A bit patchy, feels like a nice B-movie

Rating: 5/10 (20 November 2013)

First things first I eventually watched Source Code after avoiding it on release for its nerdish title. Source Code is a vague concept and I would never think of it as an attractive or even intriguing title. But yes, to me source code is about computer science so it has a very mundane meaning, and this makes me think of Matrix, which is also about some Reality Source Code, but with a cleverer - indirect, evocative - title.
In retrospect I was expecting more action but I was OK with the approach, only it didn't bloom into something really powerful IMHO. The main problem is in the plot device, which is actually the Source Code device. The great ambition of the script is to win on two counts: the mission (into a parallel reality) and reality. The former is more about action, but mixes with wider life concerns, sentiments, while the latter is fuzzier with a difficult blend of mystery, life, duty and trust.
Going back and forth between reality and the parallel reality of the Source Code proves to be a poor narrative choice since it is done much too often and suspense cannot reach high levels once you are just expecting developments on both counts. The inter-cutting with present was greatly criticized in Titanic, but it really added suspense by giving us a better understanding of the technical side, which was only in the background of the lovers story.
On the other hand the cinematography is great. Well there are actually only half a dozen of the train in the countryside, then approaching Chicago, and also of Chicago itself. Most notably are very nice helicopter shots in the opening credits, even if this bears little relevance to the story itself (since Chicago is just the background). But the rest feels cheap, like B-movie cheap. It would be OK if there was a tense suspense, but the constant inter-cutting results in a hurtful discrepancy between great establishing shots on one side (and their redundancies BTW) and the closed narrative spaces (the train and the labs). The patchy look just makes weaker parts more salient and obvious.
I am surprised Source Code got such a fine IMDb rating. I guess it plays to the crowd of Matrix enthusiasts. I admit Source Code aims for originality, while Eagle Eye, for example, is more of a routine actioneer with SF undertones. I personally found Eagle Eye more satisfying in the end. Maybe it aimed lower, but it was not getting pretentious with sentimentalist stuff. Both movies don't succeed in being totally impressive, but one doesn't mess with its inner narrative flow. Having a pieced up narrative is really not piece of cake, and if you fail to make it look great it just looks obvious and pretentious too. In Source Code it is obvious the storyline is stretched to reach the 80-minute mark, and the growing sentimentality is only obvious too, there is nothing really deep in it.
Casting: I was not impressed by Jake Gyllenhaal, he does the job but I wouldn't say the main character is a great part. Michelle Monahan was better here than in Eagle Eye, perhaps because it is more of a quiet girl-next-door part. Vera Farmiga was just wasted in a translucent role. Eventually I find Jeffrey Wright is a very weak actor, I couldn't get how they cast him as Felix Leiter, he is always hamming it to exist in the frame. He certainly contributes a great deal to the cheap B-movie feel here.