Source Code

If I wrote a short story called Source Code and sent it to the contest I submit something to every year, the judges would surely praise me for a fairly original idea and the repetition of the eight-minute scenes on the train, which always brings something new and is imaginatively interspersed with cool metaphorical interludes in the capsule. I'm sure they'd like the characters (I'd try to describe the main character in a way that's as Jake Gyllenhaal-like as possible), and I'm sure they'd be impressed by the absolutely beautiful, gorgeous scene when the world stopped. However, the judges would have a huge problem with what happens in Source Code after this scene. None of them would probably be able to digest the multitude of not only unexplained, but above all unexplainable question marks. And it's all the sadder that such an ending was not necessary at all. The director and screenwriters just wanted to act for a moment that they were making an important film with a big impact, but they forgot that they are not Nolan, who can get away with such excesses. Three and a half. (31/08/2011)

Once Duncan Jones masters the storytelling pace, he can be talked about as the new golden child of Hollywood. His films have a good concept, great actors, captivating atmosphere - and too long a duration. Fortunately, with Source Code, it is not such a problem as with the overstretched Moon, but still, I couldn't shake the feeling that by cutting about ten to fifteen minutes, it could have been the most tension-filled film of recent times. Nevertheless, thanks to the still very solidly paced plot, the chemistry of the main duo, and above all, the well-rounded ending with a twist - it is a cinema experience with an intensity that many action thrillers hopelessly lack. 75% (12/05/2011)

In terms of direction, character work, and tension, the film runs like clockwork. All three main characters are written, cast, and performed in a way that evokes a sense of maximum viewer identification and sympathy. The film has high-quality visuals, camera work, and atmosphere, but the list of strengths suddenly ceases if you reflect on the screenplay. It departs from the field of science fiction, which plays in the style of "what if," but still adheres to a logical interpretation of the world, whereas in the case of Source Code, logic took a vacation. Here, the story is based on a logical short circuit, a nonsensical premise that filmmakers get away with simply because a significant portion of the audience has become accustomed to switching off their brains with the first shots of a film and enjoying the visual effects and action. Another problem is the traditional Hollywood happy ending. This film would be much more impactful if it ended with the sacrifice of the main hero and his voluntary demise in the capsule in the laboratory. Overall impression: 60%. (14/10/2013)

Source Code is a little big movie reminiscent of Donnie Darko, Proyas’ Knowing or The Adjustment Bureau, which was released at the same time. It is visually refined, with a playful, well-thought-out script, as well as emotional and witty. It’s great when a spring Hollywood genre movie that doesn’t pretend to be anything more than it is worms its way into your heart more than “big” winter Oscar dramas. That is exactly the case with Source Code. Jake Gyllenhaal is very good here. Ignore the cheap, forced epilogue. I’m sure it was a concession to the producers, who wanted a more uncomplicated happy ending than the real one, the only one possible, inevitably reached through tears. (08/05/2011)

Jake Gyllenhaal is cool, the film has a brisk pace, but my god! In science fiction you can use any crazy idea you want, but it has to stand on sufficiently firm laws, which isn’t the case here. This fictional universe is haphazard from the get go, and let’s not talk about the ending. Taken together, Source Code doesn’t have any climax. The last fifteen minutes could have turned into either an utterly irrelevant and uninteresting filler, or in nonsense, and unfortunately it was the latter. I was really thrilled with Jones’ previous film, Moon, but this is one is just a popcorn movie that squanders a very good premise, which if more refined could have resulted in a sci-fi gem. PS: Before the screening I was almost certain I wouldn’t be disappointed. I’m sorry about the rating. PPS (Spoiler): This film would make a little sense only if I were to accept the hypothesis that the device that works according to clearly explained laws, will work according to completely different laws, and completely differently, and that it will manage generate pure chance, and that by pure chance it will work spontaneously, regardless of the instructions of its creators, who still control it according to the laws they believe it abides to, but actually doesn’t… and I won’t do that :-D (23/04/2011)