User Score
7.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 607 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 16 out of 607

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Apr 24, 2011
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great movie! Took my wife to see it this weekend. We actually thought that the protagonist was going to end up being the bomber =) Great writing, great acting, a solid 9/10. Expand
  2. Apr 23, 2011
    2
    Being from Chicago I love Chicago based movies from Blues Brothers to Ferris Bueller's Day off. But, this did not do it for me. Okay I'm not a Jake fan, but I am a Duncan Jones fan. I guess ending did it in for me.
  3. Apr 22, 2011
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Based on what I've read, I don't think most people, including reviewers, understood this movie. The ending makes it clear that Gyllenhaal is spawning parallel universes when he enters the source code, that another version of him had done it before the action in the movie, and another version of him will do it again in the new universe spawned by the action at the end of the movie when he finally succeeds. The ending heavily implies that a version of him from before the movie starts had told Vera Farmiga to tell him everything's going to be alright, just as he, in the new universe, at the end of the movie, tells her to tell tell him (the injured soldier) everything will be alright. This reading of the movie clears up almost all of the inconsistencies that others have pointed out. The only one that remains for me is the Quantum Leap quandary. What happens to the guy Gyllanhaal is inhabiting in that final successful attempt, since Gyllanhaal doesn't ever leave his body. In Quantum Leap, the guy leaped into Sam's body back in the future, but when the leap was over, he returned to his original body. Here, the leap seemingly doesn't end. So what becomes of his consciousness? Is he just snuffed out? That doesn't seem very moral in a movie that ends on such an uplifting note. Still, a solid movie that mixed a variety of references (Quantum Leap, Groundhog Day, Avatar) rather well. Duncan Jones is a director to look out for. Expand
  4. Apr 21, 2011
    9
    My kind of movie: smart, fast, extremely well-directed and acted...just a nice, tight piece of work. The kind of movie I will see twice just to catch all the interesting set-ups and nuances. A very talented director doing a complex piece of work on a very reasonable budget - definitely worth watching director Duncan Jones' career develop. Terrific score, production values andMy kind of movie: smart, fast, extremely well-directed and acted...just a nice, tight piece of work. The kind of movie I will see twice just to catch all the interesting set-ups and nuances. A very talented director doing a complex piece of work on a very reasonable budget - definitely worth watching director Duncan Jones' career develop. Terrific score, production values and cinematography. Good script. A few logic holes and some script issues later - I would never spoil anyone else's movie experience, so no specific complaints here. To sum up....okay, I kind of loved this film, noting it's not perfect. But go see it. It deserves the effort...it really does. Expand
  5. Apr 18, 2011
    8
    It's nice to see the Inception still has an effect on hollywood - not necessarily inspiring people (Duncan Jones was already showing his worth with Moon a few years back), but making it known that films can have fairly complicated plots and still be successful. It isn't nearly as good as Moon, but it's just great to come out of a blockbuster and have something to talk about
  6. Apr 17, 2011
    8
    Duncan Jones go two for two with his follow-up to Moon. This is a creative film which feels like a cross between Memento, Inception and The Matrix. A tight and well-written script (save for the final five minutes) and solid performances across the board. Source Code is worth its price of admission.
  7. Apr 17, 2011
    8
    Good, well written film - but it didn't reach its full potential. The concept is a good one, but it doesn't materialise as good as it sounded on paper but does work well and it's high points are definitely high, but I found the sub-story a little confusing and a little hard to follow. It it wraps up well - if a little cheesily and the mystery story is good, and I felt satisfied walkingGood, well written film - but it didn't reach its full potential. The concept is a good one, but it doesn't materialise as good as it sounded on paper but does work well and it's high points are definitely high, but I found the sub-story a little confusing and a little hard to follow. It it wraps up well - if a little cheesily and the mystery story is good, and I felt satisfied walking out of the theatre. Not exactly jumping for joy screaming 'It was the best film ever' but something I can and do recommend for a fun engaging story. Expand
  8. Apr 16, 2011
    7
    Initially, the audience will be left thinking of this film as okay but wondering how it could possibly do anything to make itself stick in your mind. Rest assured, it does develop and proves itself to be an emotional piece of work and cleverly written.
  9. Apr 16, 2011
