Saturday, April 16, 2011

Source Code Redux

Brandon, please by all means come after me. You are allowed to break my balls and give me a hard time. I may be anxious when I post but that’s because I’m insecure. Challenging me will bring me out of my shell and get some solid debate going. I wasn’t complaining about you coming after me. Keep it up. I’ll try to do the same against you as well. We are friends enough that I’m pretty sure we can handle it.

You’re a sucker for liking Benjamin Button as much as you do though. haha kidding. I want to like it a lot too. I need to see it again.

I can’t disagree too much with you arguments against Revolutionary Road. I still like it. I might have to re-watch it to get a better sense of it though.

I didn’t think you were advocating for poverty porn as a title. I was criticizing the term in general. I’m definitely not a fan of buzzword descriptive bullshit like that either.

John, interesting take on Source Code. I'm glad you posted on it because it got me thinking about it more. Of course it is a silly premise. I think you have to suspend your disbelief instantly, not just for the ending. You either buy into it from the beginning or reject it entirely. The jump from the source code scenario to alternative timelines/realities makes no sense, but at that point, I think you are already with the film or you are not.

I think you are right, the ending is wish fulfillment. It’s cheesy as hell too. I didn’t necessarily like the ending, but I was surprised by how kindhearted it was. Yes, it could have been more kindhearted if Sean Fentress had been saved by Colter sacrificing himself in some way. But Fentress was dead from the beginning. Would you rather have had Colter not save anyone on the train because he didn’t want to take over another man’s body? In that scenario, everyone is dead just as they already were. Fentress has no chance for survival from the beginning. He’s not even sacrificed for the sake of Colter and everyone else’s survival because he is already dead. Colter uses Fentress’ memory as a vessel to save other people’s lives. If he can’t save Fentress, it doesn’t matter because Fentress is dead. Everyone can either remain dead or everyone but one can come back to life. There’s nothing at stake in this decision except life. No one is being killed.

The film affirms life because it cares about bringing back all these people. The alternative reality ending makes no sense, but that just shows what risk Jones was willing to go to to save as many lives as he could in his fictional world. He cared so much about all his characters that he was willing to go to ridiculous heights. I’m not saying that this is a great decision on his part. I’m only saying that it is surprisingly compassionate.

The scene where the comedian tells joke to his fellow passengers falls flat, but it is indicative of the film’s compassion. Even right when the plug is pulled on Colter and the train freezes, the camera does a pan of everyone’s face in the compartment. Why do this? Because the film cares about human life, and it is trying to communicate that to you.

John, I understand and appreciate your criticism entirely. But I’m going to stick by my original feeling that the film is indeed compassionate.

Brandon, weren’t we saying that the sequel to Source Code should be a straight up romantic comedy about Colter as Fentress in his new life with Christina? haha That would be so terribly awesome. I can see the trailer for it now. So stupid, so cheesy, and with Jeffrey Wright reprising his role but this time as a best friend character.

top 10 haunted house films first?

No comments:

Post a Comment