By Matt Brunson
SOURCE CODE**1/2 (out of four)
DIRECTED BY Duncan Jones
STARS Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan
Has Duncan Jones already sold out? It’s hard to say, but Source Code, his sophomore effort as director, can only be considered a disappointment given his knock-it-out-of-the-park debut. 2009’s Moon, which missed my 10 Best list that year by one spot, was a dazzling achievement, the sort of heady sci-fi extravaganza one would expect from the son of David Bowie. Source Code is far more mainstream — a thriller designed to give cheer to the weekend multiplex crowds. That’s not meant as a knock — after all, Inception was a big-budget project from a major studio, and we see how that one turned out — and Jones shows that he can handle A-list actors and big-screen action without breaking a sweat. Still, Moon proved that his skills might be better suited to less traditional fare, and he should leave stuff like Source Code to such filmmakers as Joe Carnahan or the brothers Scott.
Or perhaps I’m just overly bitter because Source Code, overall a highly entertaining movie, concludes with what will doubtless remain one of the worst endings of the year. (No spoilers here.) Before we get to this boneheaded section of the film, we’re thrust from the start into the gimmicky setup. Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal), a soldier who had been stationed in Afghanistan, finds that he’s now being utilized in an experiment that allows him to occupy the body of one Sean Fentress, who’s about to be killed, along with all the other passengers, by a bomb planted on a Chicago commuter train. Colter’s mission is to use those last eight minutes in Sean’s body to ferret out the killer’s identity and thereby prevent any future attacks. As explained by his military contact (Vera Farmiga) and the experiment’s creator (Jeffrey Wright), he will keep being sent back to those eight minutes until he acquires the knowledge being sought.
It’s a Groundhog Day scenario mined for tension rather than laughs, and while it’s not that difficult to ID the assassin, the fun comes in watching Colter repeatedly interact with the other commuters, which include Sean’s sweet friend Christina (Michelle Monaghan), and use knowledge from previous “trips” to inform the decisions he makes on subsequent jumps. There’s really only one way for all this to end, but scripter Ben Ripley, believe it or not, jerry-rigs his own storyline by coming up with a conclusion that’s illogical, infuriating and impossible to defend. It provides Source Code with a sour coda that cripples an otherwise sweet ride.
Related Stories
All’s bare in loveless Warcraft
This article appears in Mar 29 – Apr 4, 2011.
Is it possible you just didn’t get the ending? I think it is. Maybe if you respect Duncan Jones this much it’s worth giving the movie another look before brashly concluding that the movie’s ending “will doubtless remain one of the worst endings of the year”.
Hi, Hennut. Thanks for writing. It’s difficult to discuss the ending here because I don’t want to give any spoilers, but there’s a point where the movie should have logically ended, and it would have been a smart, sensible conclusion perfectly in tune with the rest of the story. Instead, the filmmakers chicken out and cook up a nonsensical “happy ending” twist designed solely to guarantee that audience members not leave feeling the least bit ruffled. But by doing so, they betray their own integrity and also consequently leave a GAPING, ignored plot point.
SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I dont think it was one of the worst endings. I think Jones could have seen if he could of changed it to the scene where time within the source code was frozen. Just within the second everyone was happy, it would have been the perfect end to that movie in my opinion.
I would like you to elaborate Matt. I think if you label your response with SPOILER ALERT people will chose to read it if they want. What missing Plot Point?
I like the movie all the way up until the ending because the history teacher that he becomes got screwed over. Where is he now? Is he in some kind of hellish limbo? Is he dead? Does anybody care? That was the biggest problem with the movie that I could find.
Also, I agree with Josh Larson. That would have been the best place to end it.
@ Chief:
Jones addresses the situation with Sean in this interview a tiny bit – http://collider.com/duncan-jones-interview-source-code-3/83616/
Thanks for the response Matt. While you would describe as the ending as “a nonsensical “happy ending” twist designed solely to guarantee that audience members not leave feeling the least bit ruffled” I would call it a beautiful conclusion that left me with both commentary and open ended questions about the true nature of the universe we preside in and the things we can do as conscience beings to influence our own reality and establish significance within our lives.
Near the end of the movie Colter ask Russell Peters’s character why he is acting so bitter. He responds, much like the the vinegar tasting buddha in the book the Tao of Pooh, that he is bitter because the world is a bitter place. Instead of making a judgement on Peter’s assessment with the world Colter simply replies “it doesn’t have to be that way”. Through his choices, Colter has altered the current reality he perceives to arrive at a desirable outcome.
Here’s a question for you: Why does the movie end with the couple staring at Cloud Gate? Is this part of the movie betraying its own integrity to give the audience something nice and shiny to look at or is there something more to be said?