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Dr. Sam Beckett(Scott Bakula) never overstayed his welcome. In "Quantum Leap", the great science fiction series that enjoyed an inspired four-year run on NBC in the early-nineties, the time-traveling physicist would supplant body after body like a benevolent demon, solving their dilemmas with the utmost expediency before dispossessing his hosts in a self-induced exorcism that worked like a trigger mechanism predicated on situational closure. This would prove to be beneficial for our nowhere man because sooner or later, hypothetically(Al, played by Dean Stockwell, a hologram, always kept track of Sam's departure time) the loved ones and acquaintances of the newly-consumed person would eventually discern that they were dealing with an impostor. If Sam took up full residence in one of the host bodies, this new lease on life couldn't possibly pan out due to his lack of shared histories with the people he'd be expected to be intimately familiar with. Travel-weary, from all that bouncing along his own chronological timeline, the quantum leaper yearned for a sedentary existence, but the only possible happy ending for Sam would have been for him to return as himself. To settle down as somebody else, learning the supplanted person's persona like a new language, strikes me as being a little insidious, not to mention, parasitic, and that's the nagging flaw of "Source Code", an otherwise ingenious sci-fi thriller which unfortunately, doesn't know when its time is up. Once Cpt. Colter Stevens(Jake Gyllenhaal) averts the intended expression of the secondary crisis(the bomb poised to level Chicago that never detonates), thanks to the Afghanistan veteran's time-sensitive(Sam had forty-two minutes, Colter has eight) on-the-fly detective work, his superior, Colleen Goodwin, in gratitude for the captain's hand in apprehending the perpetrator, allows the military's guinea pig to die gracefully, by giving him a chance to save the doomed train commuters with one final rewind of the source code. (In a sense, "Source Code" is like Woody Allen's "The Purple Rose of Cairo". The real Colter is in a life-support chamber, while the digital Colter, is essentially, playing a part in a movie(the source code can be read as an eight-minute action-short. In the end, like the Mia Farrow character in the Allen film, the heroine falls for the simulation.) As in Harold Ramis' "Groundhog Day", through repeated stints in the time loop, the self-actualized person accumulates information to affect a different outcome. By trial and error, Colter learns that the bomb up in the ventilation shaft comes equipped with a backup trigger, a secondary cellphone, which he defuses, therefore changing the predetermined outcome of the program's allotted eight minutes. Instead of a violent explosion, engulfing the train with an all-consuming fire, the last tick of the program's timecode corresponds to a freeze-frame where the once-victimized passengers' laughter is captured in mid-regale during the last moment of their filmic existence. Meanwhile, Colter is engaged in an petrified kiss with the woman he grows to love, Christina Warren(Michelle Monaghan), the passenger who happens to be seated across from his train compartment when the soldier leaps into the body of Sean, her teaching colleague from work. This is how "Source Code" should end: a film-within-the-film happy ending. It's "Groundhog Day" in miniature. Colter learns to live life to its fullest in eight minutes. Reality-wise, these people are all dead, but in the altered source code, the victims of the terrorist attack now get to live, not die, after their running time is up. The filmmaker ruins the poetry of the moment. But Hollywood, not known for its poetic gestures, especially within the context of a would-be blockbuster, is not going to make allowances for any art-house pretensions, so instead of going out like Anthony Doniel, last seen on the shoreline in Francois Truffaut's "Les quatre cents coupe", "Source Code" tells us that there's life beyond a pre-recording, and sadly, the freeze-frame unfreezes. That's where the film loses me. Since the soldier sends a text message to Coleen(from within the source code), it must mean that he has his own memories, not Sean's, the man he usurped. As aforementioned, Sam Beckett never overstayed his welcome. How long will it take before Christina realizes that the man she's with is not actually Sean? How will she react? Colter can't blame his unfamiliarity with the schoolteacher's life on amnesia, or else he wouldn't be cognizant of Christina. The digitalized woman seems to be in love with an amalgamation(her old feelings for Sean mixed in with Colter's heartfelt pursuance of her). How confusing for her. It's a paradox that "Source Code" may not be aware of. The filmmaker, perhaps under pressure from the studio, simply rams a happy ending down everybody's throats. Logic, be damned! Expand
  10. Apr 16, 2011
    9
    Very good movie, was entertaining and kept me in anticipation throughout the entire film. Saw it at a drive-in movie theater and was super fun! I would recommend this movie to just about anyone with half a brain; it will hold your interest.
  11. Apr 15, 2011
    6
    Source Code is a more convoluted, faster paced Ground Hogs Day [1993] with guns and a ticking time bomb. Although not that well made Source Code is a reminder that audiences prefer complex story lines, even if they aren't completely coherent. 6/10

