When You Walk Through Me

I wanted to see Source Code last week in the cinema but I was ill and I was becoming desperate to avoid spoilers so I viewed it by other means (you know the means I mean). Make note that I will of course pre-order the DVD because I liked the film and wish to ensure more like it get made.

'Inception meets Groundhog Day'. I hate these descriptions that paint everything as a mashup of two existing works. That's not to say that there aren't similarities to other works, which I'll address in the spoiler section, but these comparisons used to market films to preconfigured audiences make little sense under any kind of scrutiny.

If Inception was a combination of two films, is Source Code described by the formula ((The Matrix + Ocean's Eleven) + Groundhog Day))? No, that's just stupid. Describing new films in this way assumes a linear progression of inspiration/plagiarism; whereas it is much more likely that a contemporary style becomes identified with a recent release, or that many contemporary works draw on a common source or cross in exploring related themes. The reason The Matrix pops up in almost everything these days is because it got there first in the popular consciousness and it's initial theme of questioning reality (simulation or reality?) is a philosophical concept, which it may or may not have popularised, that recurs in Inception (dream or reality?) and now Source Code (reality or reconstruction?). If it owes anything to Inception, it's that there exists a market for intelligent and thought provoking cinema - or did Inception just popularise it?

Groundhog Day is not a valid comparison because the nature of its plot device (the time-loop) was a dramatic device. Source Code (herein SC) is close to the classic mould of sci-fi in which the film explores a particular concept and the device here is squarely part of the narrative. Here's my slightly modified synopsis of the same promotional copy that is slightly altered and published everywhere by professional journalists:

A bomb explodes on a Chicago train, derailing it and killing all the passengers. Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) is part of a military experiment referred to as "Source Code" which transports him into a simulation constructed from the experiences of a passenger in the eight minutes before the explosion. Stevens must repeat those eight minutes ad nauseum until he can gather enough intelligence from the simulation to identify the bomber before he strikes again.

So to get to the point, I liked it. Colter's personal story was engaging and the two main characters (he and his female companion) were sympathetic. The ending could have been a bit shorter and kept more cards to its chest. It spells out more than strictly necessary, but it definitely prompts thought about the implications of the ideas of fate and how our actions or inaction distinguish us from our potential alternate selves.

9/10 (a great film)

»Spoilers Ahead«

Elements of the film brought to mind some other productions. Firstly, the eight minute limit of the simulation and the pressure to complete the mission in that restricted time reminded me of a US series from roughly a decade ago called Seven Days in which a member of the military is part of a time travel project. As you can guess, he is sent back exactly seven days prior to the disaster-of-the-week or terrorist-act-of-the-week and must identify the cause of said incident and prevent it from occurring. The second was the gradual reveal about the functionality of the titular project. Thankfully I hadn't seen the poster or read the tag line "Change the past. Save the future" because that gives away at least half the film. This aspect particularly reminded me of Denzel Washington's underrated Deja Vu in which a secret project investigates the bombing of a ferry using an advanced technology that creates a window to the past (just over four days prior). This technology is explained as a reconstruction (as in SC) of past events, in this case based on capturing and filtering the massive amounts of data that move around in our modern telecommunications infrastructure.

»Soilers for Deja Vu«

When the main character becomes suspicious of the absurd detail that the window offers it is revealed that the technology opens a literal window to the past (via quantum singularity). In the end he uses it to travel back and proactively/retroactively prevent the bombing. The ending of Deja Vu could be considered the bittersweet version of SC's.

Source Code was engaging enough that I wilfully ignored some potential plot holes - a repeat viewing may be called for to confirm these. There is a great deal of obfuscation about the nature of the technology utilised in the project. As we follow Stevens point of view throughout we share his lack of knowledge and confusion. The unclear and shifting explanations from the lead scientist as well as the necessity to avoid explaining the workings of a fictional device do not help - and that's as it should be, it is a plot device after all. If the film is the continuous experience of Stevens, excepting scenes in which we see his body from Goodwin's perspective, then we know that all the variations he was sent to were ones in which the bomber does plant the bomb with the intention of detonating it. He is never sent to a version in which there is no bomb as there would be no reason for him to be sent to such a reality, which therefore demonstrates control of the technology on the part of the military and understanding by the designing scientists. Then there's the paradoxes with time travel, even if it is only sending a consciousness back eight minutes into a new/parallel timeline. Like any work of science-fiction over-analysis can break the suspension of disbelief that otherwise remains intact with casual viewing.

As with Inception, I was in the process of drafting a related post before I heard about the film's premise. Some thoughts on the Many Worlds Interpretation and Quantum Suicide/Immortality and a second-viewing-review should follow later next month.

[1056]