Movies: 16306 | TV Series: 2318 | Added today: 18 | Storage: 56121 GB
|Paula Jean Hixson|
|IMDB Rating:||7.7 out of 10 (28643 votes)|
|Source Code (iPod)||Resolution: 480x272 px||Total Size: 227 Mb||
|Source Code (DivX)||Resolution: 720x400 px||Total Size: 1362 Mb|
An action thriller centered on a soldier who wakes up in the body of an unknown man and discovers hes part of a mission to find the bomber of a Chicago commuter train.
Extra spoiler warning.
The titular name refers to a military project to utilize a (fictional)medical phenomenon: the brain of the deceased contains the memory ofthe last 8 minutes before death, just like a close circuit security TVsurveillance video. If another person's brain can tap into these 8minutes of "security tape", imagine how much good can be done in crimeprevention? Research has brought this to the brink of success. The maincriterion for the candidate is compatibility to the "object", thingslike gender, age, physical built. There is one other, which will berevealed later (more spoilers!!)
The movie opens with an immediately attention-gripping score accentingon timpani and brass sending your heartbeat on an acceleration course.The visual is a sequence with overhead shot of sprawling Chicagocross-cutting with a cruising, sleek looking commuter train.
As we get into the story, movies such as "Surrogates" and "Avatar" cometo mind. Colter Steven (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up, as if from a trance,in the train and finds that he occupies the body of a man named Sean,talking to a woman called Christina (Michelle Monahgan). As we movealong, another movie registers itself: "Groundhog day". The train blowsup and Steven finds himself back in the experiment chamber as thecandidate for "Source code" mentioned earlier, about to be sent backagain, again and again until he finds out who blew up the train.
It is important to point out here that the plot is not about timetravel. The explosion has occurred and everybody on the train is dead.This is "time reassignment", whatever that means, as explained in themovie. Steven's mission is not to prevent the train explosion or tosave anybody, but only to find out who did it because the perpetratorhas something much bigger planned: to blow up Chicago with a nucleardevice. Steven's mission is not to to save millions of lives inChicago.
This suspense alone is already material for a good thriller but thenthere is a parallel suspense plot. This unfolds only slowly as thestory progresses. What we see on the train is in a sense an illusion.But there is another layer of illusion: Steven in the enclosedexperiment capsule wired into an electric circuit connected to Sean'sdead brain (not unlike the protagonists in "Surrogate" or "Avatar").Other than the experiences in the train, the only recent recollectionSteven has is doing a sortie in Afghanistan as a fighter pilot. In theproject "Source code" capsule, he keeps asking his contact officerColleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga), whose face he sees only on a monitor,how he has become the candidate of this project. The ominous truthcomes out only gradually and this has to do with the one othercriterion that I intentionally omitted to mention at the start. MoreSPOILER! You see, like Sean, Steven is technically dead and just keptbrain-active by a life support system. Once his assignment has beenaccomplished, he will be "allowed to die".
It should now be evident that from this clever plot, a superb movie canbe constructed. One has been. The thrills are expected. But there isalso poignancy in many ways. The lovely, warm, sunny smile onMonahgan's face makes it convincing that Gyllenhaal's character fallsin love with her and wants to save her, if not anybody else, from theexplosion. Cliché yet touchingly handled is the remorse of a son forunkind words exchanged with his father in what unfortunately turns outto be their last conversation.
There are also larger matters, moral and philosophical. Ruthlessproject director Dr Rutleger (Jeffrey Wright) suggests to Steven thathe should be happy and thankful for this last chance to serve hiscountry - "patriotism is not everything, it's the only thing" (thankscoach Vince)seems to be written all over his face. Steven in turn askshis own question in the train, to Christina as well as to some otherpassengers, "What would you do with the last minute of your life"? Theensuing scene is the most poignant of all.
Gyllenhaal is at his best portraying Steven in a complexity that befitsthe unimaginably complex situation this character finds himself in.Monaghan does not have much challenge in this movie, but melts theaudience's heart just by being there. Wright's performance isimpressive, even as a somewhat stereotype character. It is Farmiga,however, who deserves special mention. Starting out as quiteimpersonal, she skilfully let the caring person underneath graduallyemerge. While the billing suggests otherwise, she is really the leadactress in this movie while Monaghan is only support, in terms of thedemand of the character. But as support, Farmiga is arguably even moredeserving for an Oscar nomination than in "Up in the air". Hope shegets one.
Have I missed anything? Obviously: the most important! If this movie isnot one of time travel and changing the past, what is all this aboutSteven trying to save Christina and then, later, stop the bomb on thetrain? Well, there can be a good solution. In the timeline of thestory, Steven, through the project "Source code", finds the informationneeded and the criminal is apprehended before he can blow up Chicago.The train explosion is something that has already happened and Stevenis allowed to die. That is how the movie goes. But in the paralleluniverse (a theme just as popular as time travel, as fans of IsaacAsimov know), the bomb is stopped and the protagonists live happilyafterward. That is also how the movie goes.
Why doesn't it just stop there? The movie makers unfortunately don'thave the good sense to stop when things are going well, and add onsomething that makes am otherwise almost-perfect movie end in anirreconcilable mess. Pity!