    Source Code stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a Colter Stevens, a helicopter pilot who is trapped in some sort of machine simulator. The beginning of
    Source Code is a more convoluted, faster paced Ground Hogs Day [1993] with guns and a ticking time bomb. Although not that well made Source Code is a reminder that audiences prefer complex story lines, even if they aren't completely coherent. 6/10

    Source Code stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a Colter Stevens, a helicopter pilot who is trapped in some sort of machine simulator. The beginning of the film starts with Stevens waking up on a train in a body that is not his own. He's sitting across from Christina Warren played by Michelle Monaghan, a female companion who he will learn latter on has a small crush on him, or at least who she thinks Sean Fentress. Stevens lives 8 minutes of Fentress's life trying to gather himself when a bomb suddenly explodes killing everyone on the train. Stevens awakens in a metal dome disoriented and locked into a harness. Without knowing who or where he is an image and voice appear when he is contacted by Luit Goodwin played by Vera Farmiga. Goodwin tells Stevens that he must identify the bomber of the train so that they can prevent another terrorist attack. Steven's doesn't quite understand what's going on with his last memories being aboard a helicopter in Afghanistan. Before too many of Stevens' questions are answered he is to told to try again and abruptly plugged back into the source code. This process continues over and over until bit by bit is revealed what the source code is. Apparently source code allows a certain someone to be plugged into the consciousness of another certain someone and live out an alternate reality, something involving string theory and such. The rules are that he only he can only live out the last 8 minutes of that someone's life because that's how long the "flash" lasts when someone dies. Also, whatever he does in that reality will not affect any other reality. So Gyllenhaal is plugged into the source code relentlessly by his military commanders over and over until he finds the bomber. Over the course of his multiple reenactments Stevens narrows down the bomber and develops a relationship with Ms. Warren and Luit. Goodwin. Gyllenhall and Monaghan are good but nothing spectacular. Jeffrey Wright plays the nerdy mastermind quite well. He's cruel, discordant and tunnel minded; just what you'd expect from a scientist who's spent his whole life dedicated to his pet project. But it is Vera Farmiga who really shines in her role as the intermediate officer between the enslaved Steven's and the heartless scientist. In every scene Framiga battles with the two conflicting personas of her character. The female empathic side trying to soothe and care for Stevens as he's used as a cog in the high tech military defense machine; and also the military stratagician (stratagician is not a word???) who must convince Stevens to finish the mission while withholding the painful truth of Stevens' condition. The music in Source Code is a little pretentious and is abnormally noticeable. Its special effects are not the greatest with explosions and slow motion looking like they had been done by a sub par video game company. However it's not just the special effects, nor its mediocre cinematography but also Source Code's erratic pacing and editing for my undistinguished rating. The scenes don't flow well together and you feel just as pushed around as Gyllenhaal's character as you bolt back and forth between scenes. This feeling may have been deliberate on director Duncan Jone's part but watching the movie you feel like you've been riding the old bumpy wooden roller coaster you'd find at the boardwalk. At the end of the film you're constantly teased with false endings. As soon as you think it's going to end, they tag on and extra scene which tangles the plot even further. During the last 20 minutes they start abandoning the rules of source code and begin cramming in new content. It's like they shot multiple endings of the film and instead of choosing one, they decided to put them all in. Source Code is an intriguing film with a lot of complexities and philosophical metaphysics involved which I think is the reason for its success at the box office and among critics. As we know from Inception and The Matrix audiences today are really drawn to these alternate reality movies. However Source Code is not particularly well constructed and i'll be re-watching Ground Hog's Day numerous times before I even think about re-watching Source Code.
    Expand
  12. Apr 14, 2011
    7
    Some fairly predicable moments and some completely unpredictable moments combine to create a very interesting film that will leave you thinking. A great story and a very recommended watch.
  13. Apr 14, 2011
    10
    Very complex and deep yet easy for the general public to follow and appreciate. Well worth watching at least once. Most movies of this style (inception, shutter island) are usually very difficult to watch as if you don't hear and see everything the movie tends to become very confusing very fast. But the way that Source Code plays out makes the movie very accessible and fun to watch even ifVery complex and deep yet easy for the general public to follow and appreciate. Well worth watching at least once. Most movies of this style (inception, shutter island) are usually very difficult to watch as if you don't hear and see everything the movie tends to become very confusing very fast. But the way that Source Code plays out makes the movie very accessible and fun to watch even if it isn't your type of movie. Expand
  14. Apr 13, 2011
    3
    Moon was special, and the only reason I finished Source Crap. From the opening this movie was tired: cliche music, overdone flyovers, poorly acted, crammed full of everything they think a blockbuster needs, and all in all far too glossy.


