Well, I'm having some problems with it, and I know some things about the concepts D. Jeleva throws in above. So, here goes. Leaving aside the questions about Many Worlds and Multiverse for the moment. among the unavoidable laws of this universe, or that universe, whichever, is the 2nd law of thermodyamics - mathematican/physicist Ludwig Boltzman's statistically supported extrapolation from Newton's laws of motion. Another term for that is CHAOS - that the universal direction of TIME is towards increasing complexity and away from simplicity, even singularity if one accepts the thrust of the Grand Unified Theory of theoretical physicist Alan Guth as modified by Andrei Linde (and others) (The idea of whether or not GUT qualifies as "science" is the subject of a big fooferah being conducted in posts and comments this spring in SCIENCE magazine. There's lots of ways into exploring that battle, but I recommend one or both of two scientists on opposing sides of it: CalTech's Sean Carroll, and Columiba's Peter Woit, each of whom runs a highly popular and strongly opinionated blog that for the most part little brains like mine at least imagine we can handle.). Call that direction The Arrow of Time, which happens to be the title of one of Carroll's best known books. As I understand, among it's implications are that while travel into the future is permitted under Einstein Relativity, travel back into the past is impossible. As to 'visiting' the past, we think we'd like to because we have left-over impressions from our own near-past and can read and watch films about and research the relics of not just our own near-past but to some extent the entire universal past going all the way back to a fragment of a second following the Big Bang. But while those relics are accessible to us as essentially 'bones' of the past, and enable us to IMAGINE travelling back into the past of which they are fossilized remnants, they are not actually vehicles for and have no properties in them enabling travel back to their earlier state. IOW, the past is gone for good, and all we can due is muse on its trash. Now, D. Jeleva mentions "Many Worlds", which I won't even try to explain here in any great depth except that Many Worlds is something Sean Carroll in particular is a leading edge proponent of, so there's your travel guide to it. As I understand it, Many Worlds is a derivation from an idea that an American theoretical physicist named Hugh Everett came up with just after WW2 and into the early 1950s. Everett's idea was that the Schrodinger Equation (same Schrodinger who came up with the thought experiment involving the cat in the box that's simultaneously alive and dead until you open the box to 'fix' its status) was just some fulsome combo of proven physics from Newton thru Maxwell, Boltzmann, Planck Einstein etc to Quantum Physics, but that the so-called "collapse of the wave function" that occurs as Schrodinger's Equation is rendered DYNAMIC means that the past is lost to US, but still real on its own, and going on somewhere else we can't interact with. And not just "a" past, the remnants of which are left to us to look at and consider, but ALL POSSIBLE FUTURES or OUTCOMES from that past state, to some ridiculous number that's effectively indistinguishable from infinity. And all those OTHER "pasts" are continuing on their own narrow branches while we travel along or own twig, and all of THEM are leaving behind a virtual infinity of alternative paths as each wave function collapses. Multiverse is a different thing that's not or may not be inconsistent with Many Worlds, but 1. it's not relevant to a critique of this movie and 2. again, it's something you're better off looking first to folks like Carroll and Woit to introduce you to Also, Ethan Seagal is another strong online teacher in this area. And Seagal is particularly good on another concept D. Jeleva touched on called ENTANGLEMENT (what Einstein in the 1930s derided as "spooky action at a distance", referring to its APPARENT capacity to negate the universal speed limit of photons, which IS something that's arguably relevant to the ideas in this movie, AND if you look into in any depth at all that is quite literally more "fun" that a barrel of live active monkeys. So here's the movie is fun and not necessarily off base: in the idea that one person's consciousness / or unconsciousness, of which one or the other or both are being used in the Source Code project, namely those of the critically injured helicopter pilot, can be 'fed' or dropped into an illusion of reality created off a design constructed from the remnants of another person's last and briefly retained memory (and other information as well - I think that it really would have to work better if the second person's retained memory is adjusted to OTHER remnants of the recent past that are more objectively measusred versus entirely