Time Code

Amazon.com

Timecode divides the screen into four parts and follows, in four uninterrupted shots, a series of overlapping stories. There's the wife (Saffron Burrows) of a movie producer (Stellan Skarskård) who's considering leaving him; the producer is having an affair with an aspiring actress (Salma Hayek); and the actress is the lover of a wealthy woman (Jeanne Tripplehorn), who jealously plants a bug in the actress's purse when the actress pretends to go to an audition. Meanwhile, the producer's partners and employees (Holly Hunter, Xander Berkeley, Steven Weber, and others) are trying to cope with the producer's increasing instability. There's a drug-dealing security guard; a dim massage therapist; a temperamental director who can't find the right actress; and assorted other Hollywood types who float in and out of the action. Earthquakes and aftershocks shake things up, a lot of cocaine is snorted, and there's some sex and some violence, all improvised by the actors around a story set up by the director, Mike Figgis (Leaving Las Vegas).

The emotional effect of any story is muted by the constant distraction of trying to take in four screens at once, though at times the stories resonate off each other nicely. It's an interesting experiment, made possible by the portability and longer takes of digital cameras; anyone interested in how digital technology has affected filmmaking will want to see this novel film. --Bret Fetzer

Customer Reviews:

Watch it four times, and it might make sense.......2003-05-27

Timecode is a behind-the-scenes look at Hollywood life - the business, the politics, the jealously, and even the drugs, sex, and rock `n' roll. Salma Hayek plays Rose, an aspiring actress who will do anything to get an audition - even if it means cheating on her jealous lover (Jeanne Tripplehorn) with a male film exec (Stellan Skarsgard).

But I said that Timecode is unique, right? Well, it is. It had no script - just a story, four digital videocams, and a bunch of actors who could improvise their way through 90 minutes of filming. The four cameras shot non-stop - no cuts, just one take. The entire film was shot 15 times - and the final one was released. No editing was required because viewers see the footage from all four cameras - simultaneously. The screen is divided into four quarters, and it's up to the viewer to decide which one to watch. Believe me - it's not exactly an easy task. Though you're often given audio hints (the sound of one quarter will dominate for a while), you'll still keep jumping from quarter to quarter, trying to figure out what's going on - and what you've missed. It's definitely not a movie to watch if you're not completely alert. It is, however, very interesting. And while I wouldn't say that this is one of my favorite movies, it's still an interesting experience. If you're looking for something out of the ordinary, it's worth checking out.

If you happen to pick up a copy of the DVD, you'll find all kinds of goodies. The special features include the entire Version 1 of the film (and yes, it really is different) and an audio option that allows you to choose which dialogue you want to listen to. Perhaps, then, if you watch the entire movie four times, you'll be able to make sense of it all...

Clever, but also a bit narcissistic.......2002-12-12

Whatever. I mean, I appreciate the experimental nature of the film -- the screen split into four separate-but-interlocking screens, each shot in a continuously-running tracking shot, filmed on digital video. The "action" shifts from scene to improvised scene, and gradually we figure out how each of the characters know each other. Still... did the story really have to be set in (yawn) Hollywood? Can't modern filmmakers think of something else to make movies about? Couldn't the actors improv their way through somebody else's life, for once? Regardless, this is one of the better uses of DVD technology I've seen -- they kept the audio tracks intact on each camera's footage, so after you soak up the edited version of the film, you can go back and see (hear, actually...) what they had to work with... Rarely do we get such a clear-cut chance to get into the headspace of the director and editor, so that at least was kind of cool.

brilliant execution, lame story.......2002-10-02

Timecode is quite simply a well-executed but failed experiment.
The concept is brilliant, but it is not supported at all by a good plot. What we have is basically mindless hipster dross; jet-set stereotypes stabbing each other in the back with their cell phones, and not much else. And yet, I was entertained by the film on a technical level. Certainly worth a look, but I would love to see this idea done again, even by Figgis, with a more engrossing story.

Blah.......2002-08-05

When I rented this, I was under the impression it was a good movie. Well, I was wrong. True, the four-screen idea is innovative and couldn't have been easy to do, so I'll give Mike Figgis credit for that. In addition, the movie was shot in continuous takes, so the actors involved have proved that they have the chops to pull off something like this. And in case you're wondering if you can follow four stories at once, the volume is usually muted for three of the screens, so it's obvious which one you're really supposed to focus on at any given time. On the minus side, any time actors are given the chance to improvise their dialogue, the viewer learns anew that we really do need screenwriters, and this movie is no exception. Most importantly, this movie doesn't have ANY interestng stories or characters. Movies need those things! So, if you're interested in the techniques Figgis used, by all means check this out. But don't expect to be entertained.

