Source Code (2011) Poster

(2011)

User Reviews

Review this title
609 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Definitely a Sci-Fi film to remember
darkraven_10917 April 2011
The future of movies doesn't seem too bright since all we're getting are remakes, adaptations and unnecessary prequels/sequels and that's why original stuff like SOURCE CODE can really make my day.

Honestly, the trailers and initial premise didn't seem promising; some soldier can travel back in time and has to stop an some evil terrorist from bombing America. At first glance it looked more like some patriotic Steven Segal movie written by Tom Clancy with a higher budget and better actors. And then you watch it.

Like INCEPTION, this is one of the few movies that you can't spoil since even the smallest detail could accidentally reveal a twist or two. The story itself is a very original blend of thriller, sci-fi and drama and it works. Full of unseen twists and with a high octane pacing, SOURCE CODE will keep you wanting for more as each answer is slowly revealed. The script helps too but its the actors, who deliver the lines well, who drive the movie into emotional levels. My only problem with the film is some weak foreshadowing but it thankfully doesn't affect the movie in a bad way and to give any more details would spoil the film.

To keep it short and to avoid accidentally spoiling a plot detail or two, SOURCE CODE is a must watch. It's one of the few original films out there in a market full of crap and it's definitely worth your money. It's just a pity that Hollywood doesn't seem to be supporting these kinds of films.
211 out of 267 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Intellectual Thriller
TourettesPersonal8 April 2011
My first glance, I thought it's gonna be an ordinary action movie. The guy will look for the bomber, He'll find the bomber, he wants to save the girl, Eventually he saves the girl. But the movie isn't like that. The movie ends up having mysteries with unpredictably smart revelations. It's not an action blockbuster cookie cutter. It's a unique kind of movie that intrigues the whole cinema and let us enjoy the ride in a new way.

"Source Code" is not a clichéd mediocre action blockbuster. The movie avoids being predictable and wants to be smart and mind-bending. Duncan Jones isn't the kind of director who cares about the action. By the way this is his first action movie but he's smart for not making super cool unrealistic action scenes. He cares about the story. The movie have many intriguing subplots that is not easy to figure out. The movie wanted to be as smart as possible.

The performances were great. Jake Gyllenhaal made the whole game exciting. Michelle Monaghan shows her role's innocence. Vera Farmiga is obviously good in here. Jeffery Wright is the best among the four. The rest of the filmmaking, Chris Bacon's music score sounds old fashion and I liked it. The effects isn't really that great but it doesn't matter. The script is indeed smart. The movie also has a heart.

"Source Code" is as good as "Limitless". Both of them had the same reason why is it good. It's smart, intriguing(I've said this word many times in this review), and indeed original. Most action movies these days wanted to be super cool and super loud. "Source Code" doesn't really have a big action but it's more fun, made more sense and it's super smart.
277 out of 381 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Suspenseful thriller with a twist
lmelnick-999-26042411 March 2011
I was very fortunate to be at the World Premiere at SXSW in Austin and attended the Q&A after with James Duncan, Vera Farmiga, Michelle Monaghan, Jake Gyllenhaal and Ben Ripley. The story line keeps you on the edge of your seat and adds in enough humor to make it a thoroughly enjoyable experience. There is amazing, subtle chemistry between Jake and Michelle which really is the star of the film, performances by all the actors are excellent. Beautiful cinematography that will make Chicago proud. The ending brings up more questions than answers, but it feels right, so that's OK with me. I am not a big sci-fi fan, but this film delivers on romance, suspense, mystery and thrills. Highly recommended.
278 out of 392 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Excellent Thriller
drammer5620 March 2011
I have to agree with the previous reviewer. This is the best thriller I've seen in years.

Definitely kept me on the edge of my seat.

The writing is outstanding. All four principal actors do well and Gyllenhaal, especially, carries the plot forward extremely well.

At the start, I feared a stock, predictable Hollywood thriller. But soon I found myself en wrapped in Gyllenhaal's puzzle-within-a puzzle.

At the end, the Industry audience for this screening erupted in spontaneous applause.

Duncan Jones is definitely a young director to watch.

If you like thrillers, go see this film!
307 out of 438 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Superb!
slevinnn2 April 2011
What a movie. The price is worth paying. This movie gets straight to the point. You know you see a lot of movies that waste so much time getting into a story. Not this film, virtually from the off, we are there, in the film. It's like there is no beginning, but a middle and an end. Obviously you guys know the storyline so I'll not waste time telling you what it is about, just go and see it. It is a film that keeps you looking, you actually feel like you are 'in the source code' which is fantastic. The only downside to this film is that it feels short, it was 93 minutes but it simply flies by. Maybe that is a good thing? Shows how good this film was!

