(2012-04-27 22:01:06)

Excellent Movie

This review is from: Source Code [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) This movie was excellent from start to finish. I thought this would be a movie that the trailer shows you all of the best parts of the movie but it wasn't. I would give it an A-.Madness

TheCultureSlut

(2012-04-27 16:18:35)

Melodramatic and clichГѓВ©, but overall very intriguing.

The dialog is a bit too cheesy at most parts. It is cringe-worthy, verypoor screen writing, but overall the story is fascinating,unpredictable and original. Like with Moon, director Duncan Jonesbrings up very interesting food for thought. There are some REAL heavyethical points here, but the film never dives into any depth with them.I felt there was so much more to explore with source code, and it wouldhave been very rewarding if the the film was about 30- 40 minuteslonger and ventured into some of the issues that the film onlyscratched the surface of. I felt the film barely had time to handle thefast-paced surface aspect of the story. The acting and action of thefilm was spot-on, though I wish the film would have had a differentending. Overall, Source Code is a great film, but had the potential tobe something absolutely amazing like Moon was.

(2012-04-26 20:57:24)

prefer unambiguous endings

I hope ambiguous endings are not becoming a new trend. This movie didn't make sense to me (and enough others that there are sites dedicated to sharing the theories of what the ending means). What is a viewer supposed to do if the movie doesn't make sense? Watch it again hoping they missed a line? Search for answers? 5 stars for most of the movie, minus 2 because I prefer clearer endings that don't require internet searches to figure out what the director meant.

nahum

(2012-04-26 12:29:03)

happy ending

I LOVE happy endings - I thought this would have a sad ending but I'm glad I was wrong.I'm sure everyone who watches it will walk out with a smile.

Peter Canavese

(2012-04-24 20:38:19)

Since Source Code is philosophical science fiction and not just 'sci fi,' there's something to chew on here about consciousness: when it begins and ends, and that old chestnut of what constitutes reality. [Blu-ray]

ofourhue-1

(2012-04-24 16:40:19)

Bad Code

The fact that so many people liked this film makes me scratch mypuzzler. It asks the question: what do you get when you take a touch of"12 Monkeys," add a dash of "DГѓВ©jГѓВ  Vu" and sprinkle on a smattering of"Groundhog's Day?" The answer? ... A whole lot of "meh." Aside fromreeking of been-there-done-that syndrome, this film is reminiscent ofthe Star Trek: The Next Generation (STTNG) episode "Cause and Effect"in which the Enterprise was caught in a time loop in which it keptgetting destroyed until the crew sussed out how to avert the tragedy."Source Code," in similar fashion repeats an 8-minute event on a trainbefore its destruction as a result of a terrorist bombing.Unlike the STTNG episode that featured characters that fans (read as:Yours Truly) grew to know and love, the "Source Code" cast isunfamiliar and underdeveloped just enough for me to absolutely not careabout them or their predicament.Jake Gyllenhaal does a serviceable job as the confused, reluctantprotagonist, and though I love Vera Farmiga, she simply doesn't havethat much to do here. The ending I saw coming a mile away (and it evenlifted a bit on the UK TV drama "Life On Mars") so I can't say I reallyliked this film, but hey, I'm in the minority here, so you might justenjoy it.God have mercy on your soul, if that's the case.

Maitland McDonagh

(2012-04-23 00:33:38)

The movie loses steam before it wraps everything up, but until then it's a pretty puzzle.

bck

(2012-04-22 22:44:57)

