Timecode (2000)

Wonderful character development!

The Worst Film Ever

Admirable film.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Filmed in one long, unbroken take, with lots of improvised acting and dialogue, this highly experimental film by director Mike Figgis presents a screen that splits the action into four quadrants, formed by the intersection of the X and Y geometric axes. The quadruplicate visuals take some "time", pardon the pun, to get use to. But gradually, we settle into the story, as characters move out of one screen and into another.Figgis manipulates the sound to highlight which of the four segments we are to focus on. But I found this approach doesn't always work, as sound from other segments bleed into the main action segment. Further, the film's score is too loud, which compounds the problem. Because of the complex nature of the visuals and sound, "Timecode", obviously, is not a film for viewers who wish to turn off their brains.What I really liked about the four screen approach is that it conveys clearly the idea that an individual out of sight from others can have an impact on the overall trend of group thinking and behavior. Our words and actions thus affect others more than we realize. This impact doesn't come through as well in standard filming because the plot action takes place sequentially rather than concurrently.Although this is a technique film, it's the story and the characters that I reacted to most forcefully. The setting is Hollywood. The characters are all in the film business. The plot has people preparing for auditions, executives discussing scripts, people walking through offices carrying papers, and one character, Lauren (Jeanne Tripplehorn), spending most of the film sitting in a limousine, chain smoking, and listening to a Walkman.None of these people are appealing or sympathetic. They all come across as self-absorbed, desperate, two-faced, shallow, and pretentious. The irony here is that while the story is fictional, the plot and characters represent fairly accurately what does, in real-life, go on in Tinseltown.What would have been more compelling is a documentary approach, using real people in the film business, as they spend a typical afternoon doing business and interacting with others. The fictional nature of the "Timecode" story undercuts the visually experimental, real-time presentation.As a total cinematic package, "