emotional as animal memories necessarily are) can in effect seem to 'explore' and 'live' inside that designed construct, within limits I don't have the brain or time to go into here. But that wouldn't be AFFECTING any 'past', it would instead be a NEW MEMORY for the first person, in this case the pilot. And as the pilot messes around and explores further and deeper into that designed contruct, he'd not only be drawing on his own memory of previous speelunking into it, he'd be push the design limits, and CERTAINLY would be going welll beyond anything that could even produce a remnant in the brain of the second person, the one who actually got blowed up real good. So, I can see how the Source Code project feeding OTHER information into the construct would allow the pilot to explore in areas the dead guy could not possibly have seen, leave aside acquired a memory of capable of being reduced to code. BUT it's all clearly ONLY going on inside the pilot's brain - none of it can POSSIBLY affect the actual long gone past. When the pilot made his request of his supervising officer, that he be sent back one more time then have his 'plug pulled', that kind of made sense to me as him KNOWING this all went on inside his brain and what he was after was dying with a happier memory, of saving the girl, saving passengers, averting the explosion, foiling the bad guy, saving the day - but ONLY his memory of that: it wouldn't be possible to alter the past to change THAT future, or any perceptible future for anyone beyond himself. So the implications of the pilot and girl standing in front of the Cloud Gate in Chicago can be explained within some view of what some, including scientists, call science, the implications from the brief closing scenes back at Nelles Air Force Base the next morning cannot be explained by ANY theory I'm aware of, by ANY self-respecting theoretical physicist --- except as an imagined extension of the pilot's brain. He can THINK that what happened at NAFB the next morning happened that way. But it cannot be some objective state that any OTHER animal could perceive. IOW there's a distinction between the Many Worlds 'left behind' with the collapse of the Wave Function OTOH, and the imagined continuation of an illusion of one narrow twig that the pilot is out on, on the other hand. The first is (sort of) science-y, the second is magic mysticism. All that said, if I'm missing some key resolution here, I'd be happy as an imaginary clam in an imaginary pollution free ocean to be told of it. So, attack away, internet.
They took pages from Groundhog Day, Inception, Speed, Avatar, Edge of Tomorrow, and Minority report and put them in a blender to make this script. And yet, somehow, it worked.
I'd easily give it a 9,5 there aren't that many films that can give that certain edge that this movie gave; the touchy moment when he called his dad, the love he shares with christina, the pshycopath wanting to blow up chicago and Jake's characters way of looking at the source code no matter what people tell him. Everything in my opinion was great only some elements could have been sharpened abit more to make this movie an easy ten. In my opinion
The rules didn't change. In practice, it was not what the designers expected. In the end, Stevens said "the source code is far more powerful than you expected" or something.
Best I can figure, an incalculable number of Real Sean blowed up real good, but in at least one illusion of reality Colter Stevens' consciousness inside formerly Real Sean's body design is entering into a serious heterosexual relationship with Colter's memory of Real Sean's friend Real Christine, of whom also an incalculable number of Real Christine's blowed up real good. The only ways Colter could 'acquire' dead Real Sean's past memories would be thru the same means that we use to piece together some understanding of the past - through bones, fossils, remnants, etc. ONE WOULD THINK that, anyway - except with the whole delicate premise of the first 88 minutes having been shattered by the closing scenes at Nelles AFB, WTF knows what other magic the screenwriters might resort to. IOW feel free to imagine that Real Sean's body and brainpan retained memories like certain worms and cephlalopods have brain functions located at various places in their bodies, but you still have a big barrier to overcome in that there's no indication that the 8 minutes of pre-death memory Sean contributed to the Source Code design that Colter was stuck into would also retain other past memories. OTOH, we're such tiny weak creatures, maybe 8 minutes of pre-death memory is enough to construct an entire past journey. But then, did you see any difficulties that Colter had in accessing his own self and keeping Sean's self at bay? I sure didn't. It seems to be if Sean's memories were to start showing up, Colter would soon go stark raving bonkers.