Awesome, Intelligent Hitchcockian Quantum Leap

In a nutshell, this is an amped up 'Quantum Leap' by way of Hitchcock, deftly delivered by director Duncan Jones who proves that his first feature, the extraordinary 'Moon', was no fluke.It is a bravado opening sequence, an intense eight minutes (including the titles, in which a hint as to the nature of the movie is provided) where our protagonist (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up on a moving train, disoriented by his surroundings. He is greeted by a woman (Michelle Monaghan) who seems to know him as Sean even though he doesn't know who she is. He tells her that he is Captain Colter Stevens, a helicopter pilot who's supposed to be serving in Afghanistan. A trip to the rest room reveals a reflection that is not his own and just when she tells him that everything will be alright, an explosion occurs that engulfs everything. From there, we learn that the entire movie is one huge ticking bomb. Captain Stevens is on a mission to find out who planted the bomb and he only has eight minutes to do so. If he fails, he has to relive those eight minutes leading up to the explosion, again and again and again, until he is successful. Although he has those same eight minutes to work with, time is not on his side as there has been a threat of a second bomb set to detonate within a major city.In true Hitchcock style, the ticking-clock tension builds with each trip back to the train, but that's not where the influences stop. From framing to the amazing cinematography to editing and even the Hermannesque score by Chris Bacon employed over the opening titles, Jones does more than just channel Hitchcock in the end (one might say he was channeling Kubrick when he made 'Moon), but it's clear where the inspiration lies for some scenes and set-ups, and boy, are there set-ups and hints dropped all over the place. Like 'Inception' before or 'Sucker Punch' earlier this year, 'Source Code' is a very layered movie that entertains and thrills on first viewing, but also rewards (maybe warrants) repeated viewings to catch some of the hidden secrets, be it in the framing, dialogue, editing or background.Gyllenhaal has done this bit of time-travel before in 'Donnie Darko', although the movie doesn't really call it time-travel per se. Like 'Quantum Leap', it is his consciousness that is sent back into the body of a train passenger who had perished in the explosion, but his character remains himself. Gyllenhaal does better here as a thinking man action hero than he did in 'Prince of Persia' as he tries to focus on the mission at hand (find the bomber), while trying to figure out what happened in the last two months (his last memory before waking on the train was flying a helicopter on mission while in Afghanistan) and handling a supposed relationship between the person he is in and the mysterious woman he meets on the train. It is a very solid performance layered with nuanced, yet subtle, emotions.Michelle Monaghan does the best she can with what is essentially a small part composed of repeated moments, but the chemistry she has with Gyllenhaal works well enough for him to develop a need to save her from the exploding train each time. It isn't a big performance, but is economically handled. Taking a bigger role as Stevens' 'handler' is Vera Fermiga who delivers a majority of her performance over a monitor screen, communicating with Stevens as an almost disembodied voice (similar to Kevin Spacey's GERTIE in 'Moon', except with a real face attached). Fermiga's Goodwin becomes Stevens' life-life to reality. Goodwin's superior, and creator of the titular Source Code which enables Stevens to continually return to the disaster, is Rutledge, played in a rather odd, affected manner and accent, by Jeffrey Wright. For the most part, he is Mr. Exposition.Duncan Jones is effectively two for two in directing, and it looks like he's hit upon a theme that he likes to tackle. As Christopher Nolan enjoys employing the theme of perception (see "Memento", "Insomnia", "The Prestige" and "Inception") in his movies, Jones tackles identity. It's not really that simple as there are layers in the works of both directors (and this is merely a simple comparison), but both have now had impressive follow-ups to their fantastic, if little seen, first films (Nolan's first film "Following" preceded "Memento"). Not bad for the kid once known as Zowie Bowie.Oh, and 'Quantum Leap' fans may want to keep a sharp ear out for a cameo.

Peter Keough

(2012-04-22 07:00:20)

At the very least, the film exceeds by several magnitudes the emotional and philosophical intensity of such similar metaphysical amusements as Avatar and Inception.

Wendelina Meijerink

(2012-04-21 11:52:14)

"Source Code", progression since "Moon".

Duncan Jones' movie "Moon" reminded me of his father's musicalbreakthrough with "Space Odity"... In "Source Code", I see adevelopment in the theme of transmissible consciousness as compared to"Moon". Duncan Jones has worked this theme out with so much more detailand an eye for reality. "Source Code" must have been a real challengeto make. It's great, it's surprising, it's exciting, keeps you on theedge of your seat, makes you think! I really lived the movie in themoment, not knowing what the next moment would bring. Besides being achallenge to the mind, "Source Code" is a delight to the eye. Iparticularly enjoyed the various angles and widescreen/close-up viewsof the Chicago area.Looking forward to the next movie Duncan Jones will make!