    The beginning is fun, trying to figure out what's going on and all, they reveal some mysteries you didn't expect and I was hope full for a great film.Moon was special, and the only reason I finished Source Crap. From the opening this movie was tired: cliche music, overdone flyovers, poorly acted, crammed full of everything they think a blockbuster needs, and all in all far too glossy.


    The beginning is fun, trying to figure out what's going on and all, they reveal some mysteries you didn't expect and I was hope full for a great film. Once Jake's character decides to take the reigns, however, his actions are erratic at best along with the plot. All in all the movie tried to do to much and started unravelling by the third act. Also, could have done without both a love story and the father redemption story. Expand

  15. Apr 12, 2011
    8
    There are some movies that I see, and on my way out I will consider complaining to the staff and asking for a refund. Then I can't be bothered and end up moaning along with who ever I'm with about the time we just wasted. This isn't one of those films. I enjoyed it, and whilst it isn't perfect I would definitely watch Source Code again, and I recommend you see it when you can.

    8/10
    There are some movies that I see, and on my way out I will consider complaining to the staff and asking for a refund. Then I can't be bothered and end up moaning along with who ever I'm with about the time we just wasted. This isn't one of those films. I enjoyed it, and whilst it isn't perfect I would definitely watch Source Code again, and I recommend you see it when you can.

    8/10 gameandmoviereviews.com
    Expand
  16. Apr 12, 2011
    9
    Background and insight:

    Pure Science Fiction is often regarded as too complex for film audiences, which is why so often we see it mixed with other genres. Fine examples are the likes of Star Wars and The Matrix (etc), where you get action/westerns mixed with Science Fiction. I have always been a fan of science fiction films. They present a higher (usually) level of imagination than most
    Background and insight:

    Pure Science Fiction is often regarded as too complex for film audiences, which is why so often we see it mixed with other genres. Fine examples are the likes of Star Wars and The Matrix (etc), where you get action/westerns mixed with Science Fiction. I have always been a fan of science fiction films. They present a higher (usually) level of imagination than most genres. The rules are not always confined to real world, realistic events or physics. The only real limitation is the imagination of the writer. Science Fiction relies on its audience to suspend belief, which can be a step too far for some viewers, but for me this is one of the reasons I have always loved film, the chance to escape and experience things that only the silver screen can allow you to experience (in the visual sense). I really enjoy writing science fiction, but like the examples above I also tend to mix the genres and stay clear of pure science fiction. Duncan Jones on the other hand has been looked upon as being a modern day saviour of science fiction with his first film Moon. A master class of indie film making that was so well made, it was (and still is) almost impossible to figure out how it was made for a tiny budget of $5 million. But Iâ
    Expand
  17. Apr 11, 2011
    7
    The plot to this movie is one that has great potential.If executed right Source Code could be a great movie. Sadly though it is not, the script is good don't get me wrong, but i think the problem is that the idea and vision of the movie was to much for the pen and paper. The acting wasn't bad, but wasn't great either. It was a believable acting though, which is good. Jake is the shiningThe plot to this movie is one that has great potential.If executed right Source Code could be a great movie. Sadly though it is not, the script is good don't get me wrong, but i think the problem is that the idea and vision of the movie was to much for the pen and paper. The acting wasn't bad, but wasn't great either. It was a believable acting though, which is good. Jake is the shining star once again, with a rather exceptional performance. The FX are great, and direction by Duncan Jones was good. To get to the point, it is a pass at the theatre, but a definite rent. Expand
  18. Apr 10, 2011
    7
    Enjoyed the movie. Imagine Groundhog Day with terrorists. Well acted and a had very different slant on the time travel genre. The movie is full of plot holes so its not one you want to analyze too much. However, it was fun to watch. I was very disappointed with the ending though. I don't want to give anything away but this movie deserved a better, more intelligent ending. It's almostEnjoyed the movie. Imagine Groundhog Day with terrorists. Well acted and a had very different slant on the time travel genre. The movie is full of plot holes so its not one you want to analyze too much. However, it was fun to watch. I was very disappointed with the ending though. I don't want to give anything away but this movie deserved a better, more intelligent ending. It's almost like they did the movie, and later decided to slap a standard Hollywood ending onto it. Expand
  19. Apr 9, 2011
    8
    Source Code is a time traveling adventure movie with great atmosphere to see where captain must save the day that the train will explode and he comes back in 8 minutes to live. That movie is so cool and it's a lot of fun to see!
  20. USG
    Apr 8, 2011
    8
    This movie is much more of a thinking film than many others, and in that respect I'd recommend it. The effects are well done and only add to the movie instead of distract it. Like Duncan Jones' first movie, Moon, the trailer does not give it justice. However, Moon is more complex and thought-provoking than Source Code. Both movies do create a good sensation of suspense which is what theyThis movie is much more of a thinking film than many others, and in that respect I'd recommend it. The effects are well done and only add to the movie instead of distract it. Like Duncan Jones' first movie, Moon, the trailer does not give it justice. However, Moon is more complex and thought-provoking than Source Code. Both movies do create a good sensation of suspense which is what they are designed for. The ending of Source Code ties down and clarifies everything, making a sequel impossible. The ending also by far the movie's weakest point: it's lame. The movie could have ended at other stronger moments, but it's already short. Knowledge of parallel universes will help in the understanding of the film. Expand
  21. Apr 8, 2011
    9
    Normally when movies have multiple points where they could have ended, I feel like the endings are tacked on and ruin some of the impact. But the end of this movie is so bold, challenging, and unexpected that it seems just right. It does raise a few questions, but that's part of the fun! People who are complaining about the ending are lacking in imagination. I enjoyed the experience of theNormally when movies have multiple points where they could have ended, I feel like the endings are tacked on and ruin some of the impact. But the end of this movie is so bold, challenging, and unexpected that it seems just right. It does raise a few questions, but that's part of the fun! People who are complaining about the ending are lacking in imagination. I enjoyed the experience of the film as it kept introducing new little pieces into the puzzle for the audience to try to figure out. The performances, music, and special effects were all well done. Some characters are a bit one dimensional but others you really begin to feel connected to as the story goes on. There is some violence and language but it's not overdone. The whole film is sort of like a cross between "Unstoppable" and "Inception", only it doesn't try to overwhelm your senses. It feels like the director is along with you for the story, instead of forcing it on you. Overall I think this is a well made film and one of the best I've seen in a while. And I'm usually very picky about what I like. I would recommend it to anyone. Expand
  22. Apr 7, 2011
    10
    AAtrekker
    I loved this movie. It had so many positive qualities. The Story was most interesting, the leads were charming and very ingratiating. The story was a combination of "Groundhog Day" and the TV series "Seven Days." I found it very engrossing and was on the edge of my seat during the entire film. If I have one criticism, it is the title but it's too late for that. This film
    AAtrekker
    I loved this movie. It had so many positive qualities. The Story was most interesting, the leads were charming and very ingratiating. The story was a combination of "Groundhog Day" and the TV series "Seven Days." I found it very engrossing and was on the edge of my seat during the entire film. If I have one criticism, it is the title but it's too late for that. This film shows very clearly that you don't need profanity, excessive violence or gratuitous sex to be enjoyed. The prime ingredient is a good story. But please pay very close attention to the early dialogue; it will help you to stay focused. Please more, more, and more of this type of fun, entertaining, and satisfying film.