@geekboyII NO WAY! The ending was the best part. What the director was trying to convey is that those last 8 min are what life is about - how life should be enjoyed. It was the director's take on how he thinks life should be lived at all times. It's like in school where the teacher asks everyone how they would spend their last day. That last minute where everything was in freeze frame is how the director would like everyone to spend everyday of their life.
They actually DO seem to read the comments. People complained about the lack of post-production, and now they've got great post-production. People complained about the ugly black tablecloth, and they got rid of it. People complained about having laptops and Starbucks cups on the tables, and they got rid of those. People complained about Ben checking his phone during the show, and he stopped. People complained about the length of the reviews, and they're much shorter now.
This is my second favorite thriller right next to North By Northwest. Now; as far as sci-fi thrillers: It’s number one. I think it’s one of the most underrated films of this type. Why? Because it’s aged well, and every time I watch this flick over the years(I first watched it back in 2012)I get more out of it philosophically. Does one have to suspend belief a little to watch it? Heck yes! Didn’t we all for Back To The Future? I think 7 as a rating is too stingy. It’s a 10! By the way: Jake Gyllenhaal is measured in all of his movies. He was perfect for this role. Now, Jeffery Wright mostly plays himself: intense. So I think he’s a great fit for the dedicated driven super-scientist as well. Thrillers are supposed to be FUN. This movie is just that. It MOVES all the way through. And it’s got a cute girl for the main guy to get and fall in love with. Please don’t pick it apart. Get some popcorn and watch it. Good review by the way.
@mikranet so it was like a glitch? I sort of get it but how does that work? was this at the same time? (when she press the button and that frozen moment)
@PanzarMetal speaking of not getting it, it was my sarcastic way of saying the movie is straightforward and just because you didnt get it doesnt mean it wasnt explained.
the 8 minutes were from the random man's memory, so he could never find the bomb because the random man never saw it, he would only see what he saw and what was in his memory anyway good movie
I liked this movie as much as I liked Bill Murray in Groundhog's Day. You guys were fair. It is too bad the lady does not droil over guys the way Ben droils over girls. Seriously, how hot is that actor Jake? The military/penal sort of thing is working for him.
I saw this movie with as little info as possible. I was surprised and highly entertained. Not to pleased with the ending, but it was nice. Now that i see bits of the trailer, it would've completely spoiled it for me.
Don't read comment if you haven't seen the movie. Major spoiler. If I may ask a question. If in the ending he prevented the train from blowing up shouldn't he not be in that guy's body anymore? Cause once he prevented the bomb from going off they wouldn't have send him back into the teacher's body.
There are no plot holes. The ending is brilliant but one needs a rudimentary understanding of quantum mechanics. The "Source code" algorithm is obviously based on quantum entanglement . The ending is based on the many worlds interpretation. There are (possibly) infinitely many universes. In some of them the train explodes, in others it does not.
*SPOILER* So in the end is he simply in a different reality? Lots of people think it's heaven for some reason, but isn't he just in a different reality, it's detached from the first reality?
W00t had given the movie a 6.5 as well, there are just too many things that are left unexplained, the ending is very stupid and it kept me on my appetite
I just watched it again, and while the film is entertaining, there are many definite issues with it's internal logic and very significantly, the use of time. Unlike Deja Vu, which has a similar premise, he is in fact not going back in time. He is not even interacting with the people on the train, regardless of context...one person's consciousness is exploring the memories of another person, a very interesting idea in it's own right...but it is not at all a vehicle for the film's ending.
Oh come people the physics of this is just bonkers. I suppose if you just ignore the ridiculousness you can enjoy it, but I lack that ability. I can't decide which is worse, this, or deja vu.
