Visitors Review

ToddWebb (2012-05-26 00:31)

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.

(2012-05-25 11:46)

High Hopes, Entirely Crushed

If you watch a lot of mind-bending, sci-fi movies, you have probably thought about seeing this movie. However, if you are this type of person, you will see through the plot within the first couple of minutes and hope something surprising happens. It doesn't. The plot feels quickly thrown together, hardly thought out, and Jake Gyllenhaal, who I think can be a great actor, is boring in this movie. I loved him in Love and Other Drugs and thought he was good in Brothers, but he's a very static character here. The movie could have been great, but it fell incredibly short. Watch it if you have some time to kill, but other than that, I wouldn't recommend it.

David Sexton (2012-05-24 20:06)

The differences each time the eight minutes come around are surprisingly absorbing and there's a pleasing Hitchcockian jokiness at work.

Leonard Maltin (2012-05-24 08:05)

All of the leading actors acquit themselves well, including Jeffrey Wright as the brains behind the daring experiment in what he calls "time reassignment," rather than time travel. The fact that Ripley's screenplay gives its secondary characters some...

(2012-05-23 16:26)

Not a Moon sequel but at least as good, probably even better

This review is from: Source Code [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) If you liked Moon you'll definitely love this one. Like Moon this is a mind bending movie forcing you to think to follow along. If you hated Moon you'll hate this one too but that's why movies like Harry Potter and Pokemon were made for :)

kluseba (2012-05-23 00:08)

Where Avatar meets Inception meets the Green Zone

I was really intrigued by the trailer of this movie and decided to goto the cinema for the first time for a pretty while. The film is veryworthwhile and touching with a great main actor, an interesting plot, alot of suspense and action, a twisted part towards the last third ofthe movie and a happy ending with a philosophical focus.The only problem is that we have recently had movies such as"Inception" or Avatar where people are getting transfered to differentplace and sometimes in the body of different persons in order to savethe world or where they fall in love with a stranger. The conspiracystory surrounding this movie makes me rather think of "The Green Zone"."Source Code" is surely an entertaining and intriguing movie but itsomewhat lacks of originality. A good twist, some emotional anddramatic touches and a very good acting still make this movie stand outand pardon for a rather mediocre script that also has a plot holeconcerning the explosion of the two trains that works well timed eventhough the villain isn't able to observe the right place and time tocommit his attack while the first train is also too late and shouldindeed have meet the other train a couple of minutes earlier than wesee. Another thing that I must criticize is the weak villain that isnot charismatic enough and I didn't like the rather superficial reasonsand motivations for his devastating acts.Finally, "Source Code" is a very entertaining and worthwhile movie butslightly overrated and not as stunning, innovating or gripping as onemight think. It's worth to be watched at the cinemas because of thevisual and sound effects but a part of that, I would rather suggest towait and loan this flick later.

ylopez4-1 (2012-05-21 09:04)

Didn't really get it

Hi there, in reviewing this movie I mean its so difficult to explain,its not one of those movies that you can really keep up with your eyesclose, you have to be alert at all times. I honestly didn't reallyenjoy it, the only reason I went to see it is because I think JakeGyllenhaal is hot!!! thats about it. and I like Michelle Monagan on themovie that she did with patrick Dempsey Made of Honor..... If you arean action buff this might be your style. I honestly rather see moviesLike Limitless, or the Lincoln Lawyer, Scream 4 that I might go far,this its on a genre completely on its own. You have to keep followingeverything over and over and over, at times I just wanted to walk outof the theatre because I was getting bored ,I am sorry it was notentertaining enough for me. I was counting the seconds so I can leave,so in my opinion, pass it up, or wait til it comes out on DVD (blu rayor whatever)........ not for me. I guess Jake was great, Michelle stayIn romantic comedies. thats it.

James Verniere (2012-05-20 18:17)

Gyllenhaal is a much more sympathetic and attractive figure here than in 2010's "Prince of Persia."