GO CHECK IT OUT!
266 out of 382 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
will keep you interested till the very ending
toma_kassem30 March 2011
I was looking forward to seeing " Source Code " ever since I saw the 1st trailer, and I was lucky enough to catch it in an advance screening, before it officially released here, and it just exceeded my expectations. this is the type of movies that will keep you interested till the very ending . it's probably the best sci-fi/thriller since Inception ! no big action scenes, no big explosions, no usage of unnecessary CGI, well-written story, solid performance from Mr. Gyllenhaal ( who is now officially one of my favorite actors ) and another hit from my newest favorite filmmaker Duncan Jones. don't miss it !
129 out of 195 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Duncan Jones
slayerjmk9527 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
When i saw this at a preview screening, i was not surprised to find another great film from one of the best sci-fi directors of our time; Duncan Jones, who brought us the instant classic, Moon. Source Code is in part an original movie but bears brief resemblance to Tony Scott's Action/Thriller Deja Vu. Source Code centers itself around Colter Stevens, an AFO soldier who wakes upon a train, not knowing how he got there or why and how people are addressing him as someone else, and soon enough the train explodes, supposedly killing everyone. But Stevens awakes to find himself in a kind of "machine" called the Source Code.

The whole story is fantastic, with a man (Stevens) having to go back in time and trying to find out who is behind the bombing. With even more praise is the directing, script, and the choice of actors for the roles. Jake Gyllenhaal was perfect in the role of Stevens as Jeffery Wright was for his role as Dr. Rutledge who believes everything has to go his way or the "mission" will be ruined. Overall, this is a thriller that is not to be missed. But for those who have seen this as well, i agree that if the ending was different and more powerful, the movie would be an INSTANT science fiction classic, but it falls just short of that. Still one that will be remembered for all time, in my opinion.

9/10 Stars***
117 out of 182 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Absolutely Unnecessary Coda - Contains Spoilers
fdbjr4 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I happen to see this picture yesterday, with a friend of mine, and liked it quite a bit. But it illustrates an increasing problem with big budgeted movies. Spoilers follow.

The movie opens with the hero, an Army helicopter pilot, coming to consciousness on a Chicago commuter train. He's being addressed by a pretty girl as her boyfriend. He has various interactions with other passengers. He has no idea of what's going on. As he's trying to figure out who and where he is, a bomb detonates, killing everyone.

He finds himself back in a cell, something like a space capsule. He's informed that he's just been a part of a computer simulation, that the train was blown up that morning, that he's been cybernetically linked with the remnants of one of the victims (let it go, this is science fiction), and that his mission is to ID the bomber and prevent him or her from doing more damage. The simulation repeats and he's off again, a bit wiser, and wiser with every iteration.

Now, you don't have to be an experienced science fiction reader (which I am) to figure out that the Army pilot is dead, that these computer people are hooking up his brain to the simulation. Live people don't end up inside computer programs. But this does come as a big surprise to the captain, and to the more naive members of the audience. And it does set up what should have been a really original ending.

The hero finally completes the mission, having fallen for the girl along the way. He knows he's dead, and so is she, and all this is virtual reality. He pleads with the sympathetic operator to let him redo the simulation one last time, then let him die - completely. Touched, she agrees, even though the ogre chief of the project wants to 'wipe his memory' and use him again.

And what happens in the last iteration is what should have made the movie memorable. Knowing this is his last remnant of consciousness, what he does the last time is make everyone in the train car happy. He's learned a great deal about them the other times through. He bets a comedian (whom he has recognized from television) all the money he has that he can't make everyone on the car laugh. The man takes the bet and proceeds to do just that. As the seconds tick down to the inevitable end, when they'll all be incinerated, he takes the girl in his arms, tells her he loves her, and wants to be with her forever. The frame freezes and pans the whole length of the car, revealing every passenger laughing or in various states of bliss. This is the instant that will see the hero into eternity.

Not bad, completely unexpected, and, like the best twists, revealing that the theme of the drama was something completely different than the detective story it seemed to be. It's always nice to be surprised like that. I will confess to having to deal with moist eyes constantly at movies, and this was another occasion. A perfect ending. I reached for my hat, expecting the credits to roll up, and . . . . .

. . . it wasn't over. It went on for another 15 minutes, into the most God-awful coda you ever saw, completely obliterating the premises of the story, so bad I am not going to describe it.

What goes on? My guess is that when they previewed the movie, they found that the some members of the audience were dismayed that people as cute and likable as Jake Gyllenhall and Michelle Monaghan have to suffer the fate they do. A happy ending required. I think that's what happens, given production costs and promotion costs in the tens of millions. Trusting the better sense of the audience is a thing of the past. Too much sunk cost.
239 out of 389 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A sci-fi narrative explored the traditional way
stephisthekingpin11 May 2011
Source Code is the 2nd feature film from English Director Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie). Duncan has showed audiences twice now that his narrative can be told boldly without excessive explosions and unnecessary cgi by exploring an idea and the implications it entails; which is what should be the basis of any story.

