Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Caught a showing of this last night. Josh and Renn's take seem to be pretty spot-on, as far as my own reaction goes: good, not great. The plausibility of the ending left me puzzled for a moment, which (apparently) I'm not alone in.
But, yeah, fun little flick. In the Age of Unoriginality In Cinema, I find Duncan Jones to be such a breath of fresh air and I can't wait to see what else this guy's got up his sleeve.
I'm glad the film is tracking well, and hope it gets a good conversation going. It really isn't a stellar film, but it's a worthy studio effort and manages to be entertaining in an unexpected way. In fact, I'd say balancing the humor and charm that makes it so fun along with thicker science-fiction stuff is a more impressive feat than if he'd just made a standard, morose sci-fi flick. From what I've seen of Jones, he's a very loose, chipper guy, and I think his films reflect the duality of his personality (also why Rockwell is such a good fit for him). I hope he keeps that up.
I did a little run-down of all the Source Code coverage we've done so far, so take a look and make sure you didn't miss anything...
Caught a showing of this last night. Josh and Renn's take seem to be pretty spot-on, as far as my own reaction goes: good, not great. The plausibility of the ending left me puzzled for a moment, which (apparently) I'm not alone in.
But, yeah, fun little flick. In the Age of Unoriginality In Cinema, I find Duncan Jones to be such a breath of fresh air and I can't wait to see what else this guy's got up his sleeve.
Yeah, the "science" of this flick was clearly nonsense, but this is the first time I've loved Jake Gyllenhaal in pretty much anything. Fun, but sleight flick that keeps its eyes on the important stuff (characters) and not so much on the silly plot twists that would typically dog something like this. The only one worth mentioning is pretty much telegraphed as soon as he talks to Jeffrey Wright for the first time.
I'll be interested to see how the community likes this movie. I thought that the movie was great until the last few minutes and then it become "pretty darn good". I don't know if it's Studio Fuckery but there was a gorgeous bit of business at the very end that would have been the perfect capper to the movie and then it went on for another 2 or 3 minutes after that. If it ended at that amazing shot, I think the movie would have gone up a few notches. What happened after that shot really felt like notes from the studio for a happy ending. I don't hate how it ends and in fact it adds a few cool wrinkles but I really like ending a few minutes prior where I felt it was a philosophically better place to end things.
I've heard that criticism a lot, and while I can get behind the fact that the last few moments are kind of sappy, I dont think the film would work as well ending on that shot as many think. Also, I'd also argue against studio intervention, because the imagery of that final romantic moment is still pretty thickly woven into the imagery of the rest of the film. It's a legit motif.
How did it end?
I saw it in November and am curious as to what/if anything they changed
There's a freeze frame and then there's roughly ten more minutes of movie after that. I like the ideas presented in the theatrical ending but to me it felt a little like a cop out than the bittersweet ending it could have had. It's similar to the ending of Inception if the ending to that movie had the top falling over.
I recall it ending with
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Colter and Christina traipsing around Chicago and staring romantically into a giant metallic art orb after he was shut off by Vera Farmiga's character.
Still that?
I liked this movie a lot but I'm reminded of an article I read a while back about movies with happy endings that really aren't. What happens when this poor woman finds out the sweet teacher she's got a crush on is possessed with the mind of a dead helicopter pilot suffering from what would have to be the world's worst case of post-traumatic stress syndrome?
Nice movie, something everyone should be able to enjoy, if not fully love. I can appreciate intellectually why the movie would be better if it ended at the freeze frame, but I don't think I actually would have liked the movie any more than I already did. My favorite part was Jeffrey Wright's mad scientist shtick.
The freeze frame makes much more sense within the internal logic the film sets up - this isn't time-travel, it's a temporal re-enactment. It being the program or 'code' coming to an end is quite sweet. Even if the film was to get all theological and suggest the post freeze-frame stuff is Colter's 'heaven', it would work better than the reveal that 'Source Code is more powerful than you can ever imagine'.
Though it would admittedly be very difficult for a studio film to accept the fact that whatever happens, hundreds of people are going to die and stay dead.
