The first film of 2011 that I am desperate to see

I do charity work on weekends that might make it difficult - monday for sure

Rob

I agree with this, especially the business with the comedian. He wasn't funny in the beginning, and he's not funny in the end.

Glad you liked it overall though.

I pretty much agree with all of Pedro's issues with the film, and enjoyed it just about as much. The whole thing is kind of a gimmick, and parts feel forced or cheap, but it works well for the most part. It's definitely a step down from Moon (to be expected), but it's pretty similar thematically:


Saying it's influenced by Inception is a case of trying to make that film seem more important than it actually is. I mean, Source Code telling a good story, being intelligent, and using special effects well are the broadest of similarities I can imagine. That isn't influential, that's what just about every science fiction movie ever made tries to do. By that logic it's been influenced by every single pretty good sci-fi film ever made. Those superficial similarities just can't be used as evidence of Nolan's film influencing anything.

I don't think the movie was in any way influenced by INCEPTION (the spec script was floating around for years before INCEPTION), but I think the studio's decision to give it a reasonable budget and get behind it were directly influenced by INCEPTION.

I think I liked this one a bit better than the consensus here. I thought the beginning was great, as what's happening is revealed a bit at a time. I agree that there was definitely a point in the middle of the movie where I was thinking to myself "This guy's not being so bright about how he approaches this." The thing that came to bother me more, initially, was that
I felt like the ending redeemed that concern I had, though, since


Still, this is the most fun I've had at the movies in quite a while. The acting was generally solid and I liked the story quite a bit. I also thought that the score by Chris Bacon was a plus for the movie. I'd never heard of him before but couldn't say that I was surprised to see that he'd worked with James Newton Howard in the past. There was a feel to the score which made me think of (among others) Howard.

I think that's fair to say. Do you think studios are going to do something sort of like trial runs by giving intelligent (for lack of a better word) sci-fi films reasonable budgets and see how they perform before greenlighting another huge budget sci-fi film? Or are other things like director, cast, etc more important to getting a big budget film up and running?

Also, what do you make of Source Code's $15 million opening weekend? I haven't seen Hop, but it can't be a good sign when a critically dismissed children's film does more than double what a critically accepted smart sci-fi film does on opening weekend. I know they have very different target audiences, but that general trend can't help smart sci-fi.

Hop was marketed much better than Source Code, the latter film was advertised for about two weeks and the small buzz may have played a part in its success. It doesn't matter what films will be in competition, a children's film with good marketing, good or bad, will win out.

Absolutely. I don't mean to insinuate that I think Source Code would/could compete with something like Hop. I just wanted to point out that a well reviewed, smart sci-fi film that's actually good had a disappointing opening weekend, which isn't a good sign. The fact that people would rather see a movie that looks awful (to me) and was crushed by critics probably doesn't have much to do with science fiction at all, but it's disappointing to me. I wish more people would go out and support movies that are actually good. That's the only way to ensure more good movies get made.

If Source Code exists because of Inception's success, this sort of underperformance probably won't give the studios much faith in other intelligent science fiction films. That's how I read the situation, but I'm curious to hear what James (and others, of course) thinks.

Well you gotta understand, family films like Hop are pretty much critic proof, parents just want to have a film that they can take they're kids to, they're not gonna give a damn what critics say about the film as long as they're kids want to see it. Also there hasn't been an Easter themed film like ever, so i'm not at all surprised that Hop did so well, family films have always dominated around this time.

Great point Vexer; family films, even if they're average to bad *cough Despicable Me cough* the family would go to the movie together and spend that time then a Sci-Fi film that has been reviewed positivly by critics. It also helped that Inception had great marketing and was in the hands of Chris Nolan, director of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

Guys, I'm aware of all of this. I don't know how else to be more clear about that. Your posts seem to misunderstand what I'm trying to say. Maybe I haven't been clear enough.

What I'm saying is that Source Code underperformed. That's sad because it's a good movie that was thought well of by people who review movies. That can't be good for science fiction as a whole.

Separate from that, I personally find it disappointing that people would rather see something that looks awful and is poorly thought of by people who review movies. I understand Hop was marketed differently and attracts a different audience than Source Code. That doesn't change my line of thinking. I still don't like that so many more people saw a bad movie (presumably) over a good one.

