion

[giannattav · 2/10 · 7 February 2006]

Very disappointed with editing,accuracy of technology and continuity of film.Premise was good but somewhere along the line the story turned into a love story and main plot fell apart. It's a shame that the story went away.The acting was fair to poor. Marie Conchita Alonzo as a Massad agent with a Spanish accent is ridiculous.What's with the cutting of fish,meat,conch and coffee making.Have big problems with scientific facts which are inaccurate. When making a scientific movie at least get a consultant who can correct the errors in the script.How did one disc turn into two,was one hidden in the cave and what happened to the existence of God.

it's not real, but it's amazing

[shayhugi · 9/10 · 4 October 2003]

nothing could be less or more accurate than this movie. we all know there's no such thing as a key-less encryption but yet we know nothing about the bible.

people forget where technology is taking us, sometimes it could be amazing and sometimes it could scare you to death, but it always for the good reason.

just looking on the guy sitting there on a boat in the islands makes you think "ohh well, all you want is to chill out and live a peaceful life" and technology might be a good way to earn it, but again if it won't exist it'll be also a good way to earn it.

acting was fine as well, and theme music was very appropriate.

9 out of 10, but again it depends. recommended for computer geeks who needs vacation ;)

A Must See!

[mattmillburn · 1/10 · 23 May 2004]

This movie could be the worst movie ever. I rented it because the cover had Apachi helicopters, and army guys running away from an explosion. After watching the movie I was disappointed because there were no Apachi helicopters, no army guys, and no explosions. Not only is this the worst movie ever, it also has the most misleading cover ever.

The main character in the movie who we are supposed to like is a horrible person. He hates his wife, cheats on her, and uses every opportunity to run away and hide behind his wife in the face of danger.

Despite the horribleness of this movie I would recommend others to rent or even buy this movie. Watch it with friends and laugh at the crappiness of it. It would be impossible for anyone to ever make a movie that made less sense than this movie. Watch this movie and take pride in the fact that you and your friends could make a better movie in less then twenty minutes.

Insightful View of the Possibilities

[setdresser-1 · 10/10 · 27 March 2005]

I'm a very open minded person, or I'd like to think I am. Anyway's I was watching this film and I was thinking, "Has anyone ever proved that there's a missing link...or, is there a missing link, because there IS NO missing link?" After all this time, and all this digging, and all these scientific tests, and no-one finding any evidence that there is a missing link, AND, WHY are there still apes in the world, if they've already evolved...I'm guessing it's because there is no connection. So I'm watching this film and I'm thinking, "God, has to be pretty unique, intelligent, etc., to create such an amazing thing such as human beings. I'm aligning myself to the theory of creation, as opposed to evolution, after watching this movie. Thanks Mr. Whetstone. God does exist...and he knows all, sees all.

I enjoyed the film, and the acting, and the overall production value.

Sorry try again...

[CESI · 4/10 · 17 February 2004]

The idea was not so bad...but the script was. Too much theories, too much dialogues for nothing. And when i say nothing i perfectly describe the end of the film. NOTHING. An hour and a half of runing away, from Florida to Bahamas, to end on a "I hope this will save our world" on a magnificent ocean sunset. The hole film is about a stupid disk on wich an old man says he found the key to predict the futur and wich is also the proof that god exists. Come on... And what is that key and How does it work? Is it really on the disk? All questions left without answers. All that with a really bad photography, bad acting and no sens scenes that would be best put in the "Deleted scenes".

I do not recommend this film.

cinema is not just ideas

[boccaccio6 · 4/10 · 3 October 2008]

You may like the movie or not, it's an obvious matter of taste and individual sensibility. Better said, you may like so much the message conveyed that you give it a ten. I gave this movie a five. In my opinion, to give a ten, cinema art qualities should be taken into account, like camera work, or robustness of plot, which allows for ellipses, or smartness of the screenplay. All this is missing in this movie. If a character runs for his life let him run till the viewer also is breathing heavily. The message itself is vague, no technical details (in such a technological subject) to give it substance. A horror film may have a ten if it is perfectly done, and possibly teaches the viewer a better understanding of the human behavior. Ideals and spirituality are harder to convey. Somebody did it, a good job indeed, with very plain examples.

Intellects will enjoy this piece.

[motionpicturepr · 10/10 · 21 February 2005]

You have to at first understand and contemplate all various positions on our existence as we know it. Henry Whetstone, undoubtedly has his own theories, which I could embrace, if the storyline was just a little bit more clear. The acting was unusually good, the lead actor (James Fitzpatrick) has a very charismatic appeal. And the supporting cast was equally good.

The philosophy of the piece, is deep, mesmerizing, thought-provoking. Philosophically engaging, I loved it. Only those with deep insight and intellect will truly be able to appreciate the magnitude of this work. Those film goers interested in magnanimous action and gratuitous sex need not bother. The Code Conspiracy is a revelation of a sort.

THIS film is PROFOUND and HEAVY!

[marisa-24 · 10/10 · 10 March 2005]

Do you have the slightest idea where we came from, where we are headed, and why? The writer/director Whetstone poses and interesting dilemma when it comes to proving his theory. Yet, he makes the story compelling enough to ponder the possibilities. The stars (Jim Fitzpatrick, Maria Conchita Alonso, David Warner) are perfectly cast. The writing is straight forward and pulls no punches when it comes to including the backdrop of Whetstone's Christianity. His religious beliefs are upfront and obvious, and I don't have a problem with that. I think that when people stick to one theory of life, and don't listen to other's opinions, they have stopped the educational process. You can never stop learning...never stop growing. I feel that this film is as strong as any I've seen in a long time.

A very scary theory, but well made.

[filmgal-5 · 10/10 · 16 March 2005]

Keyless encryption? Is it possible? Is it like every other movie, that at one time or another, was considered science fiction and then came into reality. Reality is a very poignant word, when it comes to films, because I feel, that if you can foresee something, or think about a new idea, then it is reachable. Or it is creatable. Otherwise how in the world would we come-up with the idea. Being a film student, I gravitate to films such as this one (The Code Conspiracy) because it challenges my crafts choices. Instead of making another plain and simplistic story, I like to make sure that the audience members consider my theories. The actors were all very good. I like the male lead (Jim Fitzpatrick). He was interesting and played the moments very believably. I rate this movie a ten.

Thought Provoking...Great Acting.

[jwyatt-3 · 10/10 · 13 February 2005]

After reading several reviews on this film I thought I would add my twenty cents. The fact that I saw it several times, and there's still some mystery in it, still some ambiguity as to the possible meanings to all of the things that go on with John Davis, is what I find most compelling.

It's not a film like 'Pi' where all of the pieces fall into place at just the right time and you know exactly where you stand. It's something rather that is left to the intelligence and imagination of the viewer. Was he really married...did he have kids? Did his partner really commit suicide? Did God, or an Angel...kill the FBI Agent? The ambiance is perfect. The acting is great, the dialogue is outstanding. The Bahamian 'Big Smile,' talking to John about his rebirth still moves me to this date and the two simple words suddenly spoken to a disbelieving John from some unseen source while in the Beach scene still mesmerizes me like no other movie can.

Also there is a perplexing and scary scene in the middle where John witnesses his family's death (a missile shoots down the family Jet), then suddenly evil, ghostly demons express their joy over the catastrophe. There is a lot of haunting blue hues in most of the shots. I would like to see a better quality DVD put out for this one, but I'll take what I can get with this theory.

See this movie then see it again and then see it after you change your thinking about life and religion. Don't over-analyze it and don't worry if some of it doesn't make sense, after all it's not all supposed to change your thinking...but instead, challenge your beliefs.