Source Code

Sad Professor

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/summit/sourcecode/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kvn39RA1aok

distraction

i really liked moon, and i mean every thing about it. Hope "everything will be ok" [sorry] with this ...dont really like Jake Gyllenhaal myself

krudler

looks alright, all a bit Quantum Leap though, and the trailer gives away too much.

Goodshape

I always take a lengthy trailer like that to be a bad sign :-/.

Does look interesting though.

Sad Professor

The script was pretty good. Very tightly written. However, it's clear from the trailer that there's been a few changes from the draft that got leaked online. Nothing major though. The studio probably got their mitts on the ending, but no big deal.

Jones didn't write this, but unless he screwed up, I'm expecting a slightly more mainstream version of Moon. That film had a fairly simple script, brilliantly executed. I think this has the potential to be the same.

Banjaxed82

Yeah, thought the script was pretty good (Ripley's original), but it looks like it's gone through the usual Hollywood homogenising here to some extent.

L31mr0d

Ned? Ned Ryerson? BING! Watch out for that first step it's a dooooozy.

Mickeroo

Woops,didn't see the other thread. Looks good, trailer gives away way too much though.

johnny_ultimate

I think I'll ignore the trailer if it gives a lot away, but I'm very curious to see what Jones does next. Also: Michelle Monaghan in a potentially decent film is good enough for me.

Phony Scott

I'm thinking extended 'Twilight Zone' episode. I'll wait and see, but it doesn't look anywhere near as good as 'Moon'

expectationlost

trontrainception

Vokes

Clint Mansell is doing the score as well. Nice.

EDIT: Shades of Deja Vu about the trailer as well.

Richard Dower

Looks like Groundhog Day, i really dislike Michelle Monahan though!....Vera is ok.

Duggy747

What's the bet

Jake's character is the bomber

:pac:

Phony Scott

Duggy747 wrote: »

What's the bet

Jake's character is the bomber

:pac:

Agh! Worst. Ending. Ever. :P

If it ends like that, we'll presume you had some hand in writing the film!

robby^5

Looks great, is it still supposed to be set in the same universe as Moon?

Galvasean

robby^5 wrote: »

Looks great, is it still supposed to be set in the same universe as Moon?

TBH I hope it isn't. Sounds to me like a pointless gimmick.

AnonoBoy

robby^5 wrote: »

Looks great, is it still supposed to be set in the same universe as Moon?

No I don't think it's anything to do with that trilogy that was talked about.

JP Liz V1

Jake Gyllenhaal seems too young to play the lead imo

expectationlost

presume this is his hollywood 'i can do a movie' movie and get onto making his own stuff soon, wasn't he supposed to do be doing something about submarine?

JP Liz V1

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=30253

^ New Trailer out

Basq

This is being released both in the US and UK this weekend, and has been getting some pretty damn good reviews too!

The second feature film from Duncan Jones, whose debut was the excellent 'Moon'.. and he's David Bowie's son don't-cha-know!

The trailer doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkTrG-gpIzE

IMDb

An action thriller centered on a soldier who wakes up in the body of an unknown man and discovers he's part of a mission to find the bomber of a Chicago commuter train.

chin_grin

Really?

But yeah, saw the trailer and can agree that it doesn't make me want to go see it. I think it's the sci-fi-with-a-love-story-pinned-on that I can't stand.

Basq

chin_grin wrote: »

Really?

Balls.. I knew there'd be a thread on it but did a search and:



Fuggin' hate the new search! :mad:

chin_grin wrote: »

But yeah, saw the trailer and can agree that it doesn't make me want to go see it. I think it's the sci-fi-with-a-love-story-pinned-on that I can't stand.

Yeah, nor me.. but I read a couple of great reviews.

The Guardian gave it a particularly glowing review (5/5).. but I wouldn't rely on The Guardian for movie reviews to be honest.

chin_grin

Basq wrote: »

Fuggin' hate the new search! :mad:

I use the "search forum" drop down on the main page...y....bit.....thing.

It struck me as a Groundhog Day meets The Matrix. I'll reserve my opinion til I see it though.....the trailer could be misleading.

Sad Professor

Merged.

The new search is kinda useless until we can search for threads and not just posts.

Magic Eight Ball

I enjoyed it for the most part but I think it ultimately fell short.
It's definitely a step into more mainstream cimena for Jones. Let's hope he doesn't wonder too far down this path.

+ Michelle Monaghan is a fox!

Renn

Extremely disappointing, and this is coming from someone who enjoyed Moon. And the ending was f*cking horrific and seemed to end at the 'wrong' time. Sorry for the short comment but just wanted to register my dissatisfaction with it.

4/10

Sad Professor

I'm in work all weekend but might take off early on Monday to see it. There's f**k all else on in the cinema at the moment.

nyarlothothep

Quantum leap guy ie Scott Bakula play the voice of the protagonists father! I thought that was a nice touch given how it basically rips off the premise of QL.