@chukkufarley **SPOILER ALERT** It's still crazy though. I think that they should do a sequel, following the guy home,and watch him try to explain why the f#*ck he cant remember anything about himself..or having a completely different personality.
@organisedchaosau Uhm yeah words and sentences sometimes have several meanings. I replace 'I' with 'you' because you didnt get what i was saying. period.
@oobaby85 i found inception to be less confusing than source code. source code puts so much out there without properly explaining it. nevertheless i enjoyed it a lot.
The honor that is upheld by the code of a soldier is consistent throughout the film. From Vera Farmiga's attention to strict protocol to jake Gyllenhall's duty as a soldier placed in a complete foreign evnvironment, the attention to the detail of the duties of the officer contacting the family members of the falling soldier is displayed through the mind of this mesmerizing character. I was hooked as Vera Farmiga's character gave the soldier an honorable end after he had successfully completed his mission. I for one believe this is masterpiece filmmaking.
is there any movie u guys have given 10? just wondering cuz all the movies i've watched and thought were epic u guys basically said... yeah well they coulda done better... nothings perfect -.-
The source code is not as good, its not fully polished, Groundhog day and The butterfly effect are great, but the source code is more to the sci-fi thing, and always, if its sci-fi, people want more explanations. Usually after a Sci fi film you dream alot how it would be so and so, but after this you fully didnt get the thing.
This movie and that ....fuckit.. that nwordguy in charge just pies me right the fuck Not only does he not keep his word and promise to let him dieNut this outright torture forcing someone to die over and over again
I find it funny that everyone keeps talking about the holes in the movie but nobody addresses them.
Well, I'm having some problems with it, and I know some things about the concepts D. Jeleva throws in above. So, here goes.
Leaving aside the questions about Many Worlds and Multiverse for the moment. among the unavoidable laws of this universe, or that universe, whichever, is the 2nd law of thermodyamics - mathematican/physicist Ludwig Boltzman's statistically supported extrapolation from Newton's laws of motion. Another term for that is CHAOS - that the universal direction of TIME is towards increasing complexity and away from simplicity, even singularity if one accepts the thrust of the Grand Unified Theory of theoretical physicist Alan Guth as modified by Andrei Linde (and others) (The idea of whether or not GUT qualifies as "science" is the subject of a big fooferah being conducted in posts and comments this spring in SCIENCE magazine. There's lots of ways into exploring that battle, but I recommend one or both of two scientists on opposing sides of it: CalTech's Sean Carroll, and Columiba's Peter Woit, each of whom runs a highly popular and strongly opinionated blog that for the most part little brains like mine at least imagine we can handle.).
Call that direction The Arrow of Time, which happens to be the title of one of Carroll's best known books. As I understand, among it's implications are that while travel into the future is permitted under Einstein Relativity, travel back into the past is impossible. As to 'visiting' the past, we think we'd like to because we have left-over impressions from our own near-past and can read and watch films about and research the relics of not just our own near-past but to some extent the entire universal past going all the way back to a fragment of a second following the Big Bang. But while those relics are accessible to us as essentially 'bones' of the past, and enable us to IMAGINE travelling back into the past of which they are fossilized remnants, they are not actually vehicles for and have no properties in them enabling travel back to their earlier state.
IOW, the past is gone for good, and all we can due is muse on its trash. Now, D. Jeleva mentions "Many Worlds", which I won't even try to explain here in any great depth except that Many Worlds is something Sean Carroll in particular is a leading edge proponent of, so there's your travel guide to it. As I understand it, Many Worlds is a derivation from an idea that an American theoretical physicist named Hugh Everett came up with just after WW2 and into the early 1950s. Everett's idea was that the Schrodinger Equation (same Schrodinger who came up with the thought experiment involving the cat in the box that's simultaneously alive and dead until you open the box to 'fix' its status) was just some fulsome combo of proven physics from Newton thru Maxwell, Boltzmann, Planck Einstein etc to Quantum Physics, but that the so-called "collapse of the wave function" that occurs as Schrodinger's Equation is rendered DYNAMIC means that the past is lost to US, but still real on its own, and going on somewhere else we can't interact with. And not just "a" past, the remnants of which are left to us to look at and consider, but ALL POSSIBLE FUTURES or OUTCOMES from that past state, to some ridiculous number that's effectively indistinguishable from infinity. And all those OTHER "pasts" are continuing on their own narrow branches while we travel along or own twig, and all of THEM are leaving behind a virtual infinity of alternative paths as each wave function collapses.