Devin made a good point in his review that I haven't seen much elsewhere. The general lack of jeopardy is a problem. The control room environment is so sterile that it does a pretty poor job of making Colter's mission urgent. You have no sense of how long it has been since the train exploded or how many 'lives' he has. Even when you find out that another bomb is going to be set off, it still feels like Gyllenhaal can re-do the 8 minutes infinitely, particularly as there seem to be no ill-effects for him. I think they could have got to the mission much earlier and still had the existential crisis in act 2 with higher stakes.
I liked this movie a lot but I'm reminded of an article I read a while back about movies with happy endings that really aren't. What happens when this poor woman finds out the sweet teacher she's got a crush on is possessed with the mind of a dead helicopter pilot suffering from what would have to be the world's worst case of post-traumatic stress syndrome?
That's why it was a very smart choice to make the two characters friendly commuters without a romantic past. If he just took over her boyfriend it would be very weird, as it is she probably would have actually known very little of substance about the real dude.
Sorry, double post.
I dislike this critique, and I think it's common in Devin's thought process, not to mention other contemporary critics. Which is, this is a critique based on the film not being a thrill-a-minute crowd pleaser in 2011. Lack of jeopardy = not the conventional blockbuster whiz-bang I am used to, and I think it places the film in a specific context. Specifically, I think it comes from the constant discussion of box office and studios, like when people review a film and say, I don't know if this is going to do well at the box office, or I don't know if this is going to win awards. As if that had anything to do with one person's critical opinion.
As is, no, I was not necessarily on the edge of my seat by the lack of "stakes" at certain points, but it was this exact element that kept me fascinated throughout the film's runtime, particularly the second half. Devin's (and others') "problem" is actually an effort on the film's part to compel me intellectually, since I became fascinated with just how much space for logic and acceptance there is within the Source Code - it is technology that makes life both merciful (these moments will live forever) and harsh (death is always coming).
I liked it. Repeater movies like this can get old quick, but Gyllenhaal keeps thing interesting. I thought he put in a really solid performance, especially when he's all wide-eyed and unhinged.
*quickly puts pen in his shirt pocket*
"CAN I BORROW YOUR PEN????"
It gets schmaltzy at the end with the whole 'pulling the plug' thing, but Stevens was a likeable guy who served his country and had been put through hell, so I was ok with it. Then it got really schmaltzy with the 'source code somehow created a happy alternate reality' thing and that was a bit much.
It's predictable and ironically, it ends roughly three times, but I enjoyed it quite a bit. The very positive, "hug your neighbor" ending wasn't a problem for me at all, because Duncan Jones seems to me to be the kind of person and filmmaker with very positive, humanist values. It is a very safe film though, with a villain non-descript enough to offend no one at all (a more specific and divisive villain would probably counter that all-inclusive ending). If I have one serious complaint, it's that Michelle Monaghan has nothing to do in this film but serve as the ideal dream girl for Stevens. She has zero depth, a character literally made up of pleasant, recyclable surface details. She's attractive, smiles a lot, has an open, welcoming face, and that's it. End of list. Ultimately, Vera Farmiga's character is more important, and as she is an amazing actress compared to the merely good Monaghan, her face reveals a lot more about the character (of course, Farmiga actually affecting the narrative in a legitimate way helped a hell of a whole lot as well).
Anybody else catch the inclusion of that "One and Only" song that appeared in Moon? It was on the ring tone. I guess Duncan Jones mentioned it in the Q and A that Renn posted. I hope that it becomes a director trademark in some way, which I guess brings up the question as to when a director trademark becomes a gimmick.
I was hoping the film would sort of run off with some of the comic elements. My audience ate it up when Gyllenhal was unhinged and interacting with passengers in a world without consequences. I was hoping for some more quick cut visits to the source code. There has to be a point where he feels like he's not getting anywhere with the mystery, so maybe he feels like throwing in the towel for a while and goes on several 8 minute "dates" with the Michelle Monaghan. This could all be shot in a way that you could do it quickly without taking away from the suspense story and would've made the love story more real.