Jake Gyllenhaal is Colter Stevens, an Army helicopter pilot; Or at least he's convinced he is. After waking on a Chicago train unaware of his surroundings or Christina (Michelle Monaghan), a woman so eagerly talking to him, Colter discovers that everything is not as it seems. Following being referred to as Sean and a deep look into the bathroom mirror, Colter learns that his appearance and character on the outside is not the one he knows.

Waking as himself his real self this is, Colter finds himself talking to Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga) a scientist for an unknown organisation. Post a series of memory regaining techniques, he is informed that the commuter train he was previously on has been destroyed by a terrorist attack, which is only the beginning of disastrous attacks to follow. Colter learns that the brain of one of the victims contains memories of the last 8 minutes prior to the explosion, and by re-running those minutes they can discover their terrorist and prevent a major attack on Chicago.

An advanced computer program run by the mysterious organisation allows Colter to live the final 8 minutes and discover the terrorist before it's too late. Experiencing Déjà vu on every re-entry aboard the train, Colter can remember all of the memories of his previous visits, even though for Christina and the other passengers aboard it's happening for the first time.

Our hero begins to care for Christina, as much as any male would for any number of characters portrayed by Michelle Monaghan in recent times. Colter's ability to act upon free will within the 8 minutes produces the idea that he could positively change the outcome for himself, the passengers, the scientists and most importantly the love interest.

The mastermind behind the operation Dr. Rutledge (Jeffrey Wright) is desperate for it's success regardless of the lives it may cost along the way, which could compromise Colter's outcome. In a race to save Chicago from certain destruction Colter is destined for selfless courage.

The well casted characters are certainly above satisfaction, particularly Vera Farmiga who although is not the love interest will win the heart of the viewer. Don Burgess' photography is great, steady camera-work makes all the scenes believable despite the science of the story being absurd, but that's what makes Sci-fi so enjoyable. Perhaps it was the sound quality of the cinema I was in but I wasn't taken by Chris Bacon's Music Score it doesn't even put a notch on Clint Mansell's work collaborating with Jones on his previous film.

Whether it be a Trademark from the director or a homage to his previous film "Moon", Jones includes a subtle reference that fans will easily notice if not the first time around there's a 2nd hint.

Sci-fi in recent times continually proves that it's not a dying genre, take Christopher Nolan's Inception, acclaimed modern masterpiece or Independent sensations District 9 and Moon for e.g. Whether the viewer identifies Source Code as a Sci-fi or a thriller they will be taken on a visually pleasing experience nonetheless. Rating 4/5
57 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Those 8 minutes!!
dhruvasomayaji10 June 2011
First of us i have to say this is a brilliant stuff! Hollywood people have mastered the art of concept based movies. This one is a great testimony to their skills. This is easily the best movie of 2011 so far and a real thriller after inception.

The protagonist is the captain who is killed in a mission in Afghanistan but his body is recovered and it is used to accomplish a mission through the help of program loop called source code.

Some concepts used are programming, afterlife, quantum physics, psychology. But all are brilliantly combined to give a surreal experience. It is a fast paced flick so there is no chance of getting bored at any stage. This is a good one. Definitely worth of your time!
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Much better than expected
rgkarim2 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
At first I was expecting the source code to be a mediocre mystery that was all about reviving a dead girl. However, this was not the case at all in this movie, which was a welcome change. The Source code was a thriller that was constantly moving, constantly generating questions, and keeping the movie interesting. One of the most enjoyable aspects of this movie is the variety of traits the main character, Gylenhall, shows in the movie who has a strong sense of justice, duty, honor, and love. Unlike some movies, the main character is not an idiot pilot, and has considerable knowledge of a variety of topics, one being quantum theory. Another positive quality of this movie, is how each visit in the source code continues to build up to the climax of the movie. The constant search for new pieces of evidence is also intertwined with constant character development of the protagonist allowing you to get a better attachment to the character. Another thing I found fun was each time he came out of the code, the character and story development continue to take place, again driving the action. Now let's talk about some weaknesses of the movie: One big thing is the protagonist seems to be too perfect, his collective traits of knowing advanced quantum theory make him a little unbelievable. A second thing is the explanation and ending may be too complicated or too unreal for some audience members, though I did enjoy the ending that took place. The third flaw has been present ever since the trailer came out in which the person who bombed the train is also planning to make another attack. As a result, this automatically narrows the suspects on the train. If you keep thinking during the movie then you can figure out who it is within probably two or three visits to the code. Regardless of the weaknesses, the thought, development, and constant pace are more than enough to keep you entertained and happy. At the same time it also has some good morals built in about finding true happiness and working through the negatives of the world. Thus overall I would give this movie an 8.5-9 on my scale. I hope you enjoy as well.
53 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good sci-fi thriller, totally ruined by its ridiculous "Hollywood Happy" ending.
Dr_Sagan1 February 2017
This a very late review. I saw the movie back in 2011 and 2 other times since now in 2017.