Multiverse is a different thing that's not or may not be inconsistent with Many Worlds, but 1. it's not relevant to a critique of this movie and 2. again, it's something you're better off looking first to folks like Carroll and Woit to introduce you to Also, Ethan Seagal is another strong online teacher in this area.
And Seagal is particularly good on another concept D. Jeleva touched on called ENTANGLEMENT (what Einstein in the 1930s derided as "spooky action at a distance", referring to its APPARENT capacity to negate the universal speed limit of photons, which IS something that's arguably relevant to the ideas in this movie, AND if you look into in any depth at all that is quite literally more "fun" that a barrel of live active monkeys.
So here's the movie is fun and not necessarily off base: in the idea that one person's consciousness / or unconsciousness, of which one or the other or both are being used in the Source Code project, namely those of the critically injured helicopter pilot, can be 'fed' or dropped into an illusion of reality created off a design constructed from the remnants of another person's last and briefly retained memory (and other information as well - I think that it really would have to work better if the second person's retained memory is adjusted to OTHER remnants of the recent past that are more objectively measusred versus entirely emotional as animal memories necessarily are) can in effect seem to 'explore' and 'live' inside that designed construct, within limits I don't have the brain or time to go into here.
But that wouldn't be AFFECTING any 'past', it would instead be a NEW MEMORY for the first person, in this case the pilot. And as the pilot messes around and explores further and deeper into that designed contruct, he'd not only be drawing on his own memory of previous speelunking into it, he'd be push the design limits, and CERTAINLY would be going welll beyond anything that could even produce a remnant in the brain of the second person, the one who actually got blowed up real good.
So, I can see how the Source Code project feeding OTHER information into the construct would allow the pilot to explore in areas the dead guy could not possibly have seen, leave aside acquired a memory of capable of being reduced to code. BUT it's all clearly ONLY going on inside the pilot's brain - none of it can POSSIBLY affect the actual long gone past.
When the pilot made his request of his supervising officer, that he be sent back one more time then have his 'plug pulled', that kind of made sense to me as him KNOWING this all went on inside his brain and what he was after was dying with a happier memory, of saving the girl, saving passengers, averting the explosion, foiling the bad guy, saving the day - but ONLY his memory of that: it wouldn't be possible to alter the past to change THAT future, or any perceptible future for anyone beyond himself.
So the implications of the pilot and girl standing in front of the Cloud Gate in Chicago can be explained within some view of what some, including scientists, call science, the implications from the brief closing scenes back at Nelles Air Force Base the next morning cannot be explained by ANY theory I'm aware of, by ANY self-respecting theoretical physicist --- except as an imagined extension of the pilot's brain. He can THINK that what happened at NAFB the next morning happened that way. But it cannot be some objective state that any OTHER animal could perceive.
IOW there's a distinction between the Many Worlds 'left behind' with the collapse of the Wave Function OTOH, and the imagined continuation of an illusion of one narrow twig that the pilot is out on, on the other hand. The first is (sort of) science-y, the second is magic mysticism.
All that said, if I'm missing some key resolution here, I'd be happy as an imaginary clam in an imaginary pollution free ocean to be told of it. So, attack away, internet.
hey are you still alive?😂 jst joking
@@crewsadist Holy shit dude.