Geraldo Luiz (2012-05-19 16:49)

Interesting movie, bad happy ending

I love SF movies. In this one, the premise of projecting someone'sconsciousness into a past event is interesting. They made clear in thebeginning that the movie was not about time travel nor alternativereality, and all those people are really dead and nothing he does wouldchange that. As an example, in one iteration, he took "his" girlfriendout of the train and even so she was dead at the end of the 8 minuteperiod. So, what happened happened and there's no way to change it. OK,that's clear to me and then they've changed that.The movie should have ended when the life support was turned off (well,but wasn't he dead already?) and everybody on the train has frozen inthe last iteration. But no, they have to put a happy ending even if itdoesn't make any sense at all. So, they come up with a alternativereality or something like that. I just can't buy it.It's not about two realities but there is only one in which everybodyin that train was dead. Jake's "reality" was just a projection, asimulation made by a software (hence the name source code, I guess)that is driving his mind (his brain waves) to that train. Everythinghappened inside Jake's mind. So, I don't see how he could've survivedafter the plug has been pulled. The only explanation is that theyneeded a happy ending badly and didn't care if it would make sense ornot.Too bad, because without this nonsense ending the movie would be somuch better.

pc95 (2012-05-19 02:08)

Unfocused but Good Concept

Anyone who's a Star Trek fan will immediately recognize that thecreators of "Source Code" have wholly taken freely from their content -in this case, if you're interested, watch Star Trek The NextGeneration's episode entitled "Cause and Effect". That episode isbetter polished than this movie and minute for minute a betterproduction despite being 17 or so years done before it, (spoiler) butthe movie does a good job with the idea of replaying time over againand again. You cant blame the creators for employing a good idea. Theproblem is, the human aspect of the story gets overcooked and overdonein Source Code, and Jake Gyllanthal although did a satisfactory job,probably the lead role could have been afforded to a better actor. Iliked Source Code, especially it's explanations and details of what'shappening during the first two-thirds of it's length. The love interestthough doesn't quite mesh, and unfortunately the ending is painted toorosy and gets sappy. Still if you like science-fiction and it'semployment of time as a theme, and you liked "Source Code" check outthe Star Trek episode mentioned above if you've never seen it, enjoyand marvel at the parallels.

phxphil (2012-05-19 01:50)

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.

funkymihir (2012-05-18 08:39)

Wow!!! Better than Inception and loved it

This hurtling high-concept thriller confirms director Duncan Jones(Moon) as the great white hope of cinematic sci-fi. After blacking outin Afghanistan, a U.S. fighter pilot (Jake Gyllenhaal) awakes insidethe body of another man on a Chicago commuter train, and eight minuteslater, when a terrorist bomb rips the train apart, he awakes again tofind himself in a sort of control pod, communicating by monitor with acrisp national security officer (Vera Farmiga). What's happened is thatthe feds have recovered the brain of one of the bombing victims, whichretains its last eight minutes of sense memory, and are sending thepilot back into those eight minutes again and again to track down thebomber. None of this makes any sense if you think about it, but theidea is so much fun that thinking about it may be your last impulse.With Michelle Monaghan and Jeffrey Wright.

Nathaniel Smith (2012-05-18 00:37)

Great movie, a little illogical.

This science fiction thriller stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Colter Stevens,A helicopter pilot who wakes up on a train as a man called SeanFentress. Across from him is Christina Warren (Michelle Monaghan), awoman he has never met but seems to know him. As he tries to figure outhis situation, the train explodes and he awakes strapped inside somesort of iron room.He is told by a woman on a screen, Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga), thathe is on a mission to find the bomb that destroyed the train and the IDof the person responsible so as to prevent a much larger attack onChicago. He has eight minutes to do this.He goes back again and again via the "source code" system that allowshim to re-live what happened. It is revealed that Stevens' mind isconnected to the dead Sean Fentress's brain accessing the lingeringmemories of the last eight minutes of his life, creating a sort ofparallel universe. It is an incredibly intriguing concept, complimented with good acting,visuals and editing. However, as with most modern sci-fi films, itfutilely tries to explain the impossible with science. Although it ismore believable/realistic than others like Hulk or Iron Man. But itstill raised questions such as: how can Stevens move around the trainand do what he wants if he is only accessing a dead guy's memories? Howcan he go places that Fentress would not have been in his last eightminutes, such as the bathroom of a station the train passed by?However, this is obviously not main the point of the film. Even if itdoesn't make sense it's a thought provoker and an intriguing idea.Altogether it is worthy entertainment. It's interesting that whenStevens re-lives the explosion as Sean Fentress, the same actor is used(except for his reflection). Which makes sense because it is from hispoint of view.The ending was disappointing and stretched the rules of physics evenfurther. There weren't many places to go with the ending though.