I am fucking shocked at how good this was. Was it more mainstream than Moon? Sure. But it cemented in my mind the belief that Duncan is the real deal. I am so, so impressed at how well he straddled the line between visionary and mainstream. I don't think people are giving this movie enough credit. It's slick, it's entertaining, it's pretty smart for a popcorn flick (actually makes you think a little bit even if it isn't exactly "deep"), the acting is solid, and you can tell the story we got is a pretty uncompromised vision. I've read people complain about the love story, that you either buy it or you don't. I, for one, totally bought it. If you died over and over again with the same, pretty, decent woman, even if you didn't know her, you would feel a bond. And once he realizes that he's dead, she's the only thing he has to live for. I thought the love story made perfect sense.
While part of me wishes the movie ended on the freeze-frame near the end, I really liked the implication that this cycle will repeat itself over and over again from here on out with different terrorist attacks, leaving one parallel reality where every attack is stopped before it happens.
Also, I suspect word-of-mouth is going to be really strong with this one. I expect it to do pretty well when all is said and done, and I'm happy for Duncan.
Glad to see Jake Gyllenhaal in something that doesn't involve a loin cloth.
Loved the hell out of the movie. The scene with Jake talking to his dad was great. I kind of wish they would have ended with the kiss. I like the happy ending but feel the other is more realistic. Though I do like the idea of them nott know exactly what they created.
My theory on the film follows a little more in the realm of
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Parallel Universes. The source code actually does send his consciousness through time creating a parallel universe each time he is sent back. Each world goes on, in that other world, the Doctor gets the phone call from him and so on.
My theory on the film follows a little more in the realm of
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Parallel Universes. The source code actually does send his consciousness through time creating a parallel universe each time he is sent back. Each world goes on, in that other world, the Doctor gets the phone call from him and so on.
I don't know if the code "creates" a parallel universe, or if these parallel universes already exist and it's only through accessing them that they're able to inspect the past. I'd have to see it again, but I kind of think it's the latter. There's a popular theory about the nature of reality, one that's probably bullshit but a lot of physicists like it, that every possibility plays itself out within an infinity of universes. My impression is that the physics of the film was borrowing from that.
Saw the film today and really enjoyed it.
Oh sure, it's no genre-defining epic, like an Inception, but it's not trying to be. And is it ever different than Moon; Source Code is a down-the-middle-of-the-plate studio action thriller with elements of science fiction/fantasy.
The ending is what it is, a finale that any major studio would love, but I didn't hate it either. Just so we're clear (SPOILER Ahead): Source Code essentially turns out to be a time travel device, with the ability to alter the past, right? I was just bothered by how Gyllenhaal's character realized it during the phone texting to Farmiga's character scene; didn't make much sense.
Also, this was one of the few films where I enjoyed a Gyllenhaal performance in a major studio release, aside from October Sky. Why does Jones know how to use him, yet the dude comes off as really grating/annoying in flicks like Prince of Persia?
Just so we're clear (SPOILER Ahead): Source Code essentially turns out to be a time travel device, with the ability to alter the past, right? I was just bothered by how Gyllenhaal's character realized it during the phone texting to Farmiga's character scene; didn't make much sense.
Not exactly. The Source Code allows one to travel to the past of a parallel universe. Jeffery Wright says you can't change the past in THIS universe, but Gyllenhall essentially changed the past in a number of alternate parallel universes, and managed to avert the catastrophe in one. If he had changed the past in the "original" universe, then that universe would have necessarily ceased to exist, yet we see events occur in that universe after he has already averted the catastrophe in the parallel one. The brilliance of this branching universe concept is that it conveniently avoids your typical time-travel paradoxes. It also exposes those who complain about the film violating its own internal logic at the end as not getting it.
Ah, gotcha.
I'm now remembering the bit of dialogue between Colter and Farmiga's character, about her divorce, and if she would have made different life choices in another reality, so it ties in pretty nicely.
