So, yeah. First things first. Unlike them both, who thought this film didn’t live up to the hype (what with all the raving reviews and a 90% rating at Rotten Tomatoes that gave Inception an appropriate 75%), I thought it way surpassed the hype. Actually, leaving popular hype where it belongs (in the shitbucket), Source Code surpassed my own expectations of Duncan Jones whose directorial debut, Moon, being awesome and everything, had me looking forward to his next project for about a year now. And having now seen this piece of celluloid masterpiece, I’m looking more forward to his next project, Mute, than I did for this.
OK, my personal raving aside, time for that which is implicitly promised when I review: Less discussing and more diss-cuss-ing. Source Code is as bad a title for a film as it is for the sci-fi invention used in the film. Source code, as all you proper, would-be and engineer of sorts know, is a generic term for the text part of a computer program. To name your biggest, game-changing technological creation as Source Code makes me question your judgment as well your credentials as a PhD who can tap into the residual consciousness of the dead. Additionally, naming your film by a dry, common software engineering terminology can have anyone – engineers and non-engineers alike – assume or even judge before actually watching it as most do that it’s a computerish or softwarish or geekish film – none it could be any further from. Use some creativity, of which you are evidently brimful, while naming your films for future reference, Jones.
And now the Holy Grail of film critiquing: Masand ki pasand. To put it in simple terms, Masand’s one review of Source Code has more insights and penetrating observations, and a rating that is objectively accurate to the fifth decimal, than the planetary congregation of insights of all those who saw the film, made the film and wrote the screenplay. His unnatural eloquence and insightfulness are on display in what he aptly calls Masand’s Verdict (seriously, why call it anything else when it is exactly that – a verdict, not a review), as can be seen in this exemplary concluding statement of his Source Code verdict: "It’s not perfect." Oh man, what a bummer! It’s not perfect!
Masand’s ideal definition of a perfect film is Avatar, which he gave a singular 5/5 despite acknowledging, using his remarkable I’ve-seen-more-films-than-you-duh power of dissection, that the plot was so predictable as to numb your mind like anesthesia.
In his infinite wisdom, Masand also suggests that Inception lovers and dopers should go watch Source Code. At the risk of being exiled into oblivion for disagreeing with His Insightfulness’ suggestion, I recommend you suspend any expectations of seeing an Inception or some other pop film in this and watch it with a blank-slate preconception plate. When the movie ends and the titles roll and you realize it’s not another Inception or Déjà Vu, you are more likely than not to feel let down. Every film has its inspirations and aspirations from past films – regardless of how original it superficially appears – but to cite those films as a ruler to weigh this film against and to give false ideas of what to expect would lead to despair when the film fails to meet your expectations or goes in a different direction altogether. So put simply, let the film thrill you in its own right.
But yes, both Chris Nolan and Duncan Jones – besides hailing from England, bah! – have similar philosophy at filmmaking, though to varying degrees. Like Nolan, Jones doesn't patronize the audience by either spoon-feeding the story or preaching moral lessons at them. While much is presented visually comprehensibly, he does leave at least some aspect of the story to our imagination and lets us work out why this or that happened by following the clues here and there. He did that in Moon and he does it in SC as well in the much-discussed ending, and he does it so efficiently that the audience feel immensely rewarded when they figure out the why post gestating the questions. However, more important than these intellectual puzzles, and this is the hallmark of a good director, he packs and transforms the whole story into an engaging emotional medium that connects the screen to the audience and lets the drama, the action, the compassion for the characters and the progression of mood flow. He does this consistently for the stretch of the film, and at no point did I feel “left out” or disconnected; I was involved in it; I had lost myself in it. This sadly doesn’t happen with most films I watch.
That, however, is not to say it was all sentimental goo. Far, far from it – subtlety is the key. If there is any director who can pull off a happy ending without making it repulsively cloying (refer: Rajkumar Hirani’s brilliant, amazing, soul-bonding, generation-defining body of work that is saturated with didactic moral chapters on the "right way to do things"), it is Duncan Jones. He has decidedly become an object of envy for me, and I hope to God it stays that way!
8.5/10. Yeah!
Note:
1. Anish Kapoor’s famous sculpture Cloud Gate is featured towards the end of the film – partly chosen for its reflective features, mirror reflection being an important plot device in this film, and partly for artistic purposes.
2. Michelle Monaghan is very cute, damn it!
3. If you do not grasp the answer to the lingering question that’s on everyone’s mind at the end of the film, read this explanation below (not mine). But read only after you watch it – contains spoilers, even the very reading of the question.
SPOILER ALERT:
Q. How does Colter survive longer than 8 minutes in the final transfer to the train bomb scene in the end?
A. Colter's consciousness is sent from his body attached to the source machine in the starting universe to Sean's body in the newly created parallel universe each time source code is "started". When Sean's body is killed in the parallel universe, Colter's consciousness is returned to his body in the starting universe (because of the link via source code). Even if Sean's body isn't killed, Colter's consciousness is still returned to his body in the starting universe, and Sean regains/resumes possession of his own body in the parallel universe. Once Colter's consciousness returns to the starting universe, the source code team then interrogate his conciousness (via the computer terminal) to find out what Colter has learned and then send him to another parallel universe, rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat until they get the information they need.
When Colter is sent to a new parallel universe for the final time by Goodwin, he is able to defuse the bomb and arrest the bomber within 8 minutes and gets prepared for the last kiss of his life just at the end of 8 minutes. When Goodwin in the original universe switches off Colter's life support at the end of 8 minutes, she has terminated Colter's body, but his consciousness is in the final parallel universe. By switching off Colter's life support she has severed Colter's link to his body and he is forever trapped in Sean's body in the final parallel universe (which is what he suspected and wanted to happen). When Colter/Sean dies (presumably of old age) in the final parallel universe, only then will Colter's consciousness finally die.
Good Solid review man. But I would have just about given it 7/10 max
ReplyDeleteAnyway, you have covered up much about everything, but What about the background score?
After a wonderful collaboration with Clint Mansell in his debut movie, (the enigmatic background score was for me the integral reason for liking 'Moon'), this time around Jones has hired a composer, who I think is one of those loser contestants from American Idol, who wanted to prove Simon Cowell wrong by making it big in Hollywood.But unfortunately no Hudson fairytale happens here.
So, Gyllenhaal himself is no DiCaprio and not one capable to hold the viewers attention for extended periods of time. But as soon as he finished his dialogues, I would cringe, during those moments of silence before the next character would respond, as I would've to endure, those major apaswaras, which Jones tries to pass as music.
But then I realised, the more the movie progressed and more the music sucked, the more I wanted Gyllenhall to not shut up, and more I wanted Michelle Monaghan, to repeat she wanted to go to India and more I wanted Russell Peters to well, rustle along.
So in the end Jones actually,turns out a winner, by negating one aspect of his film, he puts the viewers attention to his principal characters, which in retrospect is what ultimately is the goal of his endeavour, I think, or maybe not.
Who knows? Duncan Jones, kind of comes across as smart. Not the 'Nolan' kind mind you (the smartness,which makes certain people, mock it with condescension),but maybe, he might just be actual smart!