They took pages from Groundhog Day, Inception, Speed, Avatar, Edge of Tomorrow, and Minority report and put them in a blender to make this script. And yet, somehow, it worked.
Except that it came out 3 years before Edge of Tomorrow.. but yeah it is like a mix of those you mentioned
I'd easily give it a 9,5 there aren't that many films that can give that certain edge that this movie gave; the touchy moment when he called his dad, the love he shares with christina, the pshycopath wanting to blow up chicago and Jake's characters way of looking at the source code no matter what people tell him. Everything in my opinion was great only some elements could have been sharpened abit more to make this movie an easy ten. In my opinion
The rules didn't change. In practice, it was not what the designers expected. In the end, Stevens said "the source code is far more powerful than you expected" or something.
So, what happened to the real Sean? Does Colter Stevens now have Sean's past memories?
Best I can figure, an incalculable number of Real Sean blowed up real good, but in at least one illusion of reality Colter Stevens' consciousness inside formerly Real Sean's body design is entering into a serious heterosexual relationship with Colter's memory of Real Sean's friend Real Christine, of whom also an incalculable number of Real Christine's blowed up real good.
The only ways Colter could 'acquire' dead Real Sean's past memories would be thru the same means that we use to piece together some understanding of the past - through bones, fossils, remnants, etc.
ONE WOULD THINK that, anyway - except with the whole delicate premise of the first 88 minutes having been shattered by the closing scenes at Nelles AFB, WTF knows what other magic the screenwriters might resort to. IOW feel free to imagine that Real Sean's body and brainpan retained memories like certain worms and cephlalopods have brain functions located at various places in their bodies, but you still have a big barrier to overcome in that there's no indication that the 8 minutes of pre-death memory Sean contributed to the Source Code design that Colter was stuck into would also retain other past memories.
OTOH, we're such tiny weak creatures, maybe 8 minutes of pre-death memory is enough to construct an entire past journey. But then, did you see any difficulties that Colter had in accessing his own self and keeping Sean's self at bay? I sure didn't. It seems to be if Sean's memories were to start showing up, Colter would soon go stark raving bonkers.
@geekboyII NO WAY! The ending was the best part. What the director was trying to convey is that those last 8 min are what life is about - how life should be enjoyed. It was the director's take on how he thinks life should be lived at all times. It's like in school where the teacher asks everyone how they would spend their last day. That last minute where everything was in freeze frame is how the director would like everyone to spend everyday of their life.
They actually DO seem to read the comments. People complained about the lack of post-production, and now they've got great post-production. People complained about the ugly black tablecloth, and they got rid of it. People complained about having laptops and Starbucks cups on the tables, and they got rid of those. People complained about Ben checking his phone during the show, and he stopped. People complained about the length of the reviews, and they're much shorter now.
This is my second favorite thriller right next to North By Northwest. Now; as far as sci-fi thrillers: It’s number one. I think it’s one of the most underrated films of this type. Why? Because it’s aged well, and every time I watch this flick over the years(I first watched it back in 2012)I get more out of it philosophically. Does one have to suspend belief a little to watch it? Heck yes! Didn’t we all for Back To The Future? I think 7 as a rating is too stingy. It’s a 10! By the way: Jake Gyllenhaal is measured in all of his movies. He was perfect for this role. Now, Jeffery Wright mostly plays himself: intense. So I think he’s a great fit for the dedicated driven super-scientist as well. Thrillers are supposed to be FUN. This movie is just that. It MOVES all the way through. And it’s got a cute girl for the main guy to get and fall in love with. Please don’t pick it apart. Get some popcorn and watch it. Good review by the way.
@mikranet so it was like a glitch?
I sort of get it but how does that work? was this at the same time? (when she press the button and that frozen moment)
I'm surprised that Limitless has not had a panel review - (J Kim,s review was very quick).
