Linda Cook

25 May 2012

After I saw the thoroughly entertaining 'Source Code,' I felt as I did after seeing 'Inception.' My mind had been blown, numerous times. And I wanted to see the movie in a 'know what I know now' mode.

nc-holdsworth

24 May 2012

Excellent - but cops out when it matters

Spoilers! I must admit I saw Moon and wanted to see this immediatelyafter and am most impressed, it sort of reminded me of The Jacket withKeira Knightly and Adrian Brody. I love the way director Duncan Jones takes his time to unravel a story,you learn with the main character what is going on every step of theway and grow to have empathy with him/her. My only problem which I feel may have been caused by test screenings,which is mentioned quite frequently on IMDb is the ending. Just when itseemed to stop at the perfect moment, the main character finally getsto call his dad, arranges for a comedian to entertain the passengersand with seconds to live, kisses the girl and all the victims of thedisaster are laughing and smiling and it freezes, I expected it to fadeto black ... perfect, emotional and a logical conclusion. but no.. it decides to go on a little longer as the couple go on adate, and there's a text message...and.. well it takes the shine offwhat would have been a truly memorable film. Its still excellent though but so close to being perfect.

24 May 2012

Interesting Concept, Strong Performance by Jake Gyllenhaal, But Dragged At Times

This was an intriguing concept - Jake Gyllenhaal's character appears to be sent back in time - or to a simulated version of it, it isn't apparent at first - over and over to try and determine who planted a bomb on an already exploded train, in order to try and stop a threatened second attack. Each time he learns a little more, but we are not really sure where he is in 'real time' and where it is he is visiting (and I can't reveal too much without spoiling the film.) Jake Gyllenhaal gives a great performance, a fine balance of pathos, anger, fear, and frustration. The supporting cast of Michelle Monaghan (as a woman on the train) and Vera Farmiga (as a military officer involved in the simulation/time travel) are both excellent as well.The action was filmed wonderfully, and the story kept me intrigued. My only complaints, and the reason for the 4-star rating, is that the film dragged at parts, when the Jake G. character returned to the train over and over. It's a difficult scenario to pull off - forcing the viewer to watch the same scene over and over, or at least parts of it - and I felt it did get old. Also, I was still slightly baffled about certain aspects of the plot at the end - as to what the 'source code' exactly was - I felt it needed to be fleshed out a little bit more. But overall, a good film.

Colin George

23 May 2012

The Two Joneses

"Source Code" isn't even vaguely plausible. I try not to overthinksci-fi spitballing, but even the most preposterous premises shouldadhere to an implicit rule set. Based on a screenplay by Ben Ripley,who previously authored two direct-to-DVD "Species" flicks, this lazyfollow- up to director Duncan Jones' understated 2009 character study"Moon" is a major disappointment.Steeped in pseudo-science, "Source Code's" biggest fault is its failureto adequately explain the parameters of the titular alternate realityexperiment. Through vague governmental computer wizardry, Army Capt.Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) is uploaded into the body of acivilian aboard an ill-fated Chicago-bound commuter train and taskedwith locating a rigged explosive and its owner. To complicate matters,he only has eight minutes until impact and it's back to start.So begins a trial and error rescue mission—not to save the trainitself, but to identify the culprit and avert a looming second attack.If you're already confused, don't sweat it—Stevens is too. After everybotched attempt, he finds himself back in a dank isolation roomharnessed into an enormous machine with a video link to his commandingofficers. As he probes them for more information on his mission, healso pries out the requisite exposition about the tech.Long story short, Source Code isn't time travel. It merely relocatesStevens' consciousness into the lingering memory trail of the recentlydeceased. Cool, right? The problem is that such a heady conceptimmediately opens itself to a thousand potential plot holes. Forinstance, if Stevens is reliving the terminal eight minutes ofsomeone's life, why can he exit the train at random when the body andmind he's sharing has no frame of reference for it? How does he evenknow what the passengers two cars over look like?Even if you buy into the flawed logic of "Source Code," the filmmakingjust isn't up to snuff. Jones throws subtlety to the wind for thisantithetical take on the genre he seemed so passionate for two yearsago. He imbues the proceedings with a nondescript glossy veneer andachieves unanimously stilted performances from his cast. Characteractor Jeffrey Wright comes away looking especially bad, but Gyllenhaalis also mismanaged in the lead.It isn't their fault; Jones lacks vision and Ripley lacks talent. Thelatter in particular seems incapable of executing on even his betterideas interestingly. By his hand, Stevens' lame bomb-sniffing stratagemboils down to blindly badgering suspicious-looking commuters andeventually lucky guesswork. Maybe some will respond to his common senseapproach, but I much prefer watching characters more clever than myselfweasel their way out of trouble. For all his military training, CaptainStevens might as well have been Joe Average Passenger.A far cry from the careful construction of Duncan Jones' offbeat debut,"Source Code" is a discouragingly impersonal film shellacked withHollywood disinfectant. Worse, it's plain bad science fiction. It's ahalfhearted amalgam of films like "The Matrix" and "Inception," holdthe fresh perspective. Still, I'm not ready to count Jones out. Theyoung director had a hand in fleshing out "Moon," and will hopefullycreatively contribute more to future projects. However, as it stands,his first two features couldn't be more at odds. Taken alone, "SourceCode" is a misfire; given that it's the sophomore effort of sopromising a talent, it's a major missed opportunity.