Fair enough, Cahn. (SPOILER ALERT) Actually, Josh Larson and Chief both nailed exactly my problem with the ending. For me, the perfect ending would have been Colter sacrificing himself to save all those people as he had hoped, freeze-framing in that kiss with Christina, and then coming out of the freeze frame with the real Sean (the one glimpsed in the mirror) as the person now kissing Christina. Instead, it’s still Colter, and for the rest of the movie and thereafter, all I could keep thinking was, “What the hell happened to Sean?”
If he had simply been forgotten by the filmmakers (unlikely), then that would just be sloppy writing. But looking at it any other way leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Sean’s entire existence gets wiped out just so Colter, who for all purposes was already a goner, gets to live and get the (other man’s) girl. Though no fault of his own, Colter suddenly seems a lot less gallant in my eyes. But I can’t help but think this concession was made to placate mass audiences, who would rather see Jake Gyllenhaal’s character live than that of a nameless bit player.
And let’s not forget that Christina had already been smitten with Sean BEFORE Colter took him over (“I’ve been waiting for you to ask me out for coffee”), so there’s also a strain of duplicity going on here, not really that different from those rom-coms where the heroine smacks the protagonist at the climax for wooing her under false pretenses.
But I’m digressing a bit on that final point. It’s Sean’s “death” that has left me the most bothered. In the interview that Marc links to above, Duncan Jones even basically admits to this being a problem by stating, “I think that really would come and sour the whole piece if I were to say, and by the way, by making this decision Colter has killed Sean Fentress.” But the filmmakers choosing to ignore this inconvenient fact isn’t the same as dealing with it.
One last point. Maybe I missed something crucial during my agitated fog toward the end, but as far as I can tell, Colter is still wholly Colter, except now in Sean’s body. In other words, he didn’t absorb any of Sean’s past experiences. So what happens when Christina starts asking questions like, “Hey, remember that party we went to last month?” or “You said you loved my mother’s unique name; how come you can’t remember it anymore?”
(SPOILERS)
(NOTHING BUT SPOILERS)
Your big problem with the ending was that someone who was only ever mentioned in passing, never had a single line and was only shown on screen for a total of 30 seconds got shafted in the end? The ending of A New Hope must have really bothered you, all those poor Stormtroopers, they were just trying to pay their way through college and they got blown away for nothing. Why would we care about Sean?
Sure, you are left wondering how Coltier is going to proceed. Will he start a new life or assume Sean’s identity completely? I wouldn’t call that a plot hole, it’s an open question, which is a hallmark of any interesting ending. Besides, Christina and Sean were only commute buddies, she even said she didn’t know him very well, so that’s not a problem either.
Besides, it could make perfect sense that he retained control of Sean upon his original body’s death. He wasn’t controlling Sean from the machine Matrix style. He was sent into an alternate universe. If your understanding of how the Source Code worked didn’t allow for the ending then your understanding was wrong. It was never explicitly explained how the whole transfer process worked, so they were no blatant contradictions. There are so many explanations of how the machine could have worked that would have allowed for the outcome it would be a waste of time to list them all here.
If the simulation ended or his control of the parallel Sean got severed upon Coltier’s death, everyone in the theatre would have thought, “Oh, it’s just Matrix rules.” It would have been sadder but, a lot of the originality of the movie would have been sapped.
Thanks for the detailed analysis, vince, your Clerks-lifted crack about stormtroopers notwithstanding. Why would I care about Sean? Why wouldn’t I? Audiences are supposed to care about every person on the train EXCEPT Sean? And we obviously are meant to care; otherwise, we wouldn’t give a damn if Colter went back and saved them all or not. Like I mentioned, even Duncan Jones knew this was a problem, or he wouldn’t have brought it up.
“There are so many explanations of how the machine could have worked that would have allowed for the outcome it would be a waste of time to list them all here.” Well, sure, but the best sci-fi films have SOME set of rules by which they live, some world/universe that has been carefully established, whether it’s The Matrix, The Terminator, Blade Runner or what-have-you. Theoretically, Back to the Future could have ended with Marty McFly unzipping his body suit to reveal himself as Han Solo, since after all, it’s all fantasy and anything applies, right? In the case of Source Code, it’s not enough for me (though it is for others, and that’s fine) to say, well, the machine can do whatever it needs to do whenever it needs to do it, no questions asked. That’s just lazy scripting.
Cheers!
Matt,
Here are two scenarios:
1) Colter fails in his mission or otherwise doesn’t make use of the source code device. Everyone on the train is dead. Sean is dead.
2) Colter succeeds as is shown in the film and is now living with his conscious inside Sean’s body. Everyone but Sean continues to live out their lives and are saved. It is unknown what becomes of Sean’s conscious.
