The Numbers Station
opens with two men parked on a darkened street in present day Jackson, New
Jersey. The driver, an older man named Grey (Liam Cunningham), is relating the
mineral worth of humans – less than five dollars – while the passenger is
focused on his small black notebook writing a series of numbers down, circling
some of the digits while referencing a separate printed page of numbers.
Emerson (John Cusack), the decoder, acknowledges he has received his mission
directive, lights the page on fire and tosses it out the window. Grey gives him
10 minutes to complete his task. Thus begins this suspense-driven thriller that
follows Emerson's fall from grace within the CIA's Black Ops organization when
he fails to kill an innocent bystander who witnessed him cleaning up a hit,
causing him to spiral into a psychological journey to discover his answer to
“why” through the rest of the film.
 |
| Emerson (John Cusack) has a lot on his mind |
Emerson is given one more chance to prove his worth with
what should be a straightforward babysitting mission. In an off-the-radar
bunker located somewhere in rural Suffolk, England, Emerson protects a civilian
codes operator, Katherine (Malin Akerman), who broadcasts shortwave messages
encrypted in a series of apparent random numbers. However, Emerson’s mental and
emotional state after the last hit has followed him; on his off duty hours, he
drinks to block out images of the witness’ death. After two months pass without
incident, Emerson and Katherine are shot at as they await a switch off with the
other team in the bunker. The bunker becomes a dangerous refuge as they try to
unravel how the bunker became compromised during the prior team’s watch, and
more importantly, how to reverse 15 suspect broadcasts that could be orders for
nefarious activities. Emerson’s safety net, the organization’s operator,
directs him to “retire” Katherine, putting him squarely in the same situation of
being ordered to kill an innocent person. Feelings of extreme emotional
conflict bubble to the surface for Emerson. This time, he must face his demons
and reconcile who he is and what he believes in.
 |
| Emerson drinks himself into a stupor to find momentary peace |
A Closer Look at The Numbers Station
The first and most rudimentary
question when a clandestine agency is involved in the storyline is where the
movie (television show, book, manga, et. al.) fits along the spy/espionage
spectrum and others of its ilk. Because the genre is a conglomerate of varying degrees of spy and espionage and identifiers of genre can be and are often shared, it seems easier to talk in terms of one overarching genre, but I think that does a disservice to what is being analyzed.
Based on prior exposure to the genre’s many offerings, let’s
start by dividing the genre into soft spy-fi and hard spy-fi. The former is
based in fantasy and the fantastical plots of world domination and/or complete
destruction. Technology will usually be a prominent feature, typically in the
capabilities of the gadgets and weapons brandished by secret agent/superspy and
maniacal villain alike. Character development may be secondary to the mission
as the main plot device to propel the story towards its conclusion. Examples of soft
spy-fi would include the Bond and Eurospy films, Get Smart, Deux Ex, and Najica Blitz Tactics. The latter form is rooted in the realistic spy and
espionage, with emphasis on technical aspects of the clandestine activities.
The spy uses their ingenuity over gadgets on steroids; likely, they may only have
a smart phone at their disposal to compliment their experience and training. A
personal character flaw may become an important aspect to the story. Some
examples would include The Quiller Memorandum, Enigma, MI-5, Burn
Notice, 24, Splinter Cell, and novels by Ian
Fleming, Edward Aarons and Stieg Larsson, to name but just a few. The lines are apt to blur when one
takes on some of the characteristics of the other, leading them to fall more in
the center of the spectrum than further away to one of the opposing points.
 |
| Mystery encryptions - can the key be found? |
So, where does this put The Numbers Station? This movie sits squarely in the hard spy-fi camp
because it portrays a sense of realism to being a Black Ops agent for the CIA.
Issued with a little black notebook and a gun, Emerson relies on his seasoned
experience and training to get himself through the various issues he must face
during the movie. Technical encryption expertise is explored in some detail
from the viewpoint of coder (Katherine) and decoder (Emerson) when they must
work together to figure out how to reverse the 15 encrypted codes broadcast.