To make this simpler, forget my vague comparison to Hop. Source Code, a movie that's good, smart science fiction, underperformed. What does that mean? Was Inception's success a fluke? Are audiences still adverse to seeking out brainy science fiction?

Well alot of people saw Inception because it had Nolan's name attached to it, Source Code didn't exactly have that type of "famous" director, not a whole lot of people saw Moon So it's too surprising that Source Code didn't draw a bigger crows. But is 15 million REALLY that bad of an opening? I don't think so, and Source Code has more staying power anyways, family films usually have a sharp drop-off after 2-3 weeks but I can see Source Code holding on for awhile. I perosnally think you're reading WAY too much into the this, I don't think studios are going to give up just because this film was beaten by a family film.

The $15 million opening weekend isn't horrible, but it is seen as fairly disappointing. Here's what box office mojo had to say about the opening:



The rest of your post does not even begin to respond to anything I've said. I'm not really sure how to respond without sounding like a jerk, but it really doesn't seem like you're grasping what I'm trying to say. I mean, pointing out that Inception made money because of Nolan's name and that Duncan Jones isn't as big of a name as Nolan is a little insulting. No shit. Not only that, but it has nothing to do with what I was saying because I'm not comparing the gorsses of Source Code and Inception. At all. I don't know how to be more clear than I have been, and I don't really want to be a dick, so I'll end it here.

Not sure how a 15 mill opening(in April) for a film with a 32 mill budget can be considered disappointing.
All the pre weekend predictions I read expected a 15 mill weekend.

Well what exactly do you want me to say? Not every "smart" film(sci-fi or otherwise) is going to make lots of money at the box-office just because it's critically acclaimed, and not every "dumb" film is going to bomb just because it's critically reviled, audiences don't always align with critics and this is simply one of those times. Yeah i'm sure it's real dissapointing that it didn't do better, but that's just how things go sometimes, you can't get upset everytime a film you like dosen't do that well at the box-office. But that dosen't mean that "smart" sci-fi films are doomed either, Adjustment Bureau still did pretty well so studios aren't going to completely rule out the possiblity of people seeing those types of films.

If i'm somehow saying the wrong thing again, then i'm sorry but i don't know what else to say on this matter, personally I don't really care about seeing either Source Code or Hop right now, i'm much more excited about seeing Hanna.

I'm not upset! You're making it sound like I'm on here whining about a movie not doing well! I was asking a question to James and hoped he could give some insight on Hollywood trends. He knows that stuff better than most of the people here and I wanted to know what he thought.

I don't care what you say, to be perfectly frank. I especially don't care when you either don't take the time to fully read what I've typed out or are unable to process the thoughts I've typed out. Coming in to a thread and condescendingly stating the painfully obvious is pointless.



I've read a handful of box office websites that have called the opening a modest disappointment. Maybe it isn't and my opinion is off base. I don't know and don't claim to. That's why I asked a question in the first place to James. Maybe you could point me towards some other stuff that says otherwise? I'd be curious to read it.

I don't know. I feel like you guys are jumping down my throat to tell me how wrong am I, when I'm trying to ask questions and get information. No one is providing any info, just telling me I'm wrong because of this and that. I don't get it, but whatever. That's the internet for you, I suppose.

Well i'm not trying to be "condescending" or tell you that you're wrong, you do have a point(i'm somewhat concerned about how well Hanna will perform) but if the budget was only 32 million, then 15 million definitely dosen't seem like that much of a failure, and like I said before, Source Code should have some staying power, so it could still turn a profit.

This thread has turned hilarious really quickly. I love that most of you don't even have a difference of opinion with Pete but are arguing anyway.



I think this is true, despite what the estimates were. BoxOfficeGuru only predicted 16 million, but truth be told I would still have considered it a minor disappointment if it had taken that figure.

That's less than something like Limitless. That movie did have DeNiro in a supporting role, but I'd like to think that Jake Gyllenhaal is a much bigger "star" than Bradley Cooper.

I do hope that the movie has legs and turns a decent profit but I read this:

Hey Pete, remember when you were disappointed with Inceptions opening weekend and it made a whole lot of money and had legs. Thanks to your moaning or question or whatever, I'm going to predict $75 million for Source code domestic gross.

BANK ON IT!

Exactly! I think you're giving up on Source Code a bit too early, i'll bet in a couple of weeks Hop is gonna sink like a stone and Source Code will edge it out.