23 May 2012

great

This review is from: Source Code [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) I was very pleased with the condition of the product and the time I received ur as well.. thank u for the sell...

oneguyrambling

23 May 2012

Interesting and creative sci-fi twist to Groundhog Day and Deja Vu.

It's easy to label Source Code as Groundhog Day crossed with Deja Vu.Easy but unavoidable.The tale of a man named Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhall) whoawakens on a train that he can't recall boarding across from a strangerwho obviously feels she knows him and swiftly learns that he is noteven in his own body has definite parallels to both films, and while itis definitely worth a look it ends up as a lesser film than both.The central premise of Source Code is that the human mind can recallwith great detail the final minutes of life - in this case the final 8.Ambitious scientist Dr Rutledge (Jeffrey Wright) has discovered amethod of jacking into the brain of a bystander and having a militaryman play through the closing minutes to see if they can funnel keyinformation back to headquarters, information that might assist inlearning about the circumstances behind the event, perhaps evensomething that might prevent future incidents.In this case Stevens is inhabiting Shaun, a teacher aboard the morningtrain to Chicago, a train that also carries an explosive device thatwill kill thousands of innocent passengers in 8 minutes time. At thepoint of explosion Stevens has his consciousness sent back to anundisclosed location where his only contact is a female soldier namedGoodwin (Vera Farmiga) who he interacts with via a monitor. In theinitial stages Stevens is quite literally in the dark, confused anddisoriented, each time he is urged to go further and try new things,but Goodwin and ultimately Rutledge seem reluctant to stray from thebriefest of scripts, something that frustrates Stevens no end. Then itis back to the train for 8 more minutes of trying to ascertain exactlywhat went on and to prevent another more serious attack on Chicagoitself.This is where the Groundhog Day scenario kicks in, though with 8minutes instead of 24 hours. Stevens learns quickly that only hisactions can differ from what actually happened, so it is like he is ina carefully scripted play where he is the only one allowed to improve.Shaun's traveling companion is a young colleague named Christina(Michelle Monaghan), and the carriage they are riding in has a group ofpassengers that over the many run throughs Stevens learns more and moreabout. Seeing as at the end of each 8 minutes the entire train-loaddies Stevens rapidly learns that there needn't be any reluctance tointerrupt, annoy and even beat down the passengers if it helpsenlighten him - they're gonna die every time anyway - but this is wherethe minor flaw in the film happens for me.Stevens makes what I feel are some boneheaded decisions repeatedly inhis many runthroughs, then in subsequent situations knowing full wellhe is on the clock he loafs through the early minutes, wasting precioustime, before charging headlong into flawed assumptions and illogicaldeductions. I realise that in a 90 minute film about one 8 minutescenario that perhaps they felt they had to pad out the running timesomewhat but I couldn't help but roll my eyes at some of the dumbthings this supposedly highly trained helicopter pilot was doing.That aside however flawed I found the actions at times Source Code hasa pretty solid premise that again is not too dissimilar from Deja Vu,which itself had vast holes in logic that required ignoring in order toenjoy the film more. That is the case here. If you think too hard aboutSource Code it is patently obvious that the whole thing makes preciouslittle sense, but neither does Star Wars, The Matrix and dozens ofother universally lauded films. Source Code is not ever going tothreaten their position as a hot topic on various message boards but itis worth a look and in the early stages while you are attempting topiece together what is going on alongside Captain Stevens it is quitecaptivating.I think the acting is a mixed bag, Farmiga is OK as Goodwin but remindsme too much of Kristen Wiig, who I find annoying. Wright channels DarthVader with his speech patterns and deeper than usual tone and Monaghanis fine in a role that basically requires her to be puzzled for atleast 6 minutes out of 8 as her train buddy acts in ways that she hasnever seen before. But obviously this is Gyllenhaal's gig, and I guesshe is fine. I don't think he quite cracks the 'leading man / hero'ranks just yet though, but in a smaller budget film like this I'll givehim a pass mark. He's definitely far more likable - or is it lesshittable? - than Shia LeBeouf.One last thing. In the dozen or so runthroughs where the early goingswere exactly the same routine the ticket lady always asks 'Shaun' forhis ticket, yet never Christina. Strange...Final Rating - 7 / 10. Sure the story doesn't hold up to closescrutiny. But I'd rather watch this implausible creativity over amillion lazy remakes and sequels. (Scream 4 anyone???)