Michael_Elliott (2012-05-17 11:43)

Strong Lead Performances and Direction

Source Code (2011) *** 1/2 (out of 4) Strange but satisfying science-fiction film has soldier Colter Stevens(Jake Gyllenhaal) waking up on a Chicago train talking to a woman(Michelle Monaghan) that he doesn't know when eight-minutes later thetrain blows up from a terrorist attack. Colter then wakes up as part ofa scientific experiment, which allows a source code to be used totransport someone back in time to re-live someone's finaleight-minutes, which the soldier is doing for a man on the train.Colter must keep investigating these final minutes to try and determinewho set the bomb off and to prevent a future attack. SOURCE CODE has acomplicated storyline and a very far-fetched premise but directorDuncan Jones does a marvelous job at making sure you can follow it andnever got lost in the twists and turns. The movie's certainly a lotharder to explain than actually watch because once the story does pickup and take off you're really on the edge of your seat in thrills.Gyllenhaal offers up another excellent performance and it's thisperformance that really helps draw you into the material. Just look atthe first scene where he wakes up not knowing why he's on the train andthe level of confusion that he gives off matches what the viewer isfeeling. Gyllenhaal not only makes for a good lead but he also comesacross as someone you can follow throughout the film. Monaghan doesn'thave as much to do but she too is charming in the part and Vera Farmigais also very good in her role. I think a lot of credit has to go to BenRipley's screenplay because it mixes so many different genres but itnever gets watered down or to the point where you simply don't care.It's a rather complicated bit of science and fiction but Ripley's storynever crosses the line to the point where it's a turn off or to thepoint where the viewer just won't care what's going on. Jones'direction perfectly brings the material to life and the way he floatsus through the action pieces was very good and I especially liked thedifferent ways the eight-minutes were shown.

baron_genitalstrassen (2012-05-16 09:18)

A thinking man's Inception...

Before you condemn this film to video hell, it's worth noting that itWAS an amateur film, I'm pretty sure it was a student film, inspired bythe works of legendary Christof Nolan. He worked with the kids on themovie also, but not in a big way.Zowie's *Source Code* is legendary for its bold and complex phrasingand imagery, for its reputation of embodying Surrealism *avant lalettre*, and for its remarkably extreme, savage imagery. Lessfrequently remarked is its obvious debt to the earlier film"INCEPTIONE" of the Nolan, such as THE MATRIX. Given the very Europeantranslations of the latter, one may pardon those who do not seen theFrench bub, one can hardly blame them for overestimating theoriginality of *Source Code*. Francophones such as the Surrealists andZowie, however, have no such excuse. I personally felt this film was quite enjoyable, and weird enough to beinteresting. OK - aside from the great touching sequences and real lifedrama and non3D CGI, the usage of the Lord's Name in vain isnauseatingly in your face. As well, the usage of the Number of theBEAST's Name, i.e. 666 is quite sickening. If you do watch this movie,you will see it 'in your face' as well. So blatant in fact that theychose a radio frequency - even written down for 'all to see' - as 66.6.How's that for subtle? The director and people involved in this moviereally are antiChrists. I guess the 'hook' is the heart warmingmessage.These are the reasons I did not give this film a higher rating, eventhough everything else was well thought out and executed - quiteenthralling from beginning to end - if only these producers, directors,etc. would not promote Satan. I am not surprised at this biblical filmor any others,because when it comes to God's Ten Commandments they arenever mentioned for what they actually stand for.

valleyjohn (2012-05-15 21:40)