(2012-04-20 06:43:42)

worst title ever, overrated garbage movie for numbskulls

OK. So you invent one of the most amazing technical marvels in history and then name it SOURCE CODE!!!!!?!?!?! That's like building the pyramids and calling them rock piles. This movie had a good idea and then proceeded to ravage it with idiocy. Seriously this is a pathetic scifi movie written for people who have half a brain. I will give it this... I was interested for the first half or so. Then you realize the doofus who named the movie "source code" probably came up with the rest of the movie. Honestly it felt like someone who only writes cheesy romantic comedies for a living was given a treatment and forced to make a scifi movie. They were obviously way out of their depth when they made this. I can't believe people are giving this over 2 stars. I know a ton of people who have seen this movie and not one of them enjoyed it.

Ayal Oren

(2012-04-19 20:15:37)

No intentional spoiler inside

Let me start by saying, I didn't mean to see "Source Code". It was oneof those films I red about and thought I might see them one day, but itwas sheer accident I ended up seeing it. And despite some plot holes Ienjoyed it. The acting is first class, Gyllenhaal is repeating hisPrince of Persia role, so much so I could call the earlier movie aspoiler for this one, but that's all I'm going to say on the subject.Problem is this film is almost impossible to speak about without addingspoilers. I can say the pacing was perfect, I can say it's an actionsci-fi (many scientist will debate this) in which most of the action ispsychological. I could add a special commendation for Vera Farmigawhose role is much harder than most of the others on the film and shestill performs superbly, but truth is that's all I can say withoutadding a spoiler.So here is the bottom line, despite the mentioned plot holes, the movieworks and that's what matters.

(2012-04-17 06:36:20)

Fair SF adventure, but ...,

The premise seems iffy, but I've seen worse: time travel becomes possible, but only a limited sort. Some few people can go back in time to the last eight minutes of another's life. Unfortunately, that includes the event that ended it, so it's hardly a pleasure cruise. Much to no one's surprise, the military takes this technology on as a counter-terrorism tool. It's too late to avert the disaster that already happened, but maybe it contains clues that will help prevent a bigger one. Eight minutes is hardly enough to get started, so Colter Stevens has to take the trip again and again, learning a little more each time, and dying again each time.The action plays well, and plays a little differently in each eight-minute trip (so he can make progress against the terrorist), right to the very end - which contains a pleasant flip. On the whole, this action movie acquits itself much better than lots I can name.So, what's my beef? The name. Obviously, some Lala-lander heard this cool techie term "source code". He didn't understand what it meant, so assumed that it had no meaning - leaving him free to make one up. I could do that too. Let's let the word "scriptwriter" refer to a South American turnip, and "director" be a children's playground toy. See how well that works? Heck, even a movie like Gattaca had the decency to create a new word when they created a new meaning. Outside that one bit of ridiculosity, I really did enjoy this one.-- wiredweird, reviewing the release to theaters

Harry T. Yung

(2012-04-16 22:00:12)