I went to see this one with my retired Dad, and the movie seemed to play well with the early Sunday showing/'Grandparents' crowd. Source Code has 'mainstream hit' written all over it. Even if it doesn't stay at #2, I feel that it can hang around the top five releases for a few weeks and make some serious bank, a la The Blind Side.
BTW, the Thor trailer played terribly to this crowd, a lot of guffaws and "Oh Gawwd"s, and it didn't help that the movie genuinely looks an out-and-out stinker.
Really glad people are seeing/enjoying the flick.
Though I don't think everyone needs to be so coy/cautious about spoilers. Any fool reading a post-release discussion thread without having seen said film does so at their own peril.
Well, I think everything has been pretty much touched upon. Any comment above I thought I could comment on myself was addressed below it.
So with that in mind, I'll throw in my two cents and say that I liked it as well. I actually moaned for a moment thinking we would get an "Inception" style ending; basically cutting to black either at the freeze frame or just before, leaving it open for discussion if he really did die. I'm glad they actually didn't end it there. Got me thinking more with the ending they have.
My only question would be that, seeing as since they didn't use him in the source-code yet (since he averted the disaster), but his consciousness was basically downloaded into a new body, if they were to use his mind again could there be possibility hundreds of Colter's personalities all across parallel universes? In the end he was the same guy just in a new body. And since that disaster was averted they were waiting to use the source-code in the future, but Colter was still alive at the facility and basically existing in the same universe as two people.
My only question would be that, seeing as since they didn't use him in the source-code yet (since he averted the disaster), but his consciousness was basically downloaded into a new body, if they were to use his mind again could there be possibility hundreds of Colter's personalities all across parallel universes? In the end he was the same guy just in a new body. And since that disaster was averted they were waiting to use the source-code in the future, but Colter was still alive at the facility and basically existing in the same universe as two people.
Exactly. Presumably this cycle could repeat itself over and over again so long as Colter continues to avert attacks. In fact, you could potentially wind up with more than two Colters in any one reality.
Anybody else catch the inclusion of that "One and Only" song that appeared in Moon? It was on the ring tone. I guess Duncan Jones mentioned it in the Q and A that Renn posted. I hope that it becomes a director trademark in some way, which I guess brings up the question as to when a director trademark becomes a gimmick.
Heck yeah I did. "The One and Only" by Chesney Hawkes is one of my favorite songs of all time. It's also prominently featured in the opening credits sequence of an underrated little gem from the early 90's... "Doc Hollywood."
I liked this alright, but it did remind me of a conversation I had with a friend the other day while waiting to see Kill Bill The Whole Bloody Affair at the New Beverly. He had seen Sucker Punch, which I haven't, and said his real problem with it was there weren't any stakes because it was all in the characters head (I don't think this is a spoiler if you've seen the trailers). I felt similarly about this movie. It would seem Jake's character has an infinite chance to figure things out, and doing so really has no bearing on him. He's dead. Nothing is going to change it. He saves a place he no longer has any connection to, and does it with still quite a bit of time left in the film. That he gets to possibly spend the rest of his life in some Matrix like computer generated alternate reality in someone else's body doesn't really seem like the best reward. Beyond those problems, it's an interesting film, and I do like a good time travel yarn.
I feel the film addressed those stakes when they played the wav file of his dad saying how proud he was that his son was a hero. Dead or not, he couldn't turn his back on the man his father believed him to be.
And he finds out when we do that he's going to extend past that perfect, perfect freeze frame, so living someone else's life is never a reward he was after. That moment IS his reward; he doesn't need to continue past it, which is why it grates a bit. What's extra frustrating about the actual ending to me is it really does introduce some nifty Duncan Jones-ian ideas in the last three minutes. They just rankle because they undermine that perfectly transcendent freeze frame.
Nitpick: anyone who's been to Chicago recognized that big-ass reflective sculpture in Millennium Park every time Colter blasted into and out of the source code, so we knew it had to show up at some point.
