SOURCE CODE Review

by     Posted 2 years, 76 days ago

source-code-movie-image-jake-gyllenhaal-slice-02

With his 2009 film Moon, director Duncan Jones demanded that audiences sit up and take notice of smart science fiction.  Audiences then wondered why everything was so quiet, slow, and moody and became impatient for stuff to start blowing up real good.  For his second feature, Source Code, Jones has made a more accessible sci-fi that delivers on fast-paced action, lots of explosions, sharp dialogue, while still using sci-fi as a means to explore powerful themes about identity and sacrifice.  Even when the story steers towards a forced “happy” ending, it still comes up with enough ambiguity to make the trip worthwhile.

Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a soldier tasked with discovering a bomber aboard a passenger train.  The means to uncovering the identity of the bomber is through the “Source Code”.  The train has already exploded, all the passengers are dead, but the Source Code allows Stevens to keep reliving the last eight minutes in the life of passenger Sean Fentress.  Colter can’t stop the bomb from exploding, but he can stop the bomber from hitting his next target.  But finding the bomber isn’t the only mystery that Colter has to solve.

With Source Code, Jones has proved that Moon was no fluke.  While his new movie is faster paced, it still demonstrates a strong creativity and an emphasis on character that keeps the viewer involved.  Jones finds a wonderful visual language to not only make the same eight minutes feel fresh every time, but more importantly, he finds the compelling subtext that makes the movie more than just a chewy action-thriller with a crispy sci-fi shell.  Themes that were present in Moon—replication, distrust of authority figures—are present in Source Code but they’ve been paired with a touching exploration of sacrifice and even a bit of commentary on how we ask soldiers to lose their humanity in order to transform them into weapons.

The film is helped tremendously by Gyllenhaal’s charisma.  Colter is a character who is always trying to get his bearings and must flip between humor, disdain, anger, grief, and a host of other emotions as he attempts to not only complete his mission, but to understand his participation in it.  Source Code is further proof that if you provide Gyllenhaal with a rich character, he will meet your expectations (if you provide him with Prince of Persia, it’s a different story…).  Vera Farmiga and Michelle Monaghan also turn in strong work as Colter’s superior officer and a fellow passenger, respectively.  The only weak link is Jeffrey Wright as the head of the Source Code program.  Wright’s a usually reliable actor, but here he comes off as a cartoon and his line readings feel contrived and rehearsed.

source-code-movie-image-jake-gyllenhaal-04

Where Source Code has the biggest problem is in its finish.  The film comes to a moment which would work as a final scene, and then it bypasses that scene to go for something more complex and uplifting.  Jones delivers so much of the film with tremendous confidence that it’s jarring to see him twist the narrative into knots so that the audience can leave feeling upbeat (and chances are they’ll leave confused).

Despite a slightly weak finish, Source Code is another triumph for Jones.  He’s shown that he can manage a mid-budget studio film that will appeal to mainstream audiences without sacrificing the thoughtful sci-fi elements that made Moon such a breath of fresh air.

Rating: B+

source-code-movie-poster-olly-moss-mondo-01

Sponsored Content



Please Like Collider on Facebook

Comments:
  • Justin Beaver

    Vera Farmiga and Michelle Monaghan are amazingly gorgeous. These indescribably beautiful women are pure American perfection.

  • Cord

    Love Vera Farmiga, very attractive and sexy. I hope the reviewer is off target about Jeffrey Wright, he never disappoints.

  • Alex H

    Although the ending was a little forced, this movie was easily the best movie of 2011

    SPOILERS>>>>>>>>>>>

    They could have easily faded out at the scene where the camera panned around the train, showing all of the happy ["frozen", for lack of a better term] people. That would have been a grim ending, but happy nonetheless. Sure, Colter would have died, but he saved all of their lives (kinda). I don’t know… like I said, I agree that the ending was a little forced.