Superb movie marred by not knowing when to stop

Extra spoiler warning.The titular name refers to a military project to utilize a (fictional)medical phenomenon: the brain of the deceased contains the memory ofthe last 8 minutes before death, just like a close circuit security TVsurveillance video. If another person's brain can tap into these 8minutes of "security tape", imagine how much good can be done in crimeprevention? Research has brought this to the brink of success. The maincriterion for the candidate is compatibility to the "object", thingslike gender, age, physical built. There is one other, which will berevealed later (more spoilers!!) The movie opens with an immediately attention-gripping score accentingon timpani and brass sending your heartbeat on an acceleration course.The visual is a sequence with overhead shot of sprawling Chicagocross-cutting with a cruising, sleek looking commuter train.As we get into the story, movies such as "Surrogates" and "Avatar" cometo mind. Colter Steven (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up, as if from a trance,in the train and finds that he occupies the body of a man named Sean,talking to a woman called Christina (Michelle Monahgan). As we movealong, another movie registers itself: "Groundhog day". The train blowsup and Steven finds himself back in the experiment chamber as thecandidate for "Source code" mentioned earlier, about to be sent backagain, again and again until he finds out who blew up the train.It is important to point out here that the plot is not about timetravel. The explosion has occurred and everybody on the train is dead.This is "time reassignment", whatever that means, as explained in themovie. Steven's mission is not to prevent the train explosion or tosave anybody, but only to find out who did it because the perpetratorhas something much bigger planned: to blow up Chicago with a nucleardevice. Steven's mission is not to to save millions of lives inChicago.This suspense alone is already material for a good thriller but thenthere is a parallel suspense plot. This unfolds only slowly as thestory progresses. What we see on the train is in a sense an illusion.But there is another layer of illusion: Steven in the enclosedexperiment capsule wired into an electric circuit connected to Sean'sdead brain (not unlike the protagonists in "Surrogate" or "Avatar").Other than the experiences in the train, the only recent recollectionSteven has is doing a sortie in Afghanistan as a fighter pilot. In theproject "Source code" capsule, he keeps asking his contact officerColleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga), whose face he sees only on a monitor,how he has become the candidate of this project. The ominous truthcomes out only gradually and this has to do with the one othercriterion that I intentionally omitted to mention at the start. MoreSPOILER! You see, like Sean, Steven is technically dead and just keptbrain-active by a life support system. Once his assignment has beenaccomplished, he will be "allowed to die".It should now be evident that from this clever plot, a superb movie canbe constructed. One has been. The thrills are expected. But there isalso poignancy in many ways. The lovely, warm, sunny smile onMonahgan's face makes it convincing that Gyllenhaal's character fallsin love with her and wants to save her, if not anybody else, from theexplosion. ClichГѓВ© yet touchingly handled is the remorse of a son forunkind words exchanged with his father in what unfortunately turns outto be their last conversation.There are also larger matters, moral and philosophical. Ruthlessproject director Dr Rutleger (Jeffrey Wright) suggests to Steven thathe should be happy and thankful for this last chance to serve hiscountry - "patriotism is not everything, it's the only thing" (thankscoach Vince)seems to be written all over his face. Steven in turn askshis own question in the train, to Christina as well as to some otherpassengers, "What would you do with the last minute of your life"? Theensuing scene is the most poignant of all.Gyllenhaal is at his best portraying Steven in a complexity that befitsthe unimaginably complex situation this character finds himself in.Monaghan does not have much challenge in this movie, but melts theaudience's heart just by being there. Wright's performance isimpressive, even as a somewhat stereotype character. It is Farmiga,however, who deserves special mention. Starting out as quiteimpersonal, she skilfully let the caring person underneath graduallyemerge. While the billing suggests otherwise, she is really the leadactress in this movie while Monaghan is only support, in terms of thedemand of the character. But as support, Farmiga is arguably even moredeserving for an Oscar nomination than in "Up in the air". Hope shegets one.Have I missed anything? Obviously: the most important! If this movie isnot one of time travel and changing the past, what is all this aboutSteven trying to save Christina and then, later, stop the bomb on thetrain? Well, there can be a good solution. In the timeline of thestory, Steven, through the project "Source code", finds the informationneeded and the criminal is apprehended before he can blow up Chicago.The train explosion is something that has already happened and Stevenis allowed to die. That is how the movie goes. But in the paralleluniverse (a theme just as popular as time travel, as fans of IsaacAsimov know), the bomb is stopped and the protagonists live happilyafterward. That is also how the movie goes.Why doesn't it just stop there? The movie makers unfortunately don'thave the good sense to stop when things are going well, and add onsomething that makes am otherwise almost-perfect movie end in anirreconcilable mess. Pity!

a_flynn78

(2012-04-16 03:43:19)