    Expand
  23. Apr 6, 2011
    9
    It was an utter joy for me to watch. It's "Groundhog Day" meets "Minority Report", both of which are brilliant films. This is a good film, let it be said. However, the science they base this theory on is utter rubbish. But don't try to be clever or say 'Well, that's not what would happen'. If you think you're clever,sit back and instead of poking at it's plot holes, just attempt to enjoyIt was an utter joy for me to watch. It's "Groundhog Day" meets "Minority Report", both of which are brilliant films. This is a good film, let it be said. However, the science they base this theory on is utter rubbish. But don't try to be clever or say 'Well, that's not what would happen'. If you think you're clever,sit back and instead of poking at it's plot holes, just attempt to enjoy the film, which shouldn't be too difficult. Expand
  24. Apr 6, 2011
    8
    Source Code was a great movie, and for me it was the best one of the year so far. The best part of this movie is how it pays tribute to Alfred **** with the sound track and style. Acting was great, and there were a couple twists throughout that were nice. This movie is very similiar to a movie like Inception, so if you liked Inception, you will probably like this one.
  25. Apr 5, 2011
    8
    This movie i gave 4/5 despite morribey's butt-hurt. It had a smart idea, and the ending can be interpreted in more ways than one. Although morribey is right that the ending is somewhat lack luster you can take it how you want it, but i completely disagree that one would easily lose interest. I have adhd and i managed fine. If you are into time travel films this film is for you. It isThis movie i gave 4/5 despite morribey's butt-hurt. It had a smart idea, and the ending can be interpreted in more ways than one. Although morribey is right that the ending is somewhat lack luster you can take it how you want it, but i completely disagree that one would easily lose interest. I have adhd and i managed fine. If you are into time travel films this film is for you. It is not as good as primer, but when it comes to time travel what is? The movie is also a good date film, especially with what the choices have been like lately with bad films and piss poor remakes. Its no The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly but entertaining none the less. Expand
  26. Apr 5, 2011
    5
    The movie feels like a bad attempt to make a very good short story into a full length movie. It doesn't work and it while one remains curious, one soon loses interest. It also has that awful Hollywood ending which makes a great arty movie into a rubbish weekly rental at the local video store.
  27. Apr 4, 2011
    4
    Flat and rushed is the best way to describe this film. No character development, unanswered and half answered questions, unsatisfying "Hollywood" ending. It felt like if they didn't know the answer to some questions, they left it out. There was no real explanation on how they were able to do what they did. They could've made it longer and added anything to make it better. Although rushedFlat and rushed is the best way to describe this film. No character development, unanswered and half answered questions, unsatisfying "Hollywood" ending. It felt like if they didn't know the answer to some questions, they left it out. There was no real explanation on how they were able to do what they did. They could've made it longer and added anything to make it better. Although rushed only describes the writing. The production, acting, and anything that's not the story is good. It's what makes this movie watchable. Expand
  28. Apr 4, 2011
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I usually don't write reviews with spoilers but the biggest distraction to this movie is its ending. You get the feeling the studio had 3 different endings to choose from, and I personally feel they chose the wrong one. While it is plausible, it still detaches you from the anchor and central premise of the movie (Jake Gyllenhaal has 8 minutes to solve a mystery though his actions can't affect the real world). There are other flaws logistically, for example, how many 8 minute sequences can occur in the real world and still leave enough time to save the future, but still I enjoyed the movie overall! Jake gave a great performance and I believed his romantic relationship and his sense of purpose and accomplishment regarding the mystery. Expand
  29. Apr 4, 2011
    8
    This is a little movie that in some ways (A list actor, big budget) acts like a big movie. But this is is not a movie focused on great effects but is instead focused on storytelling. Duncan Jones (Moon) is getting closer to his masterpiece certainly.
  30. Apr 3, 2011
    6
    Source Code is a good sci-fi movie featuring one of the biggest stars in todays "Young Hollywood". The story is well written, the acting is on par, and the movie wraps up into a neat little package... but this may be it's biggest weakness. This hour and a half movie finishes with it's main story so quickly, it has time to take on a more philosophical plot before it ends. It is just tooSource Code is a good sci-fi movie featuring one of the biggest stars in todays "Young Hollywood". The story is well written, the acting is on par, and the movie wraps up into a neat little package... but this may be it's biggest weakness. This hour and a half movie finishes with it's main story so quickly, it has time to take on a more philosophical plot before it ends. It is just too bad that these concepts were portrayed in such a clean, unimaginative fashion, forcing the audience approved happy ending (spoiler alert... it has a happy ending). The main concept of life after death is written in a way that anybody could get it, but leaves me wanted more to chew on, perhaps in a more ambiguous fashion (ie. Moon). Instead, I am afraid to say that the Source Code is a good movie that I probably won't care to see again. Expand
Metascore
74

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 41
  2. Negative: 0 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Apr 8, 2011
    80
    Source Code is a formally disciplined work -- a triumph of movie syntax -- made with rhythm and pace. Jones, unlike most commercial directors, accelerates the tempo without producing visual gibberish. [11 April, 2011 p. 88]
  2. Reviewed by: Una LaMarche
    Apr 6, 2011
    75
    The psychological payoffs outweigh any implausibilities. And what's the harm in logging off your network for a few hours to indulge in some good old-fashioned science fiction?
  3. Reviewed by: Mary Pols
    Apr 3, 2011
    50
    It is a tremendous downer when the second half of the movie shirks logic, defies its own established principles and raises more questions than it answers.