@PanzarMetal speaking of not getting it, it was my sarcastic way of saying the movie is straightforward and just because you didnt get it doesnt mean it wasnt explained.
i dont get the ending.... can anyone explain?
the 8 minutes were from the random man's memory, so he could never find the bomb because the random man never saw it, he would only see what he saw and what was in his memory anyway good movie
@thlin I think they were talking about the rules that the movie set fourth in the begining about the source code.
I thought it was going to be like Vantage Point. But it wasnt.
They changed the flow of the movie and it wasnt constantly on the train.
Id say 7/10...
What the hell do they mean by "gravitas" at around 3:20?
It's definitely one of those movies which is more fun if you go in without seeing a trailer or hearing about it.
I liked this movie as much as I liked Bill Murray in Groundhog's Day. You guys were fair.
It is too bad the lady does not droil over guys the way Ben droils over girls. Seriously, how hot is that actor Jake? The military/penal sort of thing is working for him.
What the hell does he mean for a more cinematic ending? like things blowing up, action?
They could have easily cut out the first 55 seconds of this. The trailer does not do this movie justice. It actually wasnt half bad.
A cross between Quantum leap and groundhogs day
"It's like Groundhog Day, if Bill Murray went into the lobby of the Bed & Breakfast every morning....and exploded". Sold. Thanks guys.
@qtzlctl2012 but how do you explain how Goodwin(?), the female who switched him off from the source code knew about the "change" in reality?>?
I saw this movie with as little info as possible. I was surprised and highly entertained. Not to pleased with the ending, but it was nice.
Now that i see bits of the trailer, it would've completely spoiled it for me.
I think Duncan Jones is one of the directors to look out for.
This movie is a definite 8.5+ I think they are low balling it, but whatever, at lease they recommended it.
I WISH I WAS IN THIS MOVIE.
Don't read comment if you haven't seen the movie. Major spoiler.
If I may ask a question. If in the ending he prevented the train from blowing up shouldn't he not be in that guy's body anymore? Cause once he prevented the bomb from going off they wouldn't have send him back into the teacher's body.
@HIMYNAMEISEVAN Because when you said "Jake Gylelenhaal is ridiculously hot" it made me think that's what a 14 yr old girl would say.
There are no plot holes. The ending is brilliant but one needs a rudimentary understanding of quantum mechanics. The "Source code" algorithm is obviously based on quantum entanglement . The ending is based on the many worlds interpretation. There are (possibly) infinitely many universes. In some of them the train explodes, in others it does not.
Hahahahahaha
*SPOILER*
So in the end is he simply in a different reality? Lots of people think it's heaven for some reason, but isn't he just in a different reality, it's detached from the first reality?
THERE IS NO RULES IN MOVIES!
I wish Ben would read the bad comments about himself!
no... i think this movie deserves more than your giving it.
Matt Atchity is a hug-able little bear, just the way I like it :)
woot, christy's still on
@MadPuppets1 it's basically like any bioware game since you can go back and do different decisions and see different consequences each time
W00t had given the movie a 6.5 as well, there are just too many things that are left unexplained, the ending is very stupid and it kept me on my appetite
Matt isn't fat, he's a "schlubby teddy bear"
Another one I almost completely forgot. A must see.
I just watched it again, and while the film is entertaining, there are many definite issues with it's internal logic and very significantly, the use of time. Unlike Deja Vu, which has a similar premise, he is in fact not going back in time. He is not even interacting with the people on the train, regardless of context...one person's consciousness is exploring the memories of another person, a very interesting idea in it's own right...but it is not at all a vehicle for the film's ending.
Heh what this actually reminds me of from the sounds of it, The third birthday.
2:42 would you say you were Gyllenthraalled? xD
I love all WTF hosts. Especially Ben, Christy and Matt.
Jake Gyllenhaal was WAAAAAAAAY hotter 10 years ago in Donnie Darko
so is the big guy or "fat dueche" the simon of the show?