mo mosenbaum

22 May 2012

well worth while

Finally a movie worth writing a comment about. It was original and notsome three minute remake of an existing movie or a cookie cutter pieceof crap. I like the suspense and a cast of unfamiliar faces thatdoesn't have you thinking of the last movie you saw that super famoustype cast actor in. Keeping the how and what of everything thathappened before the opening scene makes for a good way stay interestedin this film. This movie had that 12 monkey's feel to it but verydifferent. Overall I like it and would recommend this to all who wantto spend there time with quality entertainment. I hope to see moreoriginal based movies produced, as hard as that is now a days.

21 May 2012

Time-bending thriller

"Suspension of disbelief". It's an agreement between viewers and the people who take it upon themselves to entertain us. We all know its fake but put that aside for the short time they've asked for our attention. In this latest Jake Gyllenhaal film, that agreement is stretched to its absolute limit and for some, beyond. Gyllenhaal plays army captain Colter Stevens who's suddenly found himself on a train across from woman who keeps referring to him by another name. Additionally, she's talking to him as if she knows him. After a relatively short time the train meets with a catastrophe and Stevens is in a confined area staring up at a monitor being asked to explain the events. Still struggling with memory issues, he's given the assignment, "find the perpetrator", and returned to the same situation. This series of events occurs several times in a way that would more likely remind many viewers of Vantage Point, assuming there are many people who saw it. That said, it isn't intent on inspiring a debate on the time traveler's paradox or parallel universes. It's a whodunit adrenaline ride made to entertain and it does just that.

phxphil

21 May 2012

Wow, either love or hate

I'm glad I didn't read the second page of reviews before going to seethis movie or I might have had second thoughts (sorted by BEST). Iliked the movie which is very much above average when compared to someof the drivel coming out of Hollywood these days. And Waffle...youfigured out the whole movie in the first few scenes and worked on across word puzzle during the movie? If you think this makes you soundsuper smart it does the opposite. Only a fool would stay if that bored.Geeze, it's a SciFi movie, which means it doesn't have to be plausibleor real (The Fi stands for FICTION). All of you who had this criticismshould stay home and watch reality TV.

21 May 2012

5 star sci fi thriller

Everything Jake touches since Prince of persia turns to Gold.. and I'm becomming a big fan. When it comes to time travel I'm usually the authority on it, and this movie gives you clues that the technology could be just that. You will love this movie. The movie keeps you guessing on 'what is he' and that is what the movie is about.I tried to make guesses and my mind came up with something totally different. And I'm sure Jake didn't want to know either.I kept saying where is he!!!!!!!!!! What did they do to him????? And how cna he get out. And later, why would you want out?

Kenneth Turan

20 May 2012

With a twisty, mind-bending plot that frequently changes direction and occasionally overreaches, "Source Code" wouldn't work at all without a cast with the determination and ability to really sell its story.