Given the nature of the source code, it is impossible to save the lives of all the people on the train without this drawback. While it brings up ethical questions having one man live out the rest of another man’s life, I think it’s more than fair to say that is always more desirable than ending up with everyone dead, including Colter.
That’s an interesting and valid way of looking at it, Hennut. I still prefer the third scenario — Colter sacrifices himself for everyone, including Sean, and dies the heroic death he envisioned for himself — but I appreciate your approach. Cheers.
My main contention is with the words of your review. The ending is very easy to defend, especially since your only attacks are “What about Sean?” and “It’s too happy.” You haven’t brought up a single thing that is illogical about the ending. If your ideal ending where Colter either merges with Fentress, gains Fentress’ experiences or dissipates, giving Fentress back his parallel universe body were to have happened it would have required several more scenes throughout the movie indicating Fentress still existed in the Source Code universe, perhaps as a voice in Colters head or maybe he took control of corpse Colter’s brain during the eight minute mission or something. They didn’t do this, so it would have been a total non-sequitor if your ending happened. Chris wasn’t just a bit player he wasn’t even a character, he was just a plot device.
Hennut nails it.
Sean, essentially, becomes the unknowing hero/martyr of the film by sacrificing himself, or at least his consciousness, so that Coulter can take over his body and save everyone on the train (not to mention everyone in chicago). When Coulter inadvertantly CREATES the extended tangent universe after his consciousness is severed from the “real” world (odd how similar it is to Donnie Darko, eh?), he is creating everything around him– most of which already exists, but some, like the people on the train, are fresh creations without even knowing it. Remember, in the “real” world, the “original” universe, Sean is dead. Everyone on the train is dead. And even Coulter is dead, potentially putting an end to the Source Code all together (since it was implied that finding candidates for it was extremely difficult.)
Here, I think, is the most fascinating element of the ending, and what I think makes it particularly spectacular in implication– the train situation never occurs, so Coulter is saved for the next catastrophe. When that happens, something terrible will happen in “New-Universe,” with predictably the same results in “Old-Universe.” Christine will help him the same way she did in the old universe, especially with the encouragement of his text message, where he will then go on to create yet ANOTHER tangent universe, with ANOTHER version of himself still stuck on ice in The Source Code, waiting for the next disaster. And on and on and on..
SPOILER ALERT
While I thought the freeze-frame ending would have been good, I actually liked the ending as it happened. First of all, I liked the bit with Goodwin, because it actually raised some interesting questions philosophically and continued for me the ethical questions raised throughout the film.
As for the Bean/Cloud Gate, there is actually a very good reason to have it in there. I live in Chicago, so maybe this is more obvious to me. Have you ever been there? You can look at it from the outside, but also you can go “inside”, under it, and look up. There is a kaleidoscope-mirror effect, that allows you to see yourself and everyone else under there reflected over and over and over into near-infinity in that instant of existence. As a visual representation of the “parallel universes” of the Source Code, I really can’t think of something better than the Bean. It’s the whole premise of the movie in one single shot.
To me, it’s really the perfect ending.
I too was bothered as soon as the freeze-frame unfreezed, as the “new” Sean walked off into the sunset with Michelle to live presumably happily ever after in their parallel universe. What the hell happened to poor Sean, I thought. Sean’s mother’s gonna think something rather strange happened to her son. For a movie trying to offer up serious science fiction, I think this is a pretty big flaw.
I have no problem with our hero dying, that is, having the movie end with the freeze-frame. It worked – well, sort of – for Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan. But if we’re to go with the parallel universe theory, then I like Matt’s suggestion to come out of the freeze-frame with the real Sean kissing Christina.
BUT here’s an additional thought: some part of Colter’s essence could be preserved in there, deep down. I’m thinking along the lines of Heaven Can Wait, where Warren Beatty’s soul is transferred into the dying quarterback. It’s no longer Warren Beatty, but his essence is in there, and it comes out when he says a few lines like “Have we met before?” This ending would also lend itself to another cool scene – the missing scene, if you will – in which Sean (with Colter in there deep down) randomly encounteres Vera Farminga, and says something like “Have we met?” And because of the email she received from Colter – and because she’s so bright – she puts things together. Just a thought.
As a fan of Heaven Can Wait, Joseph, I really enjoyed your additional thought! Thanks for sharing.
And thanks to everyone for the lively discussion and the insights.
Poor discarded Sean. But did anyone mention the “S” word in this discussion as the reason for the less than satisfying ending?
SEQUEL! Coulter and his secret partner, Goodwin, continue to save the world (and maybe the shade of Sean will return to complicate life). Just a thought. Loved Moon though … great film.