Yeah, I dug this a lot. There are problems with the ending but given those gaps in logic or what we know about science, I thought the love story was totally earned. Or maybe I'm just turning into a sentimental guy. But to at least explain my thinking: At first, I thought that it worked because of the psychological truth to what Gyllenhall's captain was going through in the computer sim, but then, as it turns out, there is some reality to what he was doing. So not only does it make sense for him to fall in love but it's not as if Michelle Monahan's character is some NPC (alert: video game term) that is programmed to submit to his will.
In the end, this is a very mainstream, crowd-pleasing picture, but it works as a perosnal creative statement too. I totally get why people are rooting for it-- it's not often that you see something that straddles the line this well, and isn't called Inception.
I feel the film addressed those stakes when they played the wav file of his dad saying how proud he was that his son was a hero. Dead or not, he couldn't turn his back on the man his father believed him to be.
And he finds out when we do that he's going to extend past that perfect, perfect freeze frame, so living someone else's life is never a reward he was after. That moment IS his reward; he doesn't need to continue past it, which is why it grates a bit. What's extra frustrating about the actual ending to me is it really does introduce some nifty Duncan Jones-ian ideas in the last three minutes. They just rankle because they undermine that perfectly transcendent freeze frame.
Nitpick: anyone who's been to Chicago recognized that big-ass reflective sculpture in Millennium Park every time Colter blasted into and out of the source code, so we knew it had to show up at some point.
I agree 100% with this. I still loved the movie, but I wish it had ended 90 seconds earlier.
Nitpick: anyone who's been to Chicago recognized that big-ass reflective sculpture in Millennium Park every time Colter blasted into and out of the source code, so we knew it had to show up at some point.
Is that really a problem though? Foreshadowing a piece of imagery and then paying it off at a key moment? I though it was great that not only is the piece (Cloud Gate) itself integrated into the transitions, but the warping, liquify visual effect was also turned into a motif that informed transitions and effects elsewhere. I've also mentioned it before, but by having the sculpture teased consistently throughout the film, it made the ending feel earned and natural, rather than tacked-on at the studio's behest or whatever.
I've seen mentioned above a couple statements about his infinite chances and/or some sort of unlimited time frame to figure it out. He doesn't really. He's only got so long until the next bomb explodes in the "real" world to figure out who the bomber is. So there would be a definite stopping point for sending him into the source-code. If the commuter train blew up, at say 9am, and the bomb threat was for sometime in the afternoon, say 3pm, he would only have 43 or so trips to figure it out. He's gone for 8 minutes at a time.
I've seen mentioned above a couple statements about his infinite chances and/or some sort of unlimited time frame to figure it out. He doesn't really. He's only got so long until the next bomb explodes in the "real" world to figure out who the bomber is. So there would be a definite stopping point for sending him into the source-code. If the commuter train blew up, at say 9am, and the bomb threat was for sometime in the afternoon, say 3pm, he would only have 43 or so trips to figure it out. He's gone for 8 minutes at a time.
This. I'm not sure why this is going over so many people's heads when it comes to complaining about a lack of urgency.
I saw the film this weekend and really enjoyed it. I also think there can't be multiple versions of himself out there... each time he went past that 8 minute mark by deviating from the train explosion we cut back to Goodwin trying to get ahold of him in a frantic fashion. The first being when he got off to investigate the motion sickness guy and the second being when he found Derek Frost. Each time it appeared as if he went beyond that 8 minute mark.
The more I think about it, the more I love it. Thought the freeze frame was nearly transcendent, but the more I think about it; the more the actual ending, happy as it is (and I think earned by the character) is dark as hell. Colter died, and is born again, sure, but in order to live...dude, he just stonewalled an entire man's personality! He effectively killed him in that timeline. Now, one can say that that was never the plan, Colter knew that this last trip was one way, but why is he Colter more deserving of that life than the teacher? And dear me, what happens when he is asked questions by friends, family, etc. So the ending is dark, but I'm okay with that because I was rooting for Jake. He was great in this and I loved his moments of 'not giving a fuck' while trying to find the bomb.
Great little movie. Thank you, Duncan Jones.
