Breaking the End of “Source Code”

Breaking the End of “Source Code” (photo)

Posted by on


I really enjoyed Duncan Jones’ “Source Code,” from the clever sci-fi premise to the charmingly grumpy lead performance by Jake Gyllenhaal, to the various twists and turns of the narrative. My one major complaint with the film was the ending, not for what it said, but for what it didn’t say. Here was what I wrote in my original review last month:

“The film’s ending is particularly unusual for a modern science-fiction film thanks to its emphasis on its hero’s personal growth rather than big explode-y action sequences. Still, as refreshingly atypical as that ending is, it also has a darker angle that the movie kind of ignores and which suggests Stevens’ behavior isn’t quite as heroic as it’s made out to be.”

Obviously I was being as vague as possible at the time for fear of spoiling any of the details. Now I think it’s safe — after one more SPOILER WARNING! — to delve deeper.

The darker angle I was referring to happens after Gyllenhaal’s Colter Stevens has accomplished his mission inside the source code: he’s repeatedly travelled into the body of a man named Sean Fentress eight minutes before he’s killed in a bomb explosion aboard a Chicago commuter train. Through an arduous process of trial and error, Stevens discovers the identity of the bomber and relays the information to his handlers. Together, they capture the bomber and prevent a second attack from occurring. Though Stevens feels normal (or as normal as a man sent bouncing through time can feel), he slowly realizes that he’s essentially a vegetable being kept alive only so his mind can interface with this source code technology.

His assignment over, Stevens convinces his handler, played by Vera Farmiga, to send his consciousness back into the source code one last time and then let his physical body die. Though Stevens has bene repeatedly told he can’t alter the fate of the train’s passengers, this time he does: he stops the first bombing, and saves the lives of everyone on board. When his eight minutes are up, he doesn’t return to his lifeless corpse, or to some metaphysical limbo: he keeps living inside Sean Fentress’ body, right alongside all the other survivors of the now failed bombing attempt. And that’s where the darkness creeps in.

If Stevens is inside Fentress’ body, what happened to Fentress’ consciousness? The only assumption we can draw is that it’s gone and that the real Sean Fentress is dead, essentially at the hand of Colter Stevens. Even while he saves everyone else on board the train, Stevens has basically become a murderer. Which, when you think about, isn’t exactly a heroic thing to do.

All of those details are available in “Source Code” but the film doesn’t announce them very loudly. The epilogue scenes of Stevens and Michelle Monaghan’s character enjoying a walk through Chicago’s Millenium Park and Farmiga’s character reading an email sent by Stevens from inside the source code are hopeful and a bit suspenseful but they’re not laden with menacing metaphysical overtones. It seemed to me at that first screening that the film was raising some very provocative questions that it didn’t really want to address.

Given my interpretation, I was intrigued by Jones’ comments about the ending, which he gave at a Q&A after a screening of the film in Boston. His thoughts were recorded by /Filmcast host David Chen, who played them during this week’s review of the film. Here’s some of what Jones had to say:

“So Colter Stevens, at the end of the film, begs Goodwin to let him take one more shot at sorting out this disaster on the train, stopping the bomb from going off. So he gets sent, he gets on the train, in what he discovers to be a parallel reality, stops the bomb going off, which means Sean Fentress is now dead although he shouldn’t be… Colter has basically forfeited Sean Fentress’ life just so he, Colter Stevens, can have a happy ending. I like that, because immediately although we have a happy ending, it’s ethically a little bit more ambiguous.

I never doubted a filmmaker as smart as Jones knew these sinister undertones were present in his film, I’m just surprised he wanted them there. I initially read “Source Code”‘s epilogue as studio mandated; that the quote-unquote “natural” place to end — Stevens goes into the source code one last time, saves everyone on the train in a hollow gesture, then dies after one moment of happiness — was deemed not commercial enough, necessitating this supposedly happier addition which actually contained all sorts of unintended horror. In fact, the opposite was true: the studio preferred what I would call the “hollow gesture” ending, and it was Jones who fought for the addendum, specifically because of what I read as unintended horror.