Generally is a good sci-fi thriller that for me is ruined by its preposterous ending.

Mind though that the cinematic ending isn't the original. Hollywood producers insisted for a happy ending so they ruined the movie putting a ridiculous twist that simply doesn't make any sense.

So, go and see it. Its production is good and there is the proper amount of suspense to make it interesting. I like Michelle Monaghan's performance in this, and Jeffrey Wright's up to a point, but Jake Gyllenhaal is looking to nervous in the lead.
21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The train now arriving at platform 4 is running 8 mins late
neodante2316 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Went to a London preview screening of the film and found it a very enjoyable sci-fi thriller, with the repetitive time loop device having enough variation each time around to keep the viewer hooked.

Only those with a degree in quantum physics might understand the science behind it but essentially this whodunit mystery with Jake as our protagonist (Airforce Captain, Colter Stevens) trying to find out who caused a bomb on the train is an attention grabbing ride. Initially Colter confusion about what's happening to him is a bit drawn out at first but important in light of events later on in the film which reveal what the source code is and how he is being sent through time.

There is a twist to the film although cannier viewers than me might summarise this early on however and this is built up gradually. when the real situation is revealed it is a poignant moment and really anchors the predicament of Jake with the viewer.

I'm almost certain that everyone who leaves the film will be pondering the same question and that is whether Duncan Jones' movie would have made a more lasting (albeit darker) impression if ended at a crucial moment in the last act of the movie. Who knows what the original ending was conceived to be but in this case I think it's fair to say its the destination rather than the journey that could have elevated this to something extra. Still I would say 'all board' to those of you meaning to catch this.
93 out of 158 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Source Code - Does it live up to Moon?
Klenic31 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Oh, how we all love us some good old fashioned Contained Action- Thrillers! Last year we got the dreadful but noteworthy "Unstoppable" - in which our two heroes stationed themselves inside a moving train in an attempt to stop an unmanned freight train heading toward a city. Let it be noted, that film is nothing like Source Code. No sir, not one bit. What is Source Code, you ask? Think something along the lines of Die Hard/Groundhog Day/Clue-The board game, in a nutshell.

So, what makes this film different? It's smart, focused, and suspenseful. Whereas in Unstoppable, we pretty much knew where the whole deal was heading. But we're not talking about that film. This is Source Code, and i'm going to tell you straight up, this flick is the best film this year SO FAR.

Source Code begins with our lead character, Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhall), waking up on a Chicago commuter train, opposite Christina (Michelle Monaghan) a woman whom we sense he's never met, talking to him as if they've known each other some time. Immediately after, we learn that he's a Helicopter pilot for the US Army, and that he in fact has never met this woman before. He has no clue how he's gotten to where he is, or why. All he knows is that this woman apparently knows him well, and thinks his name is 'Sean'. Confused by all of this, he goes to the bathroom, only to find that the person in the mirror isn't him, it's someone else. As us, the audience, try to process all of this information in our mind, the train abruptly explodes into flames, killing everyone on board.

The opening immediately attaches you to the story, with the great score, unsettling tone, and disorienting editing. It also leaves us with tons of questions: What the hell just happened? Who is Christina? Who is this 'Sean' Character? Why is Colter in this situation?

Then Colter wakes up again, but now in a dimly lit cement capsule, alone, talking to fellow soldier Goodwin. We discover that the commuter train he was just on was destroyed by a terrorist bomb earlier that day, and that there may be an even larger attack that could destroy Chicago. We also learn that he's a participant in an experimental Army intelligence program that allows him to continually relive the last eight minutes of one of the train's passengers life (Sean), in order to find the bomb and the terrorist who has threatened the larger attack in the heart of Chicago.

And like Groundhog Day, he experiences the same events over and over again, remembering each and every one. Giving him the chance to inspect every suspicious passenger, as well as getting to know Christina a bit more a long the way, and eventually beginning to care for her safety. But unfortunately, all of the these people are already dead, they only exist in the parallel universe of the 'Source Code'. Every eight minutes he's warped back to the capsule, where he is debriefed by Jeffery Wright and Vera Farmiga's characters, then sent back into the Source Code.

