Hollywood hacks vs real-world risk: do movies help or hinder cyber awareness?

Most people learn about cybersecurity from stories. 

A growing body of research shows that fictional media plays a real role in shaping how people understand cyber. Studies in human-computer interaction and media psychology have found that audiences build mental models of cybersecurity partly from what they see on screen – especially when direct experience or formal training is limited. 

The problem is that these models don’t stay neatly fictional. When portrayals are exaggerated or stylised, viewers can absorb incorrect assumptions about how attacks happen, how quickly systems fall over, and who is responsible for stopping them. 

So Hollywood becomes an unintentional security awareness programme. The question is whether that is, overall, a good thing or a bad thing. 

Getting it (mostly) right: Mr. Robot 

If there’s a benchmark for credible cyber storytelling, Mr. Robot might be it. The series depicts phishing, social engineering, credential reuse and misconfiguration – the unglamorous realities that underpin most real incidents.

From an awareness perspective, that’s useful. Depictions grounded in human behaviour and process (not just technical wizardry) align more closely with how people actually experience cyber risk.

When we spoke to Black Hat MEA 2025 speaker Dan Meacham (VP of Cyber and Content Security at Legendary Entertainment), he said: 

“Shows like ‘Mr. Robot’ help bring awareness of threats – and do help IT professionals make arguments for more budget and better tools.” 

Importantly, the show also embraces failure. Attacks don’t always work, plans unravel, defenders respond. That messiness reflects reality far better than the myth of hackers instantly exploiting complex organisations. 

Still, realism has limits. Media psychology research suggests that even accurate portrayals can romanticise hackers, and encourage wishful identification with technically skilled anti-heroes. Accuracy alone doesn’t neutralise the power of a narrative to influence people in negative ways. 

Style over substance: Hackers

Few films have influenced cyber culture more than Hackers – and unfortunately, Hackers thoroughly distorts that culture. 

Its vision of cybersecurity is visual, abstract and immediate: glowing networks, arcade-style interfaces, breaches completed in seconds. And these kinds of tropes reinforce misconceptions that hacking is primarily about brilliance and speed, rather than patience, error and human weakness. 

That being said, Meacham argues that inaccuracy is sometimes deliberate – and necessary. 

“If it is too technical, the audience can be lost,” he noted. 

There’s also a safety concern: “We must be careful to not be too accurate in the details as some folks will try to replicate the activity.”

Of course, Hackers wasn’t trying to teach security. But the danger is that, for some viewers, it becomes the default reference point anyway.

When spectacle distorts risk: Live Free or Die Hard

Live Free or Die Hard pushed cyber threats into the mainstream with the idea of a single, coordinated attack collapsing power grids, transport, markets and media almost instantly.

At a conceptual level, that message is useful: cyber incidents can have physical consequences that affect even the least cyber-engaged people. But exaggerated speed and scale on film like this could distort how people understand real-world incidents, and create expectations of sudden catastrophe rather than prolonged, uneven disruption. 

The result is misplaced focus. People worry about cinematic doomsday scenarios, when it’s everyday ransomware, fraud and credential abuse that continue to do the real damage.

So – help or hinder?

As with most things in cybersecurity, it’s not a simple answer. Cybersecurity on-screen probably both helps and hinders cyber awareness. 

It can create awareness where it didn’t exist before, open up conversations, and spark curiosity. But it also shapes flawed mental models that security teams might then have to unpick.

Meacham landed on that balance neatly:

“What I do appreciate are the practical applications to solving problems… I’m happy we have stories to tell that inspire audiences to be inquisitive as well as to educate themselves about privacy, safety, and responsibility.”

Media (both fictional and journalistic) will continue to influence how people think about cybersecurity whether we like it or not. The challenge for practitioners isn’t to dismiss Hollywood – but to recognise its pull, correct its myths, and use its moments of truth as a starting point for better conversations about risk, responsibility and resilience.