So what’s more important: the director’s intent or the evidence on the screen? Jones wants those questions about Stevens’ actions to be present, but are they present enough? I’m not saying we need a shot of Stevens looking at Cloud Gate and crying “Oh no! What have I done?” But a little bit of a clue, in the editing or the music, could have made a big difference to the way we feel after the film is over.

What this comes down to is a question of what we, as the audience, want from our movies. How often do we complain about being spoon fed messages in films? A lot. Listening to Jones, and thinking some more about the end of “Source Code,” I stumbled across another possible rationale for that ending. Here’s an example of a movie that buried its messages so deep, they feel like they’re there accidentally. By discovering them, it’s as if we’re seeing something we’re not supposed to. Which, in essence, is what Stevens is doing during the final scenes of the film. Farmiga and particularly Jeffrey Wright’s character don’t want him to consider the ethical ramifications of his actions inside the source code. By embedding these disturbing implications in the finale, Jones is rewarding us for learning to behave like his protagonist; to refuse the superficial truth that’s presented to us, and find the deeper reality hidden underneath.

Watch More

Hard Out

Comedy From The Closet

Janice and Jeffrey Available Now On IFC's Comedy Crib

Posted by on

She’s been referred to as “the love child of Amy Sedaris and Tracy Ullman,” and he’s a self-described “Italian who knows how to cook a great spaghetti alla carbonara.” They’re Mollie Merkel and Matteo Lane, prolific indie comedians who blended their robust creative juices to bring us the new Comedy Crib series Janice and Jeffrey. Mollie and Matteo took time to answer our probing questions about their series and themselves. Here’s a taste.


IFC: How would you describe Janice and Jeffrey to a fancy network executive you met in an elevator?

Mollie & Matteo: Janice and Jeffrey is about a married couple experiencing intimacy issues but who don’t have a clue it’s because they are gay. Their oblivion makes them even more endearing.  Their total lack of awareness provides for a buffet of comedy.

IFC: What’s your origin story? How did you two people meet and how long have you been working together?

Mollie: We met at a dive bar in Wrigley Field Chicago. It was a show called Entertaining Julie… It was a cool variety scene with lots of talented people. I was doing Janice one night and Matteo was doing an impression of Liza Minnelli. We sort of just fell in love with each other’s… ACT! Matteo made the first move and told me how much he loved Janice and I drove home feeling like I just met someone really special.

IFC: How would Janice describe Jeffrey?

Mollie: “He can paint, cook homemade Bolognese, and sing Opera. Not to mention he has a great body. He makes me feel empowered and free. He doesn’t suffocate me with attention so our love has room to breath.”

IFC: How would Jeffrey describe Janice?

Matteo: “Like a Ford. Built to last.”

IFC: Why do you think the world is ready for this series?

Mollie & Matteo: Our current political world is mirroring and reflecting this belief that homosexuality is wrong. So what better time for satire. Everyone is so pro gay and equal rights, which is of course what we want, too. But no one is looking at middle America and people actually in the closet. No one is saying, hey this is really painful and tragic, and sitting with that. Having compassion but providing the desperate relief of laughter…This seemed like the healthiest, best way to “fight” the gay rights “fight”.

IFC: Hummus is hilarious. Why is it so funny?

Mollie: It just seems like something people take really seriously, which is funny to me. I started to see it in a lot of lesbians’ refrigerators at a time. It’s like observing a lesbian in a comfortable shoe. It’s a language we speak. Pass the Hummus. Turn on the Indigo Girls would ya?

See the whole season of Janice and Jeffrey right now on IFC’s Comedy Crib.

Watch More

Die Hard Dads

Inspiration For Die Hard Dads

Die Hard is on IFC all Father's Day Long

Posted by on
Photo Credit: Everett Collection, GIPHY

Yippee ki-yay, everybody! It’s time to celebrate the those most literal of mother-effers: dads!

And just in case the title of this post left anything to the imagination, IFC is giving dads balls-to-the-wall ’80s treatment with a glorious marathon of action trailblazer Die Hard.