The science behind the film is very far-fetched, so it's up to you, the viewer, to let go and let Duncan Jones and his crew take over your mind for an hour and a half. And he promises a very intense thrill ride that will definitely be memorable in the future as a very intelligent and unique take on the contained thriller. Nevertheless, there definitely are plot-holes in the film, and the ending is maybe too subtle for the everyday sci-fi fanatic. But i believe it's safe to say that this film succeeds in almost every category, with the constant suspense and mystery, great action sequences, and the amazing score. Source Code keeps you guessing throughout, anticipating who the bomber could be. The very definition of High Concept.

Source Code is well deserved full price worthy movie that hopefully will become a box office success as well. God knows Hollywood doesn't put out enough original material like this anymore.

  • J.G.
84 out of 142 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Doesn't just insult your intelligence, it violently assaults it
JoeManko13 August 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This movie doesn't just have plot holes, the whole thing IS one giant, gaping plot hole. There are too many nonsensical story elements to list, but here are the two biggest ones:

1 – What IS the source code exactly?

They say it creates alternate realities based on 8 minutes of a dead guy's memory. How can you create an entire fully-interactive alternate reality based on somebody's MEMORY? (Which is by definition something fixed that can't be changed or interacted with.) The whole idea just profoundly doesn't make sense on a fundamental level.

In fact, how do you create an alternate reality AT ALL? (Regardless of whether it's somehow based on a dead guy's memory or not.) They just toss that ability off casually, like it's no big deal: "Oh yeah, we can create alternate realities now. Neat, huh? We're not going to explain it or even remotely get into the logic behind it…"

Creating alternate realities and being able to recover the last 8 minutes of a corpse's memory are two concepts that have absolutely NOTHING inherently in common. It's just a sloppy juxtaposition of random junk sci-fi ideas.

2 – Why do both Stevens and his commanders think the person detonating the bomb is ON THE TRAIN WHEN IT BLOWS UP?!

Stevens spends almost all his time looking for the culprit on the train, primarily during the longer period after the last stop is made before the explosion hits, which makes absolutely no sense. Obviously the person responsible can't have blown himself up if they're so sure he's about to strike again later in the day.

If he had even basic deductive reasoning skills, Stevens would have always gotten off the train when it stopped and suspected only the people who got off with him. (And on a bigger level, no solid reason is ever given for why his commanders are so incredibly sure the suspect was even on the train ANYWHERE CLOSE to that 8 minute window he keeps visiting to begin with…)

So in short: Not only does this movie make no sense, it doesn't even seem like it's TRYING to make sense. It just feels like the filmmakers are giving you the finger and yelling "eat it, you morons!" for the entire running time.
113 out of 197 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Hollywood recycles
imdb2-556-9239837 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Source Code has a powerful trailer, setting up some intriguing questions to be answered and hinting at three plots: inside the virtual reality, outside it, and an interplay between these two that should solve some crucial points. Unfortunately, the film itself contains absolutely nothing that isn't already in the trailer. I saw the film with my wife. She fell asleep in the middle, woke up half an hour later and asked me "was he on the train again?" to which I answered "several times". "What did I miss?" "Absolutely nothing." The whole movie is an exercise in wasting time by a screen-writer whose ideas ran out shortly after he thought up a great trailer (read: sales pitch. I can almost hear it: "Inception meets Groundhog Day, and all happening entirely inside the Inner Space capsule!". Unfortunately, other than recycling from the exceedingly overdone "virtual reality" movie genre, this film has nothing). There is only one plot: "whodunit?", and that plot progresses nowhere, and is finished when the question is answered by the first candidate the audience suspects, but the last the protagonist bothers checking. The ending of the movie, on the other hand, is so bad I dare not even blame the poor screenwriter. It must have been the work of a focus group. Whatever its source, it is lame and unconvincing. Do not expect any of the questions posed by the trailer to be answered. They are not.

I see this movie as an homage to Quantum Leap. The classic "stranger in the mirror" scene is featured, and even Scott Bakula is called in to deliver his famous "Oh, boy". (The scene where this happens is, itself, a testament to the emotional inconsistency of the film: the last thing the hero does is the one thing he keeps telling everybody he wants to do.)

My verdict: Quantum Leap deserves so much better than this.
80 out of 147 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Lots of promise -- weak weak delivery
gregmalone111 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Despite the generally rave reviews Source Code has gotten, I found it to be far less than I was expecting and wanting.

To get to the point, though I am a lifelong lover of science fiction, I tend to be put off by science fiction films where the "science" comes across as something conceived and explained by a poorly educated non-scientist grabbing buzz words out of thin air. Source Code falls apart in the "science coherence" realm for me, and thus I find the film fundamentally flawed. A side note to that, I had had the impression that Source Code was a 'time travel' story, but no, they put that hoped for idea to rest quickly by the lead "scientist" mumbling something about this *not* being time-travel but rather he gives a mumbo-jumbo-buzz-words-what- did-he-say lame and confusing explanation.