Innovative, but more of an experiment than a movie.......2002-04-07

"Time Code" was directed by Mike Figgis, best known for "Leaving Las Vegas." I'm not a fan of his work, but was intrigued by the concept of this movie - it was filmed in one 90-minute take and is told via four cameras shown in different quadrants of the screen. The movie was filmed 15 different times over a period of a few weeks, with the 15th take being the theatrical release. The story (such as it is) concerns 20+ people in Los Angeles who are connected in one way or another to a small indie film studio. The soundtrack is emphasized in certain quadrants at any given time to show you where to direct your attention. I was concerned that the movie would be difficult to follow, especially on a TV, but it was actually fairly easy to watch it and understand what was transpiring.

The technique is innovative and daring, and one cannot help but admire its audacity. It was also interesting seeing how the different stories overlapped. However, there are simply too many weak points for the movie to ultimately succeed. First, the acting and script was largely improvised, and it shows. Selma Hayek has one of the largest roles, and she is simply not up to the challenge. Holly Hunter also comes off poorly with her tentative stuttering character. Second, the plot (which was loosely structured by Figgis) is not very interesting. If this same script was shot in a conventional manner, it would not be worth the price of admission. Third, the concept of the four quadrants is interesting, but most of the time little is happening in any given quadrant. For example, the upper left quadrant, features mostly Jeanne Tripplehorn and she spends a huge portion of the movie sitting in the backseat of a limo or pacing the sidewalk in front of the studio. It just isn't very entertaining.

Description

After a secret government operative develops a computer program to control the weather, the program develops the ability to think independently and causes global hurricanes in an effort to kill millions of people. Enter a talented computer gamer and hacker--he is the only one who can possibly enter virtual reality and try to control the renegade program. With some help from a beautiful reporter and a few friends, he just may be able to do it.

Customer Reviews:

Gave as a gift..........2007-01-10

to a Vanessa Marcil fan, and he passed along that it was worth it for that.

Unexpected sci-fi gem.......2003-12-03

Wow! I really enjoyed this one. All the actors were unknown, but did a great job! The plot was excellent with plenty of twists and turns. If you like sci-fi (not horror) and you enjoy movies about computers, hacking, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality, this movie is excellent.

It beat the Matrix movies hands down.

WOW.......2002-12-29

Great movie about 10 minutes before the end it gets really stupid must watch closely or you will be lost.

2 appendages up(thumbs).......2002-09-21

Code Hunter stars Vanessa Marcil (90210),Adrian Paul (highlander) and Bai Ling (red corner)with appearances by Tone-Loc and Coolio. "It is about a giant storm controlled by satellites that threatens to destroy both american coasts. The only one who can stop it is the renegade hacker known as the jester. A virtual reality game gone haywire forces him into the deadliest, and most real, game of his life" review by blockbuster Code Hunter has superb acting on the part of Vanessa Marcil and Bai Ling. Adrian Paul plays his cool self as usual Nick Cornish's performance is a little over done but the movie as a whole is worth watching. I rarely give a four or 5 star rating ex: 5 Star Lord of the Rings, Highlander 4 star: Time Cop, The One Maybe that will help you as to the rating. This is again worth watching. I own a copy!!

Average customer rating:

Lacklustre mish- mash of top ten list of sci-fi movies
An Excellent Sci-Fi Flick
Beam me up Scott! There are no intelligent reviewers here!
Sorry, It's a Stinker
It's a parody

Alien Hunter
Starring: Hristo Aleksandrov , Nikolai Binev , Stuart Charno , Ross W. Clarkson , and Anthony Crivello
Manufacturer: Sony Pictures
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

Sci-Fi Action | Science Fiction & Fantasy | Genres | DVD | Video

General | Science Fiction & Fantasy | Genres | DVD | Video

DVDs Under $7.49 | Today's Deals in DVD | Special Features | DVD | Video

( A ) | Titles | Features | DVD | Video
Similar Items:

ASIN: B0000CABBQ
Release Date: 2003-10-28

Description

When extraterrestrial and cryptology expert Julien Rome (James Spader) is brought in to investigate a mysterious alien object in Antarctica, he gets more than he bargained for: government conspiracy, deadly disease, human betrayal, rekindled romance, and the end of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Stars James Spader (Stargate, Two Days in the Valley). Awareness created by Sci-Fi Channel Premiere July 2003.