Jason Alredge

19 May 2012

A new kind of time travel movie

I saw "Source Code" April 21st at the AMC Uptown. Jake Gythethallplayed Air Force Captain Colter Stevens who's on this experimentalmission. Now keep in mind, this is NOT time travel, it's timerealignment. Believe me, the plot hot me a bit confused too.Basically, he's sent in time, in time, into the mind of a trainpassenger which is going to explode. The real confusing thing aboutthis premise is that Stevens isn't sent to stop the explosion, but tofind the bomb and the bomber to prevent another attack. He has 8minutes to do all this, since there's this thing involving a person'sdead brain being sort of active after death, 8 minutes after death.Anyway, this project utilized this phenomenon to send sometime in analternate reality so he can find information on the bomb and thebomber.I've seen quite a bit of time travel films and those had the premise ofchanging the past to change the future. Those films really made senselooking back. "Source Code" doesn't accomplish its success this way andthat can be a bit of a problem, but is a new way of making a timetravel film.Overall, Gythathall's performance was very good. And the ending was abit of a twist, but only if you see the film about three or four times.

17 May 2012

Sci-Fi with a story

Normally CGI laden F/X films are lacking in either the f/x part, the story, the acting, or the execution or sometimes in all the areas. Here is a film which succeeds despite its vague sounding story line because it fires on all cylinders.A man wakes up in a cylinder, this man is Jake Gylenhaal, who thinks he is in Afghanistan but instead is sitting on a train to Chicago which is about to blow up in 8 minutes. He is a part of a experiment and has to continue reliving this explosion until he figures out who caused it.I found it very hard to review this film but you will not have a hard time liking it. 4 stars.

nazli lz

17 May 2012

Perfection.

This movie was so perfect that I don't even want to write about it. I'drather watch it on a loop till the end of my life, instead of wastingmy time on writing and not watching it. Yeah It's probably not gonna bethat astonishing to other people but I am just amazed. I think it'sbecause it's not only a wonderful movie but also because I have areally perfect chemistry with it. I am not a physics expert but alwaysbeen interested in. As far as I know this sci fi made perfect sense, Isaw no plot holes, other than that one scene, where Captain surfs thenet on the old lady's phone, which is super fast. :D I never seen aphone or even a computer being that fast. But maybe there will be, insome years :P I think the movie had perfect balance. Had some emotionalscenes that were well put, (no cheesiness mainly because the charactersand stories are well written) had an amazing soundtrack, liked the bitsof humor, liked all of the characters except the 'bad guy' (you'll knowwho I mean), movie had the perfect pace and interesting dialogs &scenes constantly keeping you thrilled. If I forgot to mention anythingabout the movie consider they were perfect as well. I want to give thismovie 15 out of 10. Reading a Stephen Hawking book a few weeks agomight have something to do with me falling in love with this film, Idon't think I would dislike it anyways though. I strongly suggestanyone to watch it. My friends that don't care about parallel universesand such loved it too. There are many movies about this scenario, timetravel, "body travel", quantum, etc, but this was the best.I never even liked Jake Gylenhaal before this.

evan_harvey

17 May 2012

Its okay, different, a bit dull

Lots of people seem to think this was a great film, given that it'sscored 91% on Rotten Tomatoes. I disagree. It was okay, but not great.Different, but a tad convoluted. Formulaic and a little dry. Here'swhy:Plot: Not a bad idea at all. However, the writer tried overload what isa simple story with a little too much heavy-handedness. For instance:Jake G (whatever his character's name is) wakes up from an apparentdream, and doesn't know where he is. Fair enough. So he asks "Where amI?" Also fair enough. But then it's case a case of him not being givenenough information, as if trying to keep something hidden. Well,something is being kept hidden, but it all goes on a little too long.He could have just been told what the source code idea is etc etc, butinstead this atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust is ratherartificially forced.The focus is misdirected. Rather than hiding what "source code" is,it's easier to just tell the audience, get them into the basic concept,and save your energy for the more important twists.The big "reveals" in the plot are okay, but they lack narrativestrength. The storytelling is a little muddled and formulaic. Bycreating this artificial atmosphere (undoubtedly to try to keep theaudience guessing), it takes something away from the simplestorytelling aspect. That makes the twists have less impact, I found.My attention was diverted by the faked tension, and so I couldn'tsettle into the basic plot premise as much.Characters: Pretty bland. Michelle Monaghan is very cute, although herrole was pretty limited. Jake Gyllenhaal is okay, but he's not givenmuch to work with. The others are average as well, for the most part.SFX: Nothing much. It's a relatively non-SFX film, for the most part. Idid actually see a trailer that had a bus or something explode, butthat didn't make it into the film. Maybe the story changed midway orsomething. Maybe I'm off my head and saw some different movie'strailer.Overall, it's okay and forgettable. The ending is weak, and lacks anyemotional punch. It's too unbelievable. The big screen doesn't do muchfor it, so look to catch this one on DVD. 6 out of 10.