Then the film suffers from a terrible supporting cast. The cardboard cutout characters that communicate with the main character have as much depth and value as... cardboard. The lead scientist is a stereotype guy rummaging around in his lab coat being indifferent to his 'subject', while the military liaison that is the prime communicator with the main character is dealt a very poor script and no depth. By the time she does her "save-the-hero" act near the end, who cares.... there's been no establishment of character other than a face on a video monitor with no backstory (except a crumb near the end).

Don't get me started on the CGI... the train explosions and other effects --- which were minimal. A trained eye will quickly identify the CGI effects as being... budget oriented. Nuff said.

Honestly, I'd save my $15 that it'll cost at the theater and wait for DVD or Netflix. Despite a good performance by Jake G., Source Code is a lame film, poorly written and directed without inspiration.
47 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Combination of Several Successful Films that Works
claudio_carvalho27 November 2011
The US Army helicopter pilot Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) awakes in a commuter train to Chicago in the body of a professor named Sean Fentress, and his last memory is flying in Afghanistan. A woman named Christina Warren (Michelle Monaghan) talks to him; there are minor incidents in the wagon and eight minutes later, the train blows-up.

Captain Stevens wakes up in a coffined in a sort of trunk and is contacted by the military Lieutenant Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga). He learns that he had died in a helicopter crash and now he is inserted in a computer program called Source Code, developed by Dr. Rutledge (Jeffrey Wright), which transfers him to the body of a deceased person for the last eight minutes of his life using his after images. He is advised that he can not change the past, since Source Code is not a time machine, but he can reassign time and change the future. He is assigned to return to the train and find who the bomber is to avoid his next terrorist attack in Chicago downtown. Captain Stevens is sent back several times and he and Christina fall in love with each other. He decides to save the train from the explosion despite Dr. Rutledge tells him that that is effort is worthless.

I saw the trailer of "Source Code" a couple of months ago and I was anxiously waiting for its release on DVD in my country. Yesterday I saw it and the story is a flawed combination of several other films; despite of that, the film is engaging and works.

The character Captain Colter Stevens is visibly inspired in "Johnny Got His Gun" (1971) and his situation entering the body of someone else is the same of "Avatar" (2009) and "Surrogates" (2009), using the virtual concept of "The Matrix" (1999). The repetition of the same event over and over comes from "Groundhog Day" (1993) and "12:01" (1993). The different possibilities in timeline come from "Przypadek" (1981) and "Sliding Doors" (1998) and "The Butterfly Effect" (2004). Therefore, the writer Ben Ripley shows a great cinematographic culture in sci-fi and does the same that Quentin Tarantino does in action films, a rip-off that works.

The director Duncan Jones, from the best sci-fi of the Twentieth-First Century ("Lunar") so far, makes another great film in his second work, supported by the excellent performances of Jake Gyllenhaal, Vera Farmiga, Michelle Monaghan and Jeffrey Wright.

I watched this film with other viewers and in the end, we found two different interpretations for the conclusion of "Source Code". I believe that Captain Stevens has changed the timeline in the real world and the Source Code has never been used, in a time paradox. However, if my interpretation is right, Christina Warren should have been saved in one of Steven's attempt. The other interpretation is that he shifted his timeline to a parallel reality. No matter which interpretation is the correct one, everybody liked this very entertaining film. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Contra o Tempo" ("Against the Time")
18 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
clarification of ending
liguori-nick31 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
okay so i thought i would clear this up for most of you. the ending isn't about creating the alternate universes but what they are doing is changing the time line.

at the end when the guy tells Dr. Rutledge (the inventor of source code) that the terrorist attack on the train has been stopped and he says "one of these days the right crisis is going to rear its head and source code is going to have its moment in the sun" which means that the inventor doesn't really understand whats going on in reality source code always works every time without fail but they never remember that it works because when it does work and they attack is stopped they do not have start the source code program.

that is that the text at the end is about the really Sean sends Goodwin the text telling her when they start the source code up to tell colter that he will be okay this is also why she is confused because in the real time line Sean figures out how to disarm the bomb, handcuffs the terrorist to the train, and calls he police (he knows all of this because of the source code from the time line that is portrayed throughout almost all of the movie) after that he walks off with his girlfriend (or friend w/e) which is why they never know he was the real one that actually saved everyone

which kinda brings it into loop because now the attack is stopped they will wait till then next attack arises where they can use it, which they will and they will succeed again change the time line and not need to use source code till the next attack.

in summary source code always changes the time line so basically it always works and they never have to use it.