Maybe I got it wrong but I don't think there were any parallel universes, it was a time loop scenario, she killed him because she received the message from him in the past which he was sent back to, at the end of the film we see it happening all over again, where he sends the message in his last journey to the past which she agreed to send him back to because she gets the message from him in the past which she sent him back to. Basically there were no parallel universes because if there were she would never have received the message in order for the loop to be sustained, unless its like a ripple effect where multiple parallel universes are generated as a result of the loop each with their own self consistent loops as a result of sending him back in the original universe? Thats assuming that time travel actually occurred, otherwise how would he be able to see things and go places like off the train, into the vents, which Sean would never do? If its a computer simulation he may have just transferred his mind into the source code and is living out a reality which he thinks is real, containing the time loop. In which case nothing in the film is real but just a coding loop with Coulter living out a simulated reality which raises questions as to whether the bombing actually occurred, whether Coulter was really dead etc.

Also does he really die or does his mental pattern become fused once his own brain dies. Or does he replace him entirely as a persona? Or does he just die? I ask this because its kinda ambiguous, hes still a little bit too happy at the end like a guy being given a second chance at life, he says look at the world, isn't it beautiful or something like which echoes the earlier stuff he said before giving the comedian money.

Ultimately a competent hollywood actioner with some intelligent scripting. Can't expect more much from it, its not a classic or a paradigm shifting film, its just well made fare.

Crapjob Sean

Well made but completely preposterous.
The setup scenario is highly tenuous to start with, then to pull a major switcheroo on the whole thing near the end. Makes the whole thing stupid.

I think I agree with @nyarlothothep there, but any type of close examination you subject this film to causes almost every part of it to collapse.

krudler

I liked it, some good moments and a cool premise.

Fysh

I enjoyed 3/4 of Source Code as a reasonably made high-concept film, and then it suddenly turned into a Meg Ryan film, with the sort of ending that seems to misunderstand its own internal logic (

If the Source Code program does in fact generate a new reality each time it runs, then during the course of the film's events dozens of realities have been created in which shedloads of people not only die on the train but also in the aftermath of the dirty bomb

).

Between the uninteresting aspect of the love story (which was second only to The Time Traveller's Wife in terms of tedious & boring love stories portrayed in sci-fi films recently), and the failure to even pretend to examine

the motivations of the domestic terrorist whose actions propel the film's events

, it feels like a wasted opportunity.

sboyle01

Renn wrote: »

Extremely disappointing, and this is coming from someone who enjoyed Moon. And the ending was f*cking horrific and seemed to end at the 'wrong' time. Sorry for the short comment but just wanted to register my dissatisfaction with it.

4/10

I enjoyed the film but totally agree about the ending. I believe it should have ended a bit earlier, they really over-complicate things at the end.

Hank_Jones

4/10, that's quite harsh.

Thought it was quite good tbh.
The whole film is a bit of a stretch, but really, it's science fiction, who cares?
If you want something based in fact, go watch a biog.

I really liked the special effects as they only used close ups and distant shots of the train exploding, ie they knew what they were doing.

Ok, it's not as good as Moon, but I honestly don't see how people can say that it isn't a good film.

dr.bollocko

I really thought this movie was just a big pile of dumb.
The villain of the piece is nothing more than a necessity for a plot point which was particularly annoying. His line of dialogue where he explains his motivation was absolutely hilariously bad.
It sort of trundled along at a pacey enough rate to keep you vaguely entertained in the cinema however I think 4 out of 10 is fair enough considering.

Fysh

dr.bollocko wrote: »

I really thought this movie was just a big pile of dumb.
The villain of the piece is nothing more than a necessity for a plot point which was particularly annoying. His line of dialogue where he explains his motivation was absolutely hilariously bad.
It sort of trundled along at a pacey enough rate to keep you vaguely entertained in the cinema however I think 4 out of 10 is fair enough considering.

Yeah, the handling of the villain was awful. It would have been better not to have that conversation at all, frankly. The whole film felt like an attempt at a sort of apologetic "science fiction for people who don't like science fiction" film, with the obligatory uplifting ending and love story bolted on so that the Friday night dat audience will go to see it. A big load of meh, from a director whose previous film was considerably better. Oh well. Hopefully this is just a blip and not an indicator of what to expect from him in future...

dr.bollocko

I thought there were things which if expanded upon could have improved the film drastically.

The pod was in his mind and changed a couple of times throughout the film. I was waiting for the film to make more use of that in the context of his imagination / journey. And that never happened.

Outkast_IRE

I really enjoyed it , thought it flew and kept me glued to the screen, but like with most sci fi if you think about it too long you spot plot holes and problems etc.
7/10 for me

Josey Wales

I'm surprised that people are being so harsh on this film. I thought it was thoroughly enjoyable. It wasn't just a big dumb action film with lots of fancy effects and no story. It leaves you with something to think about if you like to think a bit deeper about what you've just seen.

It was a rare case of a film being far better than the trailer promised. Normally it is the opposite.

xalot

It didn't do anything for me. I really loved Moon but found this a bit boring.