There are so many things we could say about Die Hard. We could talk about how it was comedian Bruce Willis’s first foray into action flicks, or Alan Rickman’s big screen debut. But dads don’t give a sh!t about that stuff.

No, dads just want to fantasize that they could be deathproof quip factory John McClane in their own mundane lives. So while you celebrate the fathers in your life, consider how John McClane would respond to these traditional “dad” moments…

Wedding Toasts

Dads always struggle to find the right words of welcome to extend to new family. John McClane, on the other hand, is the master of inclusivity.
Die Hard wedding

Using Public Restrooms

While nine out of ten dads would rather die than use a disgusting public bathroom, McClane isn’t bothered one bit. So long as he can fit a bloody foot in the sink, he’s G2G.
Die Hard restroom

Awkward Dancing

Because every dad needs a signature move.
Die Hard dance

Writing Thank You Notes

It can be hard for dads to express gratitude. Not only can McClane articulate his thanks, he makes it feel personal.
Die Hard thank you

Valentine’s Day

How would John McClane say “I heart you” in a way that ain’t cliche? The image speaks for itself.
Die Hard valentines


The only thing most dads hate more than shopping is fielding eleventh-hour phone calls with additional items for the list. But does McClane throw a typical man-tantrum? Nope. He finds the words to express his feelings like a goddam adult.
Die Hard thank you

Last Minute Errands

John McClane knows when a fight isn’t worth fighting.
Die Hard errands

Sneaking Out Of The Office Early

What is this, high school? Make a real exit, dads.
Die Hard office

Think you or your dad could stand to be more like Bruce? Role model fodder abounds in the Die Hard marathon all Father’s Day long on IFC.

Watch More

Founding Farters

Know Your Nerd History

Revenge of the Nerds is on IFC.

Posted by on
Photo Credit: Everett Collection, GIFs via Giphy

That we live in the heyday of nerds is no hot secret. Scientists are celebrities, musicians are robots and late night hosts can recite every word of the Silmarillion. It’s too easy to think that it’s always been this way. But the truth is we owe much to our nerd forebearers who toiled through the jock-filled ’80s so that we might take over the world.


Our humble beginnings are perhaps best captured in iconic ’80s romp Revenge of the Nerds. Like the founding fathers of our Country, the titular nerds rose above their circumstances to culturally pave the way for every Colbert and deGrasse Tyson that we know and love today.

To make sure you’re in the know about our very important cultural roots, here’s a quick download of the vengeful nerds without whom our shameful stereotypes might never have evolved.

Lewis Skolnick

The George Washington of nerds whose unflappable optimism – even in the face of humiliating self-awareness – basically gave birth to the Geek Pride movement.

Gilbert Lowe

OK, this guy is wet blanket, but an important wet blanket. Think Aaron Burr to Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton. His glass-mostly-empty attitude is a galvanizing force for Lewis. Who knows if Lewis could have kept up his optimism without Lowe’s Debbie-Downer outlook?

Arnold Poindexter

A music nerd who, after a soft start (inside joke, you’ll get it later), came out of his shell and let his passion lead instead of his anxiety. If you played an instrument (specifically, electric violin), and you were a nerd, this was your patron saint.


A sex-loving, blunt-smoking, nose-picking guitar hero. If you don’t think he sounds like a classic nerd, you’re absolutely right. And that’s the whole point. Along with Lamar, he simultaneously expanded the definition of nerd and gave pre-existing nerds a twisted sort of cred by association.

Lamar Latrell

Black, gay, and a crazy good breakdancer. In other words, a total groundbreaker. He proved to the world that nerds don’t have a single mold, but are simply outcasts waiting for their moment.


Exceedingly stupid, this dumbass was monumental because he (in a sequel) leaves the jocks to become a nerd. Totally unheard of back then. Now all jocks are basically nerds.

Well, there they are. Never forget that we stand on their shoulders.

Revenge of the Nerds is on IFC all month long.

Watch More
Powered by ZergNet