another way you could think of it is that colter from separate time lines gives 8 minutes of memories to people filled with information to stop terrorist attacks. the Sean on the train would suddenly have memories from a serperate time line that the train explodes so he had have the ability to stop it. this is what colter is doing to people

personally what i would like to know is does Goodwin frequently receive texts from random numbers telling her to tell colter hes going to be okay when they start the program and that source code works better than they know

after receiving many of these texts from random people who no way could know about the classified project she must eventually figure out that source code is always working because all terrorist attacks would stop completely and she would be receiving these texts every time the program worked and the time line was changed
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bad. Terrible. Awful. Repugnant. Unacceptable. Stupid.
neaonbhb21 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
OK so Gyllenhal is good in this movie. Lets get that out of the way first. Now onto the roast.

What a terrible steaming pile of dung this movie is. It simply makes NO sense. Lets examine the two possibilities for the "world" that they are operating in.

In the first, they have developed code that allows them to put a person's consciousness into the body of someone else in a mock-up of the world as it was at that time an infinite number of times. Fine - Where did this mock-up come from? They implied that it was from the the guy who Gyllenhal is inhabiting, but the train exploded... his brain would be peanut butter (along with everyone else on that train). OK so lets say magically his head got tossed away from the train and they retrieved it, how exactly does this guy manage to have complete knowledge of everything that exists in that world? He didn't go into the bathroom and open the ceiling and find the bomb there, so there would be nothing there in his version of the world. He either got off the train or stayed on it, so there's no way he could know what happened after the point that the train moved on. He might continue to believe that the Middle- Eastern stereotype guy was the terrorist - there's no way he could have any knowledge of what happened after those two events diverged. So of course, the virtual world example is ridiculous and makes no sense.

Alright so what about the idea that it is an alternate reality? This is even harder to believe. If its an alternate reality then of course there is no way to believe that the events would have unfolded in the same way as in the reality the movie takes place in. Every alternate would be different and none would reliably provide information about the reality of the movie. The guy that Gyllenhal "inhabits" maybe doesn't even exist in the alternate reality. Maybe he died of cancer. Maybe he works in Japan. Maybe he called in sick today. Who knows???

If its a virtual construct then all the information is already there, just parse the data. If its an alternate reality then by the definition of the word ALTERNATE you can't rely on it being even marginally similar to your reality. And if its time travel you could literally send him back an infinite number of times in succession. Just by the odds you would eventually get the data you needed by reading his brain (which is silly by itself, don't get me started...)

And then there is the annoying obfuscation that moves the plot along but is entirely unnecessary for the movie. There's no need to hide facts from Gyllenhal's character -- Just tell him what he's doing! There's no need to get his permission -- Just send him back! Why the writers play these stupid games with their audience I haven't a clue.

Stop being stupid movie-going zombies! Be critical! Ask questions!

If you keep consuming this kind of crap and saying its a filet mignon, the studios will continue to feed you CRAP.
75 out of 145 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It's not Deja Vu all over again, because Deja Vu was a good film
Critomaton3 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Here's a simple review of Source Code: If you didn't like Deja Vu, with Denzel Washington, you'll probably hate Source Code. In fact, if you loved Deja Vu you'll probably still hate Source Code.

SC doesn't work on any level. The explanation of the sci-fi tech is lazy - it doesn't work hard enough to warrant the suspension of disbelief you'd need to invest yourself in the story.

The characters are so clichéd it's too embarrassing to even talk about them. Suffice it to say that they're phonier and more unbelievable than the quantum physics technobabble.

The hero finds the bomb in the first place he looks. Yawn. The bomber is the last person he suspects but the first person Hollywood would suspect. Yawn.

The super-secret, billion-dollar, experimental quantum physics project at an Air Force base is run by a nebbishy civilian professor, one technician, and Vera Farmiga. Groan.

Did Jake Gyllenhall change the past in his universe, the future in a parallel universe, or what? Who cares?

Howard Stern Tweeted about this movie "it was great." He is known for questionable taste in movies, so I wasn't sure what to do with that review. I figured going in that the lack of an exclamation point was intentional sarcasm. After seeing this turkey, I sure hope it was.
82 out of 161 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Illogical, disappointing
don-vaidasas16 April 2011
The hole technology on which movie's story is based was conflicting with the story itself so badly that it ruined the movie (even for a sci-fi lover as myself). And it comes in 15min.. I tried to forget that illogical details and enjoy the movie, but the end just "killed" me. If the movie would end 10 minutes earlier, I would put much better vote. But now the movie could be rated good only if you didn't understand the hole concept then comes "wow - how nice...", but if you follow the story and have logical thinking - you'll be very disappointed. The acting wasn't so bad as many reviewers said, the hole story was a bit banal and in such case you can't act neither brilliant neither bad.
16 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Best review about this movie, yet
oxygenus25 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This movie shamelessly uses computer science (specifically computer programming) jargon (about 5-10 terms, like "specification", "drivers", "Source Code", etc) for a completely different purpose. For the kind of arrogant bullshit this movie presents (which is NOT science fiction, it's the new genre: bullshit fiction) it should be banned for reasons of subculture and attacking the sanctity of computer science, the most advanced and helpfull science we've got, the pinacle of civilization.