Customer Reviews:

Lacklustre mish- mash of top ten list of sci-fi movies.......2007-07-22

James Spader brings an element of class to an otherwise derivative sci-fi.
It's not quite as B-movie as the title suggests, however, with a reasonably interesting story which rises above the expected B-movie excuses for bared flesh and gore..
Basically, as the plot progresses you realise are watching a remake of The Thing, as a bunch of ill equipped scientists discover a mysterious craft which unleashes something unexpected.. only then you realise it is in fact morphing into a remake of Predator, as you get the first person perspective of the alien stalking the scientists, only to discover you are watching a weird version of Outbreak, as a strange virus... oh, why bother, you get the idea.. At least it nicks ideas from the best.
Suffice to say, it does hang together plot wise, although action movie buffs will likely be disappointed - the ending is more Abyss than Alien...
Barely passable effects and decent acting hold things together enough for a watch, but its not particularly a credit to anyone involved.

An Excellent Sci-Fi Flick.......2005-03-17

If you are a science fiction fan, you are probably fed up with the formulaic evil aliens jumping out of the dark. This movie is refreshing on many levels. Yes, it has a few problems, but for the scientifically-minded, this movie has only subtle fallacious science in it, as opposed to the travesties in other sci-fi films. Also, this is a must-see for any James Spader fans, as he performs brilliantly yet again. It's a good movie!

Beam me up Scott! There are no intelligent reviewers here!.......2004-09-07

Except one.

I bought this movie used solely because James Spader was in it. That man is a consummate actor and I love everything he's done. I had no problems following this film; the DO NOT OPEN sequence was a bit hokey but otherwise the film made a lot of sense. The idea of friendly aliens accidently landing on earth is a belief I have held for a long time. Why does everyone look for hostile like in Signs? Anyway, despite some of these reviews, I considered this to be an enjoyably viewable film with an interesting premise and the alien ship coming to rescue the escape pod finding instead of a comrade, these unintentially infected humans reminded a bit of coccoon. They offered a sanctuary rather than obliteration by their own government. Spader's Julian is the only level headed one in the bunch, much as he was in Stargate. Sure, it has elements from other movies, every sci fi flick does. This is one film I am proud to have in my collection. Hey, I cried at the end, I wanna go too!

Sorry, It's a Stinker.......2004-07-08

This movie simply doesn't work on any level. No drama, no good one-liners, no worthwhile visuals. Nothing. Not even the "so bad it's good" consolation prize.

It's a parody.......2004-07-05

This is a movie that only makes sense after you have seen movies like Alien. Lots of those movies actually. Because this is a parody on those kinds of movies, but nobody is telling you.

So you just sit through the movie and like those things go, when scientists find an alien artefact, they pry it open as the typical cave dwellers they still are. And because it looks organic, they prod it. Yeah right you think, if you haven't walked out the theatre by then or pressed the stop button.

But anyway, a plot twist follows that caused me to gave it three stars, instead of a one. Acting is good, special effects are good, alien space ship is excellent.

But we have a lot of plot holes unfortunately. The alien artefact emits a signal that after decoding says "DO NOT OPEN". In English. That's what we would expect, wouldn't we, aliens that speak English. Also, if you want to say DO NOT OPEN, why encrypt it? Especially if you unleash death to an entire planet if you ignore the warning.

As usual, lesser films contain lots of scenes that add nothing to the overall picture. That our cryptologist fells for his female students is irrelevant for the movie. But I think the director was stretched to produce a 90 minute movie that could be done in 45 minutes and would have been the better for it.

The movie would have been much better if the background on Julian, his work on SETI, his life, hope and aspirations would have taken up a significant part of this movie. The only thing we learn now is that he has affairs with female students. Hardly surprising, irrelevant for the movie, and I doubt if ET likes to hear that part of his life as well.

Audio commentary of the director is interesting, he actually tells you where scenes come from, where it was shot, and such. You want to go through this movie at least once with the audio commentary enabled.