Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 5,559,182
  • Total Topics: 106,348
  • Online Today: 719
  • Online Ever: 3,311
  • (July 08, 2021, 03:14:41 AM)
Users Online
Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 05:08:03 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Source Code (Duncan Jones' new film)

Started by Custard, November 20, 2010, 01:49:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Custard

Zowie Bowie's highly anticipated follow-up to the marvellous Moon.

Well, i gotta say, this looks a bit good!

http://www.enterthesourcecode.com/

chocky909

If you didn't know this was from the director of Moon, it'd be hard to get excited about the film from that trailer. I'll be looking out for it on release though because that concept done properly could be awesome. Dull trailer.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Just what I was going to say.

What with Moon being so good, I'm willing to give Jones the benefit of the doubt here, but this does look a bit disappointingly generic. It reminds me of the Tony Scott film Deja Vu, aptly enough.

Ja'moke

I got a bit of a Twelve Monkeys vibe from that trailer. I absolutely love Moon, watched it again a couple of weeks ago, so I'm looking forward to this.

chocky909

The tagger got there first but it is basically Quantum Leap The Movie crossed with Groundhog Day isn't it?

Alberon

To me most trailers look horribly generic. Even when its something interesting the trailer is almost always designed to appeal to the broadest base possible, even to the point of misrepresenting the film.

Also, he may be directing this film but since it is clearly a bigger project he isn't going to have the level of control he did with Moon. Could be interesting though, there is a hint in the trailer that he's not just dipping back into the past but possibly alternate realities.

alan nagsworth

Quote from: Alberon on November 20, 2010, 05:47:49 PM
To me most trailers look horribly generic. Even when its something interesting the trailer is almost always designed to appeal to the broadest base possible, even to the point of misrepresenting the film.

Like LOVE!!!!!! I mean, I know I've mentioned this before but the DVD case of Moon depicts a screengrab of the only fleeting bit of sex in the entire film that lasts about ten seconds. It's almost entirely irrelevent, but it sells. Fuck knows how anyone, when buying a new film, could look at a title and say "not a big fan of this sci-fi stuff, but there is a shot of a pretty lady's bare back! I'll take it!" but apparently people do think like that.

OT: The trailer looks like a crap and I don't like that Gyllenhall chap much, either. Moon was bleak and stripped down to its bare, hopeless essentials. This comes across as the same sort of thing but on a bigger scale which doesn't really seem like it fits. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm just quite bored of all this split personality who-am-I-TELL-ME-QUICKLY-BEFORE-WE-EXPLODE stuff, and when it's tied in with some secret service Matrix bullshit, I lose interest even further. Two films of this decade that are slightly similar have struck a huge chord with me: Moon, and The Machinist (both of which I believe are among the greatest pieces of mainstream Western cinema of the last decade) and I think I've seen enough of it now, to be perfectly honest.

I still aim to give this a go and be proven totally wrong because of the high regard in which I hold Moon, but for now... meh.

boxofslice

Looks like another Hollywood mish mash of other films - as people have said, 12 Monkeys, Déjà Vu and Quantum Leap.  The use of Jake Gyllenhaal doesn't bode well either.

Jake Gyllenhaal doesn't work well as a macho lead. He's best playing a man with vulnerabilities, i.e. in Jarhead, Donnie Darko, Zodiac or The Good Girl. The trailer leads me to believe that this could be a good premise let down by bad lead casting.

boxofslice

I sat through Prince of Persia last week and was staggered at just how bad he is in these sort of roles.

Santa's Boyfriend

His accent was far better than I expected though.  How the hell is he managing to change his body mass like that?  It's like he doesn't work for a living and has got all day to hang around lifting weights and...  oh yeah.

I thought the trailer looked a bit rubbish at the beginning, but by the end I'm sold enough to rent it on DVD.  Doubt I'll see it at the cinema as money is tight at the moment, but I hope it does well.

Icehaven

It's a shame that while he's kept within the Speculative SciFi, high concept, slightly futuristic genre only now with a bigger, louder tone presumably due to having a much larger budget and stars, it could have been more interesting if he'd done it the other way around, kept the low keyness and stripped back mood and changed the genre. So many films of this ilk are fairly good ideas badly executed, probably because studios insist on filling them with big names and lots of explosions, so one of the best things about Moon is that it's a great idea and it's done well.

Zetetic

Bah. I suppose there's always the chance that the intelligent[nb]Setting aside their decision to name it 'the Source Code'. Although that opens the way for a number of increasingly confusingly named sequels.[/nb] people who designed and constructed the thing will turn out to be right and that his plan to change anything is as stupid as it seems. But I fear not, and the film can only be utterly, utterly, utterly irritating.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth


HAYRDRYAH

Quote from: Zetetic on November 29, 2010, 02:03:05 PMAlthough that opens the way for a number of increasingly confusingly named sequels

Source Code with a Vengeance?[nb]I don't get it[/nb]

Johnny Townmouse

As usual, a Basil Exposition trailer.

Philip K. Dick's Groundhog Day.

I'm trying to get hold of the (proper) screenplay today. What are the chances that either he or his 'partner' are the bomber? Or that the 'guvernmunt' set it up and are just test to see how good he is?