I saw the film this weekend and really enjoyed it. I also think there can't be multiple versions of himself out there... each time he went past that 8 minute mark by deviating from the train explosion we cut back to Goodwin trying to get ahold of him in a frantic fashion. The first being when he got off to investigate the motion sickness guy and the second being when he found Derek Frost. Each time it appeared as if he went beyond that 8 minute mark.
He definitely went past the 8 minute mark each time he avoided death on the train, and his consciousness returned to our reality. But, each time he entered a parallel past, there were two of him. There was the Colter that was embodying the teacher and there was the Colter in a lab somewhere. At the end, when Colter does remain in the teacher's body, there are permanently two Colters. If the cycle were to repeat itself, you could potentially have three Colters (one in the lab, one embodied in the teacher and another embodying another victim of an attack). And so on.
Nitpick: anyone who's been to Chicago recognized that big-ass reflective sculpture in Millennium Park every time Colter blasted into and out of the source code, so we knew it had to show up at some point.
Yeah I kept seeing it and wondered if it was some sort of memory left over from Sean.
He definitely went past the 8 minute mark each time he avoided death on the train, and his consciousness returned to our reality. But, each time he entered a parallel past, there were two of him. There was the Colter that was embodying the teacher and there was the Colter in a lab somewhere. At the end, when Colter does remain in the teacher's body, there are permanently two Colters. If the cycle were to repeat itself, you could potentially have three Colters (one in the lab, one embodied in the teacher and another embodying another victim of an attack). And so on.
Gotcha, I was thinking someone was talking about multiple parallel universes where he was in each one (from each time he was sent back). Each time he died he was brought back, that was the trigger for returning him, or so it seemed.
Quote:
The more I think about it, the more I love it. Thought the freeze frame was nearly transcendent, but the more I think about it; the more the actual ending, happy as it is (and I think earned by the character) is dark as hell. Colter died, and is born again, sure, but in order to live...dude, he just stonewalled an entire man's personality! He effectively killed him in that timeline. Now, one can say that that was never the plan, Colter knew that this last trip was one way, but why is he Colter more deserving of that life than the teacher?
Glad I'm not the only one who thought this! Sure, the teacher would've died anyway if Colter hadn't intervened, but still.
I wonder: do you people who have a problem with the movie going past the freeze frame ending, would you have been more satisfied if say, after said freeze frame, we cut to the teacher, now back in control of his body? And that Colter experienced one moment of happiness before being ripped out of that happy reality that he created for those people on the train, who would continue to live in that reality?
God, this movie has so many cool ideas floating around it. I think my favorite reveal though, for some reason, was the reveal that Goodwin and co. weren't seeing Colter himself, but merely text. It made me think back to how they were talking to him before, how they were treating him not as a person but as bits of text.
Also, this is the second movie Jones has done where the normally end of movie "twist" happens midway through, thus leaving the rest of the movie to explore it. Kind of wish more movies would do this. Imagine a Sixth Sense where Bruce finds out he's dead halfway through!
Hmm...that doesn't sound very good now that I think about it...but you know what I mean.
Quote:
I think my favorite reveal though, for some reason, was the reveal that Goodwin and co. weren't seeing Colter himself, but merely text. It made me think back to how they were talking to him before, how they were treating him not as a person but as bits of text.
I loved this too! And once you realized where he was didn't even exist, it made perfect sense.
But it does make you wonder how Colter could "see" them as well. Learning eventually that the...for lack of a better word...ship he was in was a projection of his creating, wouldn't Goodwin and co. be as well? He's in a box in the other room, can't see them and never met them. I guess for arguements sake they could have wired something into his brain and connected it to the monitor, so instead of using his eyes he got an image directly into his brain. Maybe answered my own question, there.
Really enjoyed this. Duncan Jones does such a fantastic job of exploring some pretty neat ideas without compromising mainstream accessibility. He also does a fantastic job of juggling all the shifts in tone. There was a lot more levity than I was expecting (Gylenhaal is great in these moments), and the way Jones bounces between the more playful scenes and the heavy emotional stuff and some truly haunting images (the full shot of Stevens' torso hooked up to the machinery really stuck with me) feels so organic.