The dialog is complete bs, not just because of the misused jargon, but mainly because it tries hard to be militaristic and "sf" (trust me, it's actually bullshit fiction).

The special effects are not there. Even if the train crash is played repeatedly, it's just some fire covering the train, and lots of noise. That's about it. Nothing more to see. No train wrecks, no real accident. NOTHING.

The final scene tries to be something like the "Matrix Effect" with the camera moving around while everything is still. Unfortunately it is just a collage of people's pictures and the "camera" just zooms out (train background, people's pictures). It is so obvious, it shouldn't have been done. It's not 2011 worthy.

The plot is made of holes: - How can a human mind have enough information about every single corner on that train, including contents of books, or what's concealed in the ceiling (note that the attacked did not die in the train wreck)? - Even if we supposed that maybe they reconstructed the information from all the dead people, there still wouldn't be enough to "mimic" people's reactions (the information was reconstructed from a single person) - If the "big bad quantic theory bullshit computer" already had the information about the train and it's "contents", then it already knew where the bomb was. Why was it necessary for the wimpiest soldier ever in cinema to play with to find out where it was? -How in hell did the main character sent a SMS message from one parallel world to another (also there's a moral issue about taking that teacher's life/place - so he can be with that girl). -The nuclear "bomb" is so small (smaller than a little TV). Wtf, nuclear bombs are huge. They don't fit into a little box, and don't have Christmas lights on them.

There is a lot of propaganda about "terrorism" and it actually contains brain washing patriotic stuff like reasons for a soldier to die for his country (for example, it is told to the soldier, that he must stay alive and keep fighting (searching) so he can serve his country, by finding out where bomb which will kill the entire city of Chicago).

The soundtrack, the acting, the camera moves and general pace of the movie try to create a state of suspense. It did work for idiots, didn't work for the rest of the audience (you don't want to know the kind of people like the movie, I interrogated a lot, and really, only complete idiots).

Please stop making movies like these. At least invent your own words for the kind of bs you present. When I heard "charge the drivers" I was gonna leave the cinema, too bad I was with someone else.
87 out of 179 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Uninspired, half-baked thriller left me clock watching
Skullbussa2 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
A tired movie begets a tired movie review.

Look, I just left this film feeling like somewhere, some tiny speck of original thought crept into the screenwriter's head when he was writing this movie: The film does make the audience think. A brain puzzle in the same vein as the (much) superior "Inception", this film just constantly reminds the viewer how we are in the hands of mediocre talents who are too lazy to see an idea through and rely upon tired concepts to caulk together a story.

There is no need to poke holes in the pseudo-science surrounding the out-of-body concept employed in Source Code; it is immediately self- contradictory as our protagonist wanders into areas (train station, other train cars) that his host never did and therefore could not have known for Colter to experience. Unlike Inception, which doggedly follows its own rules of dreams, the world of this film writes, breaks, and re-writes the rules.

But this really isn't the biggest problem with the movie. The biggest problem is the ridiculous and ham-fisted approach Colter takes to finding the bomber. He thuggishly roughs up a variety of passengers, wasting the viewer's time with red herring after red herring. Our director wastes a golden opportunity to weave one hell of a whodunit and instead spends precious time trying to develop a love story nobody gives a hoot about.

I do not feel that I know anything more about these characters at the end of the film as I do at the beginning and I certainly don't care about them any more either. What could have been the emotional high point of the film, a phone call that Colter places to his father, is handled so poorly that I threw in the towel and just waited for the lights to come on.
25 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Unbelievably bad
vodkaanimal30 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I can't believe just how bad the movie was. It's totally worthless at both its "action" and at its "meaning" level. It's not just that the plot's ideas are far-fetched. They're not even consistent or logical.

E.g. how could it be possible to construct a whole parallel world from just memories of a handful of people? At some point we learn that "some part" of the main character's brain is "still functioning". It would be absolutely impossible to undertake the complex cognitive tasks he does with just "some part" of his brain. Etc, etc.

As for the "meaning", what was it supposed to be? That we should learn to care about every moment of our lives? That there exist worlds parallel to ours? That we should love our neighbors? Whatever it was, it's an utter cliché. It's hard to believe someone in Hollywood accepted this script. Obviously they consider viewers idiots. I hope they are not right.
42 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed