Encrypt

Encrypt

2003 ""
Encrypt
Encrypt

Encrypt

4.2 | 1h41m | en | Science Fiction

2068, the ozone layer is gone and the world is a wasteland. A band of mercenaries attempt to break into a Estate that is guarded by a automated defence system called "Encrypt" in order to steal priceless artwork.

View More
AD

WATCH FREEFOR 30 DAYS

All Prime Video
Cancel anytime

Watch Now
4.2 | 1h41m | en | Science Fiction | More Info
Released: June. 14,2003 | Released Producted By: , Country: Budget: 0 Revenue: 0 Official Website:
Synopsis

2068, the ozone layer is gone and the world is a wasteland. A band of mercenaries attempt to break into a Estate that is guarded by a automated defence system called "Encrypt" in order to steal priceless artwork.

...... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Cast

Grant Show , Vivian Wu , Steve Bacic

Director

Oscar L. Costo

Producted By

,

AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.

Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

TheLittleSongbird I have definitely seen worse movies than Encrypt. From the premise it seemed intriguing, but for some reason(maybe it was the fact that it was a low-budget TV movie) I was also dubious as to if it would be as good. It isn't quite, but it is not a complete waste of a good concept either. For instance, for a low-budget TV movie it actually looks quite good. The editing is crisper than I was expecting, the settings do at least have some atmosphere and the special effects are above average, not outstanding but not crude or artificial. There is only one exception, which was the robot that looked as though it would be more at home in the 30s, even then it was nowhere near as bad as special effects for other low-budget TV movies I've seen recently. The music has a suitably haunting quality, not over-bearing or sluggish-sounding. The acting is also above average, especially from Vivian Wu who is radiant and has a certain command, nobody's absolutely outstanding but again there is nobody terrible at the same time. The story also has points of interest, the psychological games between Wu and the hero are very intriguing especially. On the other hand, there are other scenes that do feel as though they were there for padding, consequently the pace drags at times. The ending also underwhelms, not in a rushed or abrupt sort of way but it did seem a little too easy and contrived for my liking. The dialogue is not as cheesy or as stilted as I feared, but it is rather talky with too-episodic a structure which drags Encrypt further. The characters are less stereotypical than you'd think but underdeveloped, and I really didn't see the need for a villain. All in all, not bad but at the same time I didn't care for it. 5/10 Bethany Cox
asinyne I watched most of this film recently but had to leave towards the end due to an appointment. It was by no means a great movie but it wasn't terrible either. In fact I was drawn in after a while. I agree that with a bit more budget this could have been really good. A couple of things that would have helped a lot are more interesting sets and perhaps a sexier girl in the role of the hologram. This might have created a bit of sexual tension thats always a good thing. The actress that played the role was OK but i don't think the camera found her very compelling. Grant Show isn't especially charismatic either but hes not bad. I liked the suits they wore and the guards looked pretty decent also. At times the constant and slow paced moving from room to room got a bit tedious but thats why i say the scenery could have been more interesting, giving the viewer more visual twists if not plot twists. Overall, its not a bad way to spend some time, i would take it over 75 percent of Arnold's movies...I gave it a six, almost a seven. Sorry i missed the ending, but thats OK i can catch it later.
Orson-17 A user comment by Roger Tay states: "How on earth does dreck written as badly as this actually get made?" Well Roger, let me explain.This was an original script and I happen to know the screenwriter on this project, (God I love living in L.A.). I read the script way before it was produced. This is not what was written. Producers, and there are many on a project, try to dance around each other making changes to justify their existence.When enough changes are made, the producers bring in another writer who knows nothing of the original intent of the writer and tries not only to make the lame changes the producers want, but will do his/her best to change at least 51% of the script in order to share a full "screenplay by" credit on the project. And that's how this was re-written. So, to answer your question.... you take a bunch of 30 year olds who know how to dress but know nothing about story telling and give them a decent script to destroy.
dtype I'm a big fan of camp, but when every plot 'twist' is predictable and bad, while obviously not trying to be, even I lose interest. I was going to rate this a 3, but the ending dropped it a point easily. Its only saving grace is that I hated other movies more. Not enough beer in the world for this one.