Quote:
God, this movie has so many cool ideas floating around it. I think my favorite reveal though, for some reason, was the reveal that Goodwin and co. weren't seeing Colter himself, but merely text. It made me think back to how they were talking to him before, how they were treating him not as a person but as bits of text.
I loved this reveal as well. The way Jones handles these twists and turns is just so refreshing - hes like the anti-M. Night. I should have known better, but for the last act, I kept waiting for that bombastic musical cue and crazy reveal that leads to a big final set piece; an explosion or a chase, something you'd typically find in the climax of your conventional techno-thriller. Instead, the movie ended with some heartfelt character moments that were totally earned.
Side note: Weird performance from Wright. I dug it, but it felt Shatner-esque at times.
I just realize that, had the teacher returned to his own body after Colter set right what was once wrong, the movie would essentially be Quantum Leap.
I loved this too! And once you realized where he was didn't even exist, it made perfect sense.
But it does make you wonder how Colter could "see" them as well. Learning eventually that the...for lack of a better word...ship he was in was a projection of his creating, wouldn't Goodwin and co. be as well? He's in a box in the other room, can't see them and never met them. I guess for arguements sake they could have wired something into his brain and connected it to the monitor, so instead of using his eyes he got an image directly into his brain. Maybe answered my own question, there.
Well, they were looking into a camera, so presumably it's wired into his brain. I was actually a little worried they were saving the reval that he was dead for the end, because as soon as Wright says "You think you're in a pod, so that's what is looks like to you?" I figured Colter was a brain in a vat or something. Was very happy that his death became part of his journey, rather than a "twist".
I just realize that, had the teacher returned to his own body after Colter set right what was once wrong, the movie would essentially be Quantum Leap.
Even without that happening, the film does more than a few nods towards acknowledging the similarities. First is the reflection reveal in the bathroom at the beginning, the second one being casting Scott Effin' Bakula as Coulter's dad. He even says "...Oh boy" when Coulter calls him at the end. As a life long fan of the show, I did a little mini fist pump when that happened.
Though I get wanting to end with the freeze frame (and with a smaller budget and an indie release it probably would've ended there), they do the legwork to justify the further reveals in the last five minutes. Overall though, loved everything about it.
Best moment for me? The look Jake gives the bomb when he disconnects the cell phone and it doesn't blow up. That "YEAH! What then?!" look. Cracked me up.
While the freeze frame is definitely a highlight worthy addition to the film (full of highlight worthy moments), I keep thinking back to the moment where, if I remember the particular 8 minute piece, Jake was just handcuffed for trying to steal the gun and he's on the floor, bleeding from the head, Christie is there and I forget exactly what he says, but he says 'tell me everything's going to be alright.' The bomb blows up and we see creeping towards them in slow motion and they're sitting there, lost in a totally human moment right before they're engulfed. I mangled it, but I thought it was beautiful.
I liked the score, but man I was Clint Mansell had gotten tapped for this one. The theme to Moon is one of the best scores of the last few years and I would've loved to have seen him and Jones team up again.
I actually thought the freeze frame was pretty cheesy. Not nearly as schmaltzy as the rest of the ending, but still problematic. It's one thing to latch on to the ridiculous concept, but then the script ups the ante with all those endings. The movie just gets a little too greedy.
Ultimately, I liked it though. It had enough interesting things going for it to enjoy, it just kinda craps the bed. You can tell Jones was brought in as a director for hire, but he's a solid choice as this shares a lot of the same themes.
Did anyone else thing that Jeffrey Wright was really over the top? Was that his take on the material (playing up the silliness of it) or was just he just chomping it up for the hell of it? Especially contrasted with Famiga, who was far more restrained. Thought that was a weird choice...
Jeffrey Wright's performance was weird because he was playing Dick Cheney. Posture, speech patterns, buzzwords... Dick Cheney is a creepy motherfucker.
Farmiga needed to be restrained. Her relationship with Colter was crucial to the film's emotional center. Jeffrey Wright recognized it as his only chance to play a villainous mad scientist. I was in.