16 May 2012

DUNCAN JONES, OPUS 2

**1/2. A serious Groundhog Day (Special 15th Anniversary Edition) revisited by Philip K. Dick. It's good but no meat on the bone.

KineticSeoul

16 May 2012

One of the best Sci-fi flick of 2011

This is a very well crafted sci-fi thriller that is fast paced to thepoint there isn't a single dull moment. In fact it wouldn't be astretch to say this is ONE of the best movies of 2011. When I first sawthe trailer to this I thought it would be a "Deja Vu" rip off andalthough it's similar in few aspects this is a different movie. Thetwist and turn in this sci-fi flick is entertaining and also intriguingto watch the outcome of it all. Jake Gyllenhaal was great in this roleand played his character in a way where you will care what happens andmakes the plot more engrossing. I won't get into the plot much sincethis is one of those films where it's best to hardly know much about itbefore seeing. But what I can say is that it's a film very worthwatching and should not be missed.8.4/10

ricburger

16 May 2012

Extremely Well Done

This is a film that defies genre labels. It's not a time travel film,but it does seem to be able to change the recent past. It's a uniqueblend of science fiction and thriller, with a little bit of romancethrown in. For me the connection between Colter and Christina reallyclicked and made me want more of these two characters. I've seen somereviews that panned the ending as being unnecessary, but after thestunning revelation a little more than midway through, they had toprovide more of a kick in the pants for the end. Definitely worked forme. Towards the end, it seemed it would end with Colter dying in avirtual reality fairy tale, and Goodwin throwing her career away tomake it happen. But we then get left with a completely altered realitythat actually works. I enjoyed this immensely.

14 May 2012

Watch out for that first step, its a doozy!

A man "awakens" on a train. A woman he doesn't recognise seems to be in mid-conversation with him.He sees a reflection of another face, not his own, in the window, and confirms this by checking in the restroom's mirror.A few minutes later the train explodes.Suddenly he's in a dark bunker. What on Earth is going on?A female military officer guides him out of his disorientation, but won't (at first) reveal the true nature of his circumstances.Before you can say "Police Box", he's back on the train.Alternating back and forth between these two "realities", the mystery is gradually revealed.This film is a bit of everything.Primarily a mystery/thriller, but with a little romance, time travel/quantum physics, military setting, punch-ups, a few laughs, and thankfully ideology-deficient.And all in all it works.I can't imagine anyone seriously disliking this film.The ending is a bit soppy, but since it's such an exceptional beauty, I'm prepared to forgive it.

ToddWebb

14 May 2012

Sci-Fi action does not disappoint!

Source Code is now added to my top 20 all-time favorite movies.This movie is excellent - if you like sci-fi. If you don't like sciencefiction, then this movie can't help you. You must be able to take aleap of faith with the premise of this story.Why this movie is fantastic and deserves your time: 1) Quick-start. Theaction begins the moment we fade-in. The very first frame of the movie- that's it, game on. And don't think this is the typical gimmick ofthen going into flashback so we can see the "setup" for the actionwhich started the story. Oh no. We simply jump into the middle of theaction. The story has already started, and we're barely grabbing on forthe ride.2) Pacing. The hero does everything you want him to do, exactly whenyou want it, in the right way, at the right time. Sometimes confused,sometimes determined and forceful - always in the same frame of mind asus, the viewers. At no time was I waiting for the hero to "catch up" tome. And at no time was I left behind while the story raced ahead of me.It's a writing skill I greatly admire.3) Characters. They are all believable. They react to situations theway you think people should react. You never "see" acting. You neversay to yourself, "Oh come on, nobody would say that." Not in thismovie.My mind was engaged every step of the way through this thriller.There's no time to rest. And there's no filler scenes.This movie has been compared to many. Source Code really stands out onits own, and is superior to most. If you liked or even mildly enjoyedsome of the other movies to which Source Code has been compared, youshould love this. Enjoy.