I first learned about Source Code thanks to IMDb. I saw Jake Gyllenhaalwas starring in the film, so I decided to check out the trailer. It wasbrilliant. The trailer made me excited to see the actual movie and Iwas very disappointed (when I first saw the trailer) to find out that'Source Code' wasn't out yet.
We were originally going to see 'Sucker Punch' today, but it wasn'tshowing during the times we were available. Luckily, I saw that thismovie was also playing, so I eagerly suggested to watch this movieinstead. It was a good choice, seeing as my mom, my sister and I allenjoyed this movie tremendously.
This movie will keep you on the edge of your seat, waiting for Colter(Jake Gyllenhaal) to make his next move. I was surprised to see thatthis was sort of a low-budget movie. The director did a great job withlimited funding. 'Source Code' will keep everyone interested. Unlessyou're that type of person who over-analyzes everything and wantseverything to be perfect.
As an action movie, this film gets a perfect grade. As a thriller,another perfect grade. But I was confused with the science-fiction partof this movie. The ending made me confused. I didn't know what hadhappened anymore. I think that this movie should have ended 5 minutesearlier. But it didn't. And for that, I gave this movie a 9/10. A verysmall (and can be overlooked if you wish to) deduction.
'Source Code' is an excellent mystery thriller. Don't over thinkthings. Just enjoy it. This is truly a great movie. I will be lookingforward for more works of Duncan Jones.
Viewed on: April 4, 2011
The idea is nice, it begins very mysteriously and when the generalconcept is presented you sense there are going to be mind blowingthings, something like Inception perhaps. Sadly, the scientific idea ispurely presented and the writers give too much place to romance, itseems like the movie tries to attract women and do so by weakening thesci-fi part. I hate movies that try too grab too many aspects, themovie could go a little bit longer and actually build the idea of"Source Code". The romance is forced upon the story, like the writerswere told they had to insert love and did it wrong. To sum it up, agreat concept not so greatly presented. See if you want to satisfy yourthrill hunger.
Most directors tend to stumble for their second film, others far exceedthem while Duncan fits nicely in between those two extremes and followsup his very impressive debut, Moon, with this well-executed thriller.
While this is more mainstream than Moon was it doesn't make the filmany less thought provoking and exciting, if anything it exceeded myexpectations. Based on what the film industry is churning out recentlythis film particularly stands out for me.
But all the credit shouldn't be down to Duncan. The script is reallywell written with some smart dialogue and a cleverly crafted story thatkeeps you guessing. Jake Gyllenhaal also gives a very convincingperformance along with a great supporting cast that overall will makethis film go down as probably one of the more underrated films thisside of the summer blockbusters.
Air Force helicopter pilot Colter Stevens(Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up ona train, not knowing how he got there, he sees a beautiful woman namedChristina(Michelle Monaghan), who talks too him like she knows him, butColter doesn't remember meeting her. And she calls him a differentname. In this sudden state of confusing, Colter goes to the bathroom,and looks in the mirror, sees a face that is not his. Within 8 minutesthe train blows up. Colter wakes in a special pod, in a bigger state ofconfusing, a small screen in the pod comes on, an army lady namedColleen Goodwin(Vera Farmiga) tells Colter that he has to go back andfind the bomber, before another attack happens, will Colter save theday?
Almost as good has Duncan Jones last film Moon(2009). Such anentertaining sci-fi thriller, that holds your interest from beginningto end. Jake Gyllenhaal is good in his role, showing such emotion, notplaying just another action hero type. Michelle Monaghan is good also,she and Gyllenhaal have great chemistry. Vera Farmiga and JeffreyWright are in there supporting roles too.
An intriguing set-up which promises a lot until the villain shows up.He's an American patriot. You know, the kind that's always blowingthings up. To make matters worse Gyllenhaal at first follows twoIslamic guys, one middle Eastern, the other white, who both turn out tobe innocent, as if to say in the usual lazy Hollywood way "see, see, weare confronting your prejudices here." If only they would confronttheir own prejudices.
In modern Hollywood the villain comes in three varieties 1. Whitepatriots. 2. White capitalists. 3. A combination of 1 and 2. Why is itthat Hollywood now seems incapable of dealing with any idea of evilwhich doesn't include these categories? Its not as though the world isnot furnishing enough examples of terror to write about. Yet as dailyexamples of Islamic/communist/ecological violence greet us, Hollywoodis more and more engaging in fantasies where not only is this nothappening but the choice of villain is the least likely to commit them.Its as though the Hollywood of 1944, instead of making films aboutspies and fifth columnists, made ordinary Americans the real threat.
For those not ideologically minded (ie the majority of the audience)the problem is not the leaden agenda but the utter predictability of itall by now. The brief thought that an Islamic terrorist might appear(for once) in a mainstream movie only serving the accentuate thecrushing deflation when it turns out to be the same old. I expect hugegroans for cinemas when the sucker punch hits them "Not again!" Whichwill turn to anger as they realise (yet again) that Hollywood and thecritics have conspired to churn out something utterly insulting to itsaudience as "intelligent". Its a pity, since this film has pretensionsto be a thinking sci-fi thriller.