Oh come people the physics of this is just bonkers. I suppose if you just ignore the ridiculousness you can enjoy it, but I lack that ability. I can't decide which is worse, this, or deja vu.
@chukkufarley **SPOILER ALERT**
It's still crazy though. I think that they should do a sequel, following the guy home,and watch him try to explain why the f#*ck he cant remember anything about himself..or having a completely different personality.
@organisedchaosau Uhm yeah words and sentences sometimes have several meanings.
I replace 'I' with 'you' because you didnt get what i was saying. period.
@chukkufarley It was an OK film and everything, I just think that too much was heaped onto the audience without explanation...if that makes sense.
@oobaby85 i found inception to be less confusing than source code. source code puts so much out there without properly explaining it. nevertheless i enjoyed it a lot.
@PonytailPlease nope he showed no signs of that
Damn Christy is fine.
The honor that is upheld by the code of a soldier is consistent throughout the film. From Vera Farmiga's attention to strict protocol to jake Gyllenhall's duty as a soldier placed in a complete foreign evnvironment, the attention to the detail of the duties of the officer contacting the family members of the falling soldier is displayed through the mind of this mesmerizing character. I was hooked as Vera Farmiga's character gave the soldier an honorable end after he had successfully completed his mission. I for one believe this is masterpiece filmmaking.
The film was interesting, it kept me excited.
Good review.
hey Ben Mankiewicz i saw you on cnn :)
is there any movie u guys have given 10? just wondering cuz all the movies i've watched and thought were epic u guys basically said... yeah well they coulda done better... nothings perfect -.-
The source code is not as good, its not fully polished,
Groundhog day and The butterfly effect are great, but the source code is more to the sci-fi thing, and always, if its sci-fi, people want more explanations.
Usually after a Sci fi film you dream alot how it would be so and so, but after this you fully didnt get the thing.
@PanzarMetal replace "you" with "i". because i know i got what was going on, apparently you didnt.
@sebisthebestyes thts wht she said
this movie was fucking awesome!
i thought this was going to be the mind blowing movie of 2011- you guys took some steam out of that one. still want to see though.
Ull need to watch the movie again to desive to give rating
@Julietteisme i'm not a 14 yr old girl... however I did enjoy it a lot.
@17thSHIT what is your country?
@NotSober100 His no? What?
@01eximius I bet you don't actually get the film.
I think Ben is the douche
nice directing of the channel videos
I am impressed
Doesn't come out in my country until May 5. But I get Thor earlier than the US. Why does my country get all the stupid movies.
@NotSober100 One letter, but it means something completely different. Learn from this, and start spelling it correctly.
@mrnicktoyou What??????????????????
Its a Movie
I hate time travle movies that keep repeating the same shit over and over again. Even my love of Jake Gyllenhaal couldn't get me to this movie.
weird editing this time around
look for the ones who look ... nervous LOL :D
ok justing thinking about this serugetts( how ever you spell it ) gamer source code have the same idea
@qtzlctl2012 ooohhh.. okay. Thanks for the explanation:P
@Rtv03 yea man trailers today do a lot of spoiling for me. I decide not to watch them.
would be a better video game
@sebisthebestyes Yeah, he's not a douche.
love Christy!
0:13 guy looks like george4title
@BLUEC0RE lol I was thinking the same thing.
@stemcgolf Thank you for making my day, ya nincompoop.
a very average thriller it seems
@qtzlctl2012 oh i get it now, thankyou!(:
@NotSober100 It's "you're", not "your". Get an education.
Christy wears very unflattering clothes ... she should wear nothing
very weak review.
no substance, just repeated comments about how 'gimmicky' the movie was.
bring out the Asian dude.
deja vu
@993wab no
is the chick with the blue baseball jersey, lesbian?
Loved it
@jumar1281 lmao
This movie and that ....fuckit.. that nwordguy in charge just pies me right the fuck Not only does he not keep his word and promise to let him dieNut this outright torture forcing someone to die over and over again