Thoroughly enjoyable entertainment

Imagine a film that was a cross between "Inception" , "De ja Vu " and "Groundhog Day" and you will get Source Code and what a cracking littlemovie this is.There has been quite dirge of SciFi thrillers in the last 12 months andmost have been really good , so Source Code had a lot to live up to andlive up to it does.Jake Gyllenhaal plays a helicopter pilot who wakes up to find he isthrust into a situation where he has to find a bomber of a trainheading to Chicago. he has 8 minutes to find the bomber but not justthe single 8 minutes because somehow he is being thrust back in time todo the job of saving countless lives. Confused ? You wont be when you watch this because this flick movesalong a really fast pace from the moment it starts and unlike Inception, you don't finish the film scratching your head wondering what thehell just happened.Gyllenhaal is superb , as is Christina Warren , the only one lettingthe side down is Jeffrey Wright , who plays Dr. Rutledge . His actingis a bit wooden.I can't recommend Source Code highly enough. It's ninety minutes ofpure entertainment.

BM Rao (2012-05-13 07:41)

Probably won't start a franchise, but will be remembered.

This movie has everything that one loves and expects from a goodenjoyable movie.In all the departments, whether it is acting, casting,story, editing, or visuals, this one delivers. I loved the concept ofthe movie, no matter how improbable it was. All through the movie Ikept thinking how it was possible to make up an entire alternateuniverse from 8 minutes of memory synapses of a school teacher. Most ofthe time this would be a turn-off and will go against the movie, but itis handled in such a fashion that I was willing to suspend disbeliefand incredulity and just enjoy the film. Because every time Iquestioned the movie, I also asked the question, "Ok, fine, but I mawilling to see what happens next." It is a rare thing for a film-makerto be able to do this, especially since this is not a hardcore actionmovie.The ending could have been handled better, and was a bit disappointingbecause the protagonist, who wants to die in 'this' universe, does notinstruct the lady Captain to take him off life support in the 'other'universe. but at the same time the message that he does send her isappropriate. Everyone needs to hear 'It is going to be okay.',especially when one is in the same situation as the protagonist.Some of the people who watched the movie with me were of the opinionthat JG's acting was a bit wooden, but to be honest, it fit in wellwith the mood and pacing of the movie. This is not a bang-slash movie.This is a thinker's movie, so to speak.I put this movie in the same category as Constantine - movies that areslow, steady, gripping and stylistic. I loved Constantine & I love thisone!

(2012-05-12 12:12)

Fair SF adventure, but ...,

The premise seems iffy, but I've seen worse: time travel becomes possible, but only a limited sort. Some few people can go back in time to the last eight minutes of another's life. Unfortunately, that includes the event that ended it, so it's hardly a pleasure cruise. Much to no one's surprise, the military takes this technology on as a counter-terrorism tool. It's too late to avert the disaster that already happened, but maybe it contains clues that will help prevent a bigger one. Eight minutes is hardly enough to get started, so Colter Stevens has to take the trip again and again, learning a little more each time, and dying again each time.The action plays well, and plays a little differently in each eight-minute trip (so he can make progress against the terrorist), right to the very end - which contains a pleasant flip. On the whole, this action movie acquits itself much better than lots I can name.So, what's my beef? The name. Obviously, some Lala-lander heard this cool techie term "source code". He didn't understand what it meant, so assumed that it had no meaning - leaving him free to make one up. I could do that too. Let's let the word "scriptwriter" refer to a South American turnip, and "director" be a children's playground toy. See how well that works? Heck, even a movie like Gattaca had the decency to create a new word when they created a new meaning. Outside that one bit of ridiculosity, I really did enjoy this one.-- wiredweird, reviewing the release to theaters

Elvis Mitchell (2012-05-10 14:15)

Saddled with CG effects that will only be passable on your smart phone, or from the back seat of a minivan, it's as if the looniness of the Code plot is out to undermine the highly wound, tightly cut beginning -- the camera shakes from too much adrenaline.

(2012-05-09 22:07)

Nice SciFi

This review is from: Source Code (Amazon Instant Video) This was a great movie that kept me interested and entertained the whole way through. I'm not going to go into deal as I'll let the plot do that when you watch it. The movies concept is original enough and the characters are well done. There are some nice things at the end of the movie that tickled a tear gland for me. I liked this flick.