To summarise this film in one number? 93

I thought this film was terrible in every facet but the fact that itonly runs for 93 minutes is completely unacceptable, it's a waste of mymoney and yours. 30 years ago that would of been acceptable for athriller, not any more. Mission Impossible 4, that came out only a yearlater, ran for 2 hours and 10 minutes, and it was part comedy. TWICE,we had a flutter of special effects and quick explosion to signify thelead character had traveled into the Source Code and had died beforefinding anything, 16 minutes had passed in the structure of the filmthat we didn't get to see. For a film that is only 93 minutes long, howdare you quickly hash over anything!This film has no artistic discipline, the premise is interesting ifentirely unbelievable, the main character has 8 minutes, EXACTLY 8minutes, to avert a disaster. Can you not afford a stopwatch? It wasalways short of that 8 minutes and often it jumped around, give meexactly 8 minutes, no cuts please, that is what I would expect from agreat film, discipline. The last trip into the Source Code was a farce,Colter defuses the bomb and apprehends the suspect in about 30 secondsdue to cuts. SERIOUS SPOILER: The main character is actually dead. Okay, I actuallythink that is interesting, just decide what your focal point is. I'mnot sure what the movie was mostly about, was it about relationships?Was it about saving the world? Was it about death and alternaterealities? I think it was about all three equally. Too many thingshappening for a 93 minute film, all meaning was rendered mute by thefact it rushed through so much. Deja Vu has a lower rating but is a far better film in my opinion. Itsrunning time is 126 minutes and it is much better off for it, it givesit time to develop the thriller plot more.Source Code is not a great film, it may be in some respects be a goodfilm, an enjoyable watch, but it is not art, it should be closer to6.5/10 then 7.5/10 because it isn't that good. You don't get that gooda rating by only running for 93 minutes (INCLUDING CREDITS).

Tim Martain

(2012-04-15 14:54:37)

Even when I thought I had the whole thing figured out early on, the movie allowed me to feel smug for a while before shooting me down. Brilliant.

(2012-04-14 23:14:41)

Sci-fi meets Ground Hog day

This review is from: Source Code [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) Solid characters, believable story line. (I don't care if the science is 100% accurate or absolutely plausible) - this film rocks, what a great ride. (pun intended)The actors did a great job - infusing heart and soul into a tense, tight, escapist, thriller. I don't buy many DVDs these days - there are so many other options. Bu when I do add to my "analog" collection, my main criteria is multiple viewings. I watched this movie at least 3 times when it first came out. I am amped to see it again. Great job Duncan, Jake, Vera, etc!

(2012-04-14 05:07:25)

Pretty Good -Surprisingly!

With all the so-so (at best) movies out lately I was happily suprised that Source Code was actually a pretty good watchable movie that made sense. It had some Inception-type moments (I hated Inception) but they were well developed and were consistent with the plot line. Source Code also borrowed a theme from Star Trek TOS episode "The Menagerie" were Captain Pike who was badly injured in active duty was able to enjoy life in another dimension. Overall a good movie-I might even buy it on bluray.

lewiskendell

(2012-04-10 10:00:11)

A second impressive feature from a director with nothing but promise.

Source Code is a very cool sci-fi action/drama from Duncan Jones. It'smuch faster-paced and less philosophical than his previous feature,Moon, and it's even more satisfying, in my opinion. The plot, which involves a man reliving the same 8 minutes before aterrorist attack over and over in order to find the person responsiblefor it, is intelligent without ever becoming hard to follow. JakeGyllenhaal gives a great performance as a harried, confused man whoeventually finds focus and purpose in what he's been tasked to do. You don't have to be a hardcore sci-fi fan to enjoy this, as it'sgrounded in the real world in a way that makes it very easilyaccessible. Source Code gets my full recommendation. It's an exciting,smart, original movie with heart. 

Frank Grauman

(2012-04-09 17:10:02)

Excellent Thriller

I have to agree with the previous reviewer. This is the best thrillerI've seen in years. Definitely kept me on the edge of my seat.The writing is outstanding. All four principal actors do well andGyllenhaal, especially, carries the plot forward extremely well.At the start, I feared a stock, predictable Hollywood thriller. Butsoon I found myself en wrapped in Gyllenhaal's puzzle-within-a puzzle.At the end, the Industry audience for this screening erupted inspontaneous applause.Duncan Jones is definitely a young director to watch.If you like thrillers, go see this film!