Looks a bit shit to be honest.

Ja'moke

Its been getting very good reviews, apparently its one of those trailers that it make it seem like its going to be a certain type of film, but there's much more too it. Looking forward to seeing it despite the shitty title.

Icehaven


Thought this was pretty bad really, despite an intriguing premise. It's been hugely overpraised (Peter Bradshaw gave it 5 stars!) and is really just a silly, patriotic, junk-science blockbuster. It's on about the same level as the aforementioned Deja Vu.

Harpo Speaks

I thought it was good, though with reservations - particularly about some of the things which occur towards the end of the film.

It's certainly no Moon.

thugler

Though it was good and fairly entertaining, though is transparently an attempt to make a more Hollywood crowd pleasing version of moon. There were some good sci fi ideas, Which had a lot of potential, but it seemed hey weren't interested in going into too much depth, and the ending felt a bit odd.

The soundtrack was ridiculously schmaltzy and inappropriate too.

Harpo Speaks

Quote from: thugler on April 04, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
The soundtrack was ridiculously schmaltzy and inappropriate too.

Indeed, I've seen it getting praise elsewhere as being Hermannesque, but I found it quite intrusive at times. Shame, as the use of music in Moon just added to the beautiful atmosphere of it.

Harpo Speaks

Quote from: thugler on April 04, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
and the ending felt a bit odd.

Spoiler alert
I thought you could have ended on the freeze-frame of the people laughing on the train, and that would have been better. I'm not sure you need the text message to spell out the existence of multiple universes as I think that is implied within the film itself.
[close]

The more I think about this film though, the more questions it raises. It's certainly not as simplistic as the trailer implied.

Ja'moke

I really enjoyed it, but it could have done without the last 15 minutes or so. It's certainly no Moon, but very enjoyable none-the-less.

They seemed to change the idea of what the source code was. At the beginning of the film I thought the idea was they were just connecting Colter Stevens' brainwaves to the brainwaves of the dead man, allowing Stevens to relive his last memories. I liked this because a) It sounds vaguely plausible and b) The fact that he couldn't change anything or save anyone was nicely bleak. Then all this shit about alternate realities came in, at which point I sort of lost interest.

Oh – and if
Spoiler alert
Colter Stevens takes over the body of the bloke at the end of the film
[close]
, isn't that sort of the same thing as
Spoiler alert
killing
[close]
him? Doesn't that make Stevens a
Spoiler alert
murderer and a cunt
[close]
?

Harpo Speaks

Quote from: Maybe Im Doing It Wrong on April 04, 2011, 02:49:50 PM
They seemed to change the idea of what the source code was. At the beginning of the film I thought the idea was they were just connecting Colter Stevens' brainwaves to the brainwaves of the dead man, allowing Stevens to relive his last memories. I liked this because a) It sounds vaguely plausible and b) The fact that he couldn't change anything or save anyone was nicely bleak. Then all this shit about alternate realities came in, at which point I sort of lost interest.

Spoiler alert
Was it the case that the military believed that it could only be used as a sort of simulation, when in actual fact it was creating a new reality each time? So in actual fact, although he eventually saved one train full of passengers at the end, didn't he actually wipe out ten times more across various realities every time he entered the Source Code and failed to stop the bomber?

Also, were the 8 minutes supposed to be the limits of the SC technology, or was it just that they knew the bomb would go off at the 8 minute point? I assume it's the latter as there were a couple of times where he stayed in a particular reality beyond the 8 minutes, and it was only getting killed which brought him back (falling onto the tracks and being shot).
[close]

Quote
Doesn't that make Stevens a
Spoiler alert
murderer and a cunt
[close]
?

Well he's in the Armed Forces so we knew that anyway LOL. But yes, that's another interesting aspect of it -
Spoiler alert
in that reality where the explosion is averted, it's Shaun who effectively unknowingly gives his life to save everyone else on the train.
[close]
Maybe.

Yes, the 8 minute thing is pretty sloppy. The fact that there's an 8 minute limit is all over the publicity but...er...the first scene isn't 8 minutes is it? More like 5 and a half. I suppose there's no reason why it should be real time, but it would make sense.

And I'm pretty sure Jeffrey Wright says it's 8 mins because that's the limits of the dead guy's memory. But, as Harpo Speaks says, that's contradicted by
Spoiler alert
Stevens being in the train for longer periods and just coming back when he dies.
[close]

It's all very odd. I'm guessing it's a combination of sloppy script-editing and studio meddling.

Harpo Speaks

Now I'm thinking about it
Spoiler alert
it isn't much over the 8 minutes, as him falling on the tracks happens just after the bomb goes off, and in the shooting incident, he turns his head to see the plume of smoke go up, then dies shortly after.
[close]

AlterEgg

What a terrible film that just muddled it self to the end. The most interesting thing by far were the flying shots of Chicago, what an interesting looking city.

Onionlimit

I really enjoyed it.  Obviously when you get into Alternate realities there's bound to be some plot holes or bits that get a bit muddled.  I think I'll have to watch it again to really get it, but there's a lot there to enjoy.  I also really loved the little reference to Moon.