Gyllenaal did very well with the material, I thought, especially the scenes on his own in the capsule.

fluke

Donnie Darko 2: Jake's on a Train

Magic Eight Ball

The ending is a cheat and cheapens what comes before it. I was also a little baffled that the audience is supposed to care about a relationship between two people when one of them is being so heavily deceived about the nature of their relationship.
+

At what point did it turn into a time-travel movie??

sboyle01

Is he living on as himself or the other guy at the end? If it's the other guy how could he get fool people. eg. job, family, personality etc.

Fysh

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

+

At what point did it turn into a time-travel movie??

The ending smacked very much as "A lot of viewers won't care that you've tried to set the rule of this being a way to see the past, not change it - so how about we have a twist where in the end you can change the past? And by the way, in case you're wondering - that's not a question, we're doing it."

sboyle01 wrote: »

Is he living on as himself or the other guy at the end? If it's the other guy how could he get fool people. eg. job, family, personality etc.

He's living as the teacher, with the teacher's face and identity. I did wonder the exact same thing myself - the bit where he points out that he has no money (because he gave his cash to the comedian on the train) had me thinking "HAH! Let's see you use an ATM with Sean's bankcard, smart-ass!"

Josey Wales

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

+

At what point did it turn into a time-travel movie??

Fysh wrote: »

The ending smacked very much as "A lot of viewers won't care that you've tried to set the rule of this being a way to see the past, not change it - so how about we have a twist where in the end you can change the past? And by the way, in case you're wondering - that's not a question, we're doing it."

I had a totally different understanding of the ending.

I don't think there was any time travel. In the e-mail at the end Jake's character says that the Source Code experiment goes further than they thought. The Jake that was on the train who stopped the bomber is now living in one reality where the bomb never exploded and this realities Jake never has to get sent to stop the bomb.

There is another reality out there where Jake used Source Code to stop the bomb and then died with Goodwin turned off his life-support.

Outkast_IRE

Josey Wales wrote: »

I had a totally different understanding of the ending.

I don't think there was any time travel. In the e-mail at the end Jake's character says that the Source Code experiment goes further than they thought. The Jake that was on the train who stopped the bomber is now living in one reality where the bomb never exploded and this realities Jake never has to get sent to stop the bomb.

There is another reality out there where Jake used Source Code to stop the bomb and then died with Goodwin turned off his life-support.

Exactly what the ending was , anyone with notions of any alternatives are simply wrong , its a pretty clearly explained ending in that way .

Also felt the same way at the end wondering how the frick this guy is gonna be able to teach the guys subjects at work, access money, form family relationships.

sboyle01

Spoiler -

Also, the teacher is a goner in both realities. In one he blows up in the train and in the other he is taken over by Jake. Unlucky.

Fysh

Josey Wales wrote: »

I had a totally different understanding of the ending.

I don't think there was any time travel. In the e-mail at the end Jake's character says that the Source Code experiment goes further than they thought. The Jake that was on the train who stopped the bomber is now living in one reality where the bomb never exploded and this realities Jake never has to get sent to stop the bomb.

There is another reality out there where Jake used Source Code to stop the bomb and then died with Goodwin turned off his life-support.

Well, that was my point (though looking at my previous post I can see where the confusion could creep in.

The source code experiment actually does create "new" realities, or at least allow the one-way transition of consciousness between different worlds. But this means that all the worlds depicted throughout the film where Jake fails to stop the bomb exploding are *also* real, which is completely glossed over in the film's ending.

TL;dr - The many worlds interpretation of quantum theory doesn't make for a happy ending unless you ignore most of its implications.

When I said "change the past" I only meant that in terms of someone who hasn't really understood the film and is approaching it with the same perspective as, say, the Back to the Future films. Though given the tag line on the posters they didn't exactly help themselves with how they marketed it...

sboyle01 wrote: »

Spoiler -

Also, the teacher is a goner in both realities. In one he blows up in the train and in the other he is taken over by Jake. Unlucky.

Heh, that hadn't occured to me but yeah, good point. Just another aspect of the ending that doesn't really work in the context presented for it unless you deliberately ignore implications of what you've been shown throughout the film...

OutlawPete

I found it enjoyable, good popcorn movie.

First half better than the second.

It is quite annoying though that it makes zero sense, or to be more precise, doesn't even try to make sense.

Ending was made with sequels in mind for sure.

LighterGuy

I like my movies to have logic for what ever the world sets up in the movie. Ie, in the matrix neo could do all crazy stuff because he knew it was a simulation and cound bend it but yet in the real world he couldnt do any of the stuff.... perfect logic!

however!

Ok, (1) the original setup of the source code doesnt make any sense what so ever! ... lets say its possible to look at the last 8 minutes of a persons brain. but how could anyone go out of what that person saw? like i walked by a house today. how could someone go into the last 8 mins of my memory then go into the house that I didnt view?

(2) whats more important is they say its not time travel. fair enough. but dont you think the logic is that they would known something is up if they can relive and gain further information than what that 8 mins contained?
I guess thats my only gripe. That they created a machine, established it wasnt time travel but "over-looked" its unexplained ability to to learn and view things beyond ones recent memory? ......... thats a plot hole.

or am i being too much of a nerd?