This narrative of sharing encryption expertise and problem solving is
reminiscent of Tom and Hester in the 2001 Enigma (although neither one of them are spies: they worked
for a clandestine British intelligence organization at Bletchley Park during
World War II).
 |
| Psychologist: "We are sociopaths...it has all been distilled down to zeros and ones" |
The Numbers Station
does spend a fair amount of time on exploring the character flaws of Emerson
and briefly, Katherine, because it does weigh in on decisions made during the
movie. After many years of being a “yes” man, Emerson begins to question the
“why” when he botches his hit and he refuses to follow through on an order to
kill a bystander. After the event, Emerson ia subjected to a psychological
evaluation to examine what went wrong:
Emerson: She [the young woman who he refused to kill after she
witnessed the hit] asked a very good question.
Psychologist: Which was?
Emerson: Why.
Psychologist: We are
sociopaths. We’re vulnerable to qualms of conscience like anyone else. We face
these decisions every day, and we vote up or down. Like everything else, it has
all been distilled down to zeros and ones.
According the psychologist, decisions are black and white
and seem to carry the same weight regardless if it is deciding which brand of
soap to buy or whether to follow an order, even an order to take another
person’s life. For Emerson, decisions do not distill down to a binary structure
of one or the other; it’s a concept that he is forced to revisit a number of times.
At one point, Emerson and Katherine sharply point out
each other’s shortcomings: he tells her she fits the coder’s profile of a college
dropout, insecure, a possible victim of sexual abuse, and highly intelligent,
and she responds that he is an arrogant person hating everyone and seeing
everyone as a potential hit. He tells her she is close, but in actuality, he
assesses himself with the following traits that led Emerson to reveal how the
CIA was able to recruit him:
Emerson: I had a stable
childhood but with an underlying desire to break free from control or
authority. Restless. Sense of entitlement. Striking lack of empathy or
compassion for other people….Recruited me straight out of college. Said it was
the best opportunity I’d ever have. Told me I’d do special things, important
things.
Katherine: But you’re worth
more than that, what some bureaucrat wrote down on a piece of paper 20 years
ago.
Emerson: All they’re talking
about is what’s real. Reality. They know how to use it. They’re good at it.
While Katherine’s belief is that it is a job – hers and his
– and that when the going gets rough, it’s as simple as walking away and doing
something else. However, is it that simple? Tempers flare again and Emerson pushes Katherine to realize that although she is a civilian employee, she is still culpable for the part she plays within the organization. Her naïve patriotism and service to her country is not an excuse of innocence, claims Emerson in an angry outburst. As the anger subsides, each set to their respective tasks – Emerson to resolve the physical threat of the unknown assailant and Katherine to discover the password to the master encryptions so she can broadcast cancellation orders.
 |
| Despite differences of opinion, Emerson and Katherine find code a common thread |
After evaluating against the spy-fi spectrum, I look for any
facets of the film that can be traced back to Bond’s sphere of influence on
popular culture. Sometimes there are blatant homage instances to James Bond and
other times, it may be subtle or none at all. In the case of The Numbers
Station, Cusack’s Emerson is anything but Bond
incarnate. Rather, his portrayal of a flawed Black Ops CIA agent is gritty and a
pragmatic approach to the spy genre. Emerson toils away his evenings in
tormented contemplation – haunted by his growing sense of morality, questioning
his loyalty to the agency. He drinks to excess to dull the pain in the wee
hours of the night, but the doubt remains and is at the forefront of his mind
as he deals with the central crisis of the movie. Daniel Craig’s interpretation
of Bond, especially while pretending to be dead after the opening sequence of Skyfall, one could find some parallels between the two
characters. However, in the case of Emerson, he calls into question one’s blind
allegiance, exploring and challenging the rules of engagement in the Jason
Bourne series and hit man type films such as Wanted (2008) and The Replacement Killers (1998). Otherwise, Bond is no where to be seen or felt in this movie.
As an independent film, the use of one location – an old
English bunker – for the vast majority of the movie is utilized to stretch a
modest budget. Although the use of audio playback and visual flashbacks build a sense
of suspense, there are other indie films that have utilized the single location
to better advantage: Pontypool (2009), The
Outpost (2008), and The Devil’s
Rock (2011) come to mind. What works for The Numbers Station is the psychological component of two people, competently acted by Cusack and Akerman, having to pool their respective skills and knowledge and find trust with each other in spite of their character flaws. While Emerson is no Bond, he does add to the hard spy-fi offerings within the larger, ever evolving spy/espionage genre.
 |
| Emerson deep in thought |
