Source Code - ****SPOILER****
Discussion
Watched Source Code last, whilst not a bad effort from director Duncan (Zowie Bowie) Jones, who directed the excellent Moon, but it was spoilt by the hollywood ending.
There was an obvious point to end the movie, but no, they had to tack on five minutes of tat at the end, which tarnished the whole experience for me.
Some fine camera work throughout and good lead performances, but due to my grumpiness at the ending, i can only give a 6.5/10.
There was an obvious point to end the movie, but no, they had to tack on five minutes of tat at the end, which tarnished the whole experience for me.
Some fine camera work throughout and good lead performances, but due to my grumpiness at the ending, i can only give a 6.5/10.
It was fine, we watched it last night aswell. Bit predictable that he was dead but the plot worked fine.
The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
DJC said:
It was fine, we watched it last night aswell. Bit predictable that he was dead but the plot worked fine.
The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
Are you serious with the spoiler in your first line?The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
Really?
DJC said:
It was fine, we watched it last night aswell. Bit predictable that he was dead but the plot worked fine.
The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
The happy ending wasnt so much of a problem, everyone likes a happy ending. The problem with it was in its execution, it was very clumsy. Suddenly he was left in a new body, taken over Fentriss life. Wtf does he know about Fentriss' life? He has stolen a life. Why wouldnt the Captain bird tell Felix (sorry Routledge) about the greater success of Source Code? It was a clumsy handled ending, but nothing too major.
FFS. I'll not bother now!i watched it last night
Although i enjoyed it i felt with a few tweeks it could of been brilliant, such as more focus on the 2nd plot and an effort to make the actual source code more believable
also without giving too much away i questioned the main charaters actions at times and was sat there a few times thinking you simply wouldnt do that
lastly i feel that the fact it was a 12a rating could have something to do with the watered down feeling about the film,im not saying there has to be blood and guts,boobies and drugs but take away the 12a rating and typical hollywood fall in love ending, replace with a darker edge to the film and your halfway there.
i would say its still worth a watch though and most will enjoy it.but it felt like it was trying to be like inception but just easier to understand(maybe to try and appeal to those who said inception was too confusing) which is fine but the theory behind source code is about as confusing as it gets, so really it needs to come close to inception in terms of how deep and 'information packed'to really convince you and draw you in
i would say its 6/10 or possibly up to 8/10 depending how easily you guess the plot and whose behind it
Although i enjoyed it i felt with a few tweeks it could of been brilliant, such as more focus on the 2nd plot and an effort to make the actual source code more believable
also without giving too much away i questioned the main charaters actions at times and was sat there a few times thinking you simply wouldnt do that
lastly i feel that the fact it was a 12a rating could have something to do with the watered down feeling about the film,im not saying there has to be blood and guts,boobies and drugs but take away the 12a rating and typical hollywood fall in love ending, replace with a darker edge to the film and your halfway there.
i would say its still worth a watch though and most will enjoy it.but it felt like it was trying to be like inception but just easier to understand(maybe to try and appeal to those who said inception was too confusing) which is fine but the theory behind source code is about as confusing as it gets, so really it needs to come close to inception in terms of how deep and 'information packed'to really convince you and draw you in
i would say its 6/10 or possibly up to 8/10 depending how easily you guess the plot and whose behind it
Oh grow up you lot. I couldnt give a monkeys about spoilers and Im rather afraid that I have more important things to think about in life than worrying over whether somebody will or wont go and see a film because they read 4 or 5 lines about said film on the internet. Yer like children at times.
DJC said:
Oh grow up you lot. I couldnt give a monkeys about spoilers and Im rather afraid that I have more important things to think about in life than worrying over whether somebody will or wont go and see a film because they read 4 or 5 lines about said film on the internet. Yer like children at times.
Of course you couldn't give a monkeys - you've seen the fvcking film, numbnuts!If your 4-5 lines were not revealing major plot twists (ie e find that out in the first 10 minutes for example) that's fine.
But in the first week of a film release, to post that?
High functioning aspergers, yes?
DJC said:
Oh grow up you lot. I couldnt give a monkeys about spoilers and Im rather afraid that I have more important things to think about in life than worrying over whether somebody will or wont go and see a film because they read 4 or 5 lines about said film on the internet. Yer like children at times.