    <<<<<<<<<<<SPOILERS

    But I'm almost certain a sequel will pop up in a couple of years, considering how well-recieved this film is. Perhaps the questions that arose at the end will be answered. One can only hope, right?

  • Kent

    I loved the film, but I did agree that the ending was preposterous and plot-holish. But just a few minutes ago I realized that the ending may actually make total sense!

    ********Spoiler Alert****************
    Initially, the final scenes involving Goodwin reading the email and walking into the office where Dr. Rutledge and a government official are talking about the apprehended terrorist, Derek Frost, was confusing to me. Here’s what happened. The final time Colter Stevens uses the Source Code, and after Goodwin “kills him” off, he realizes that Dr. Rutledge was wrong about the Source Code. The program actually does create an alternate timeline, though still not time travel. I thought the ending involved time travel, because it really seemed like it. But it’s not. The “new” timeline that Colter Stevens is now stuck in continues, and that’s the timeline in which he sends the email to Goodwin. However, the Goodwin that receives this email is not the same Goodwin that we know and have seen throughout the entire movie. The Goodwin that receives the email is the one from the new timeline in which Colter Stevens is now trapped in. So that’s why the ending scene involving Rutledge’s office makes sense! In the new timeline, Colter apprehends Derek Frost while he’s still on board the train, leading Frost to be arrested by the police and whatnot. So of course, that’s why the government guy and Dr. Rudledge were able to talk about Frost being arrested in his office, because that scene is in the same exact timeline as the one Colter is stuck in. Now in this new timeline, Colter Stevens is living as Sean Fentress (which isn’t really that feel-goody if you think about it, cuz now where’s Sean?), and in the new timeline there is another Colter Stevens who is in the mutilated body, ready for the Source Code to be activated and used for a mission. Understand?

    I could be wrong, though. Haha.

    • Tyler

      @Kent, you hit the nail right on the head in your explanation!

      Wonderful movie. Loved Moon and loved this just as much, if not more.

  • Mario P

    Hmm. I might be missing something here, but if Stevens becomes Sean (in the new parallel world created after Goodwin turns Stevens’ life support off) what has happened to Sean in that parallel world? I imagine that in the parallel world, Stevens was still killed in action two months earlier, so in effect he’s come back to life (in the parallel world) in Sean’s body (with his deformed body – and another mind? – waiting for a mission in the alternate reality’s lab).

    But why, then, isn’t Sean in the parallel world too, as himself? Has he effectively been erased by quantum physics (you can’t have two particles in the same quantum state) or something like that? I know Sean died in the ‘real’ world, but so did Christina and all the others (on the real train); so, in this parallel world, where the train doesn’t blow up, Sean should be there too, surely – and not just as a body? The only explanation, as I say, is that Sean’s consciousness gets ‘erased’ from all parallel universes because it’s been ‘occupied’ by Stevens. Which is, when you think about it, kind of creepy?

    On top of all that, the basic premise is weak: replaying memories in a brain (Sean’s) by hooking it up to another brain (Stevens’) is like playing a video tape – you can’t create NEW information, or explore things that Sean wouldn’t know. That’s a pretty big leap, even for science fiction, though no more so than time machines, I suppose.

    The bigger flaw is that if Stevens only has half a brain, he wouldn’t be all that sharp, in reality or in alternate reality. He’d be rather confused, and pretty slow on the uptake to say the least… Also, the research guys in the ‘real’ world do seem to know a lot about the alternate world of the Source Code even though no one has ever been sent there before. Okay, it’s just a film…

    … but actually, the only ‘logical’ interpretation (if that’s what you want) is that the whole thing is a crazed hallucination in the (pretty much fully operational) brain of a war casualty being kept alive in a special ops facility. He imagines the whole lot, including the alternate reality, where he can make up with his dad and fall in love happily ever after…

    Mario P

  • Pingback: Source Code

Features

IndieClick Film Network

Click Here