Cock.DJC said:
Oh grow up you lot. I couldnt give a monkeys about spoilers and Im rather afraid that I have more important things to think about in life than worrying over whether somebody will or wont go and see a film because they read 4 or 5 lines about said film on the internet. Yer like children at times.
Epic Spoiler Fail.
DON'T READ MY POST IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM!
As it's spoiled...by some months now...I think I missed a logic jump in the film, maybe someone can explain?
Have I got this right?
This special unit notices a train blow up and another big explosion 'downtown' one morning. Their source code has identified that they can hook a 'life' into the last eight minutes of one of the people who died in the event to direct that person's behaviour and uncover vital information.
The film ends with no 'event' occuring because the dead person changed the course of events. So it was just a film about time travel and changing the course of history?
It seems like there was a leap of faith for the first bit...so you run with the sci-fi groove, but then the actual out-turn was just complete b
ks? It means that the captain administrator lady never actually did all the stuff she did in her laboratory all that day.
And I do 'get' that it was fiction and not a documentary, before anyone starts!
As it's spoiled...by some months now...I think I missed a logic jump in the film, maybe someone can explain?
Have I got this right?
This special unit notices a train blow up and another big explosion 'downtown' one morning. Their source code has identified that they can hook a 'life' into the last eight minutes of one of the people who died in the event to direct that person's behaviour and uncover vital information.
The film ends with no 'event' occuring because the dead person changed the course of events. So it was just a film about time travel and changing the course of history?
It seems like there was a leap of faith for the first bit...so you run with the sci-fi groove, but then the actual out-turn was just complete b
ks? It means that the captain administrator lady never actually did all the stuff she did in her laboratory all that day.And I do 'get' that it was fiction and not a documentary, before anyone starts!
V8mate said:
DON'T READ MY POST IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM!
As it's spoiled...by some months now...I think I missed a logic jump in the film, maybe someone can explain?
Have I got this right?
This special unit notices a train blow up and another big explosion 'downtown' one morning. Their source code has identified that they can hook a 'life' into the last eight minutes of one of the people who died in the event to direct that person's behaviour and uncover vital information.
The film ends with no 'event' occuring because the dead person changed the course of events. So it was just a film about time travel and changing the course of history?
It seems like there was a leap of faith for the first bit...so you run with the sci-fi groove, but then the actual out-turn was just complete bks? It means that the captain administrator lady never actually did all the stuff she did in her laboratory all that day.
And I do 'get' that it was fiction and not a documentary, before anyone starts!
I think that the idea is that they actually slot him into a parallel world where events can be different. I think he alludes to this as each time he enters the "source code" some events seem to occur differently. Each time previously, he fails to complete the allotted eight minutes and his alter ego borks it. As it's spoiled...by some months now...I think I missed a logic jump in the film, maybe someone can explain?
Have I got this right?
This special unit notices a train blow up and another big explosion 'downtown' one morning. Their source code has identified that they can hook a 'life' into the last eight minutes of one of the people who died in the event to direct that person's behaviour and uncover vital information.
The film ends with no 'event' occuring because the dead person changed the course of events. So it was just a film about time travel and changing the course of history?
It seems like there was a leap of faith for the first bit...so you run with the sci-fi groove, but then the actual out-turn was just complete b
ks? It means that the captain administrator lady never actually did all the stuff she did in her laboratory all that day.And I do 'get' that it was fiction and not a documentary, before anyone starts!
no, my understanding was they (the military) believed they were inserting him into a parallel world where he could find the information that would lead them to the other attacks. Donnie darko insisted they were wrong and there was more to it but they wouldn't listen. In actuality he is right and he manages to change events preventing the attack therefore source code never gets tested and thus they don't know it actually works (because he alters time they don't get the initial attack that allows them to test it out, creating the paradox that should something happen and they use it, if he prevents the event it doesn't give them the chance to test source code ad infinum). To prove his point he texts vida farminga (in what must be the first movie in which you don't see her ass) that it is a success.
eta: look, it's basically quantum leap
eta: look, it's basically quantum leap
Edited by Oakey on Tuesday 30th August 21:41
of course, when he says they've created something far more successful than they could imagine (or words to that effect) what he means is they've invented a device that allows a dead person to steal someone else's life which is pretty much what he did. That part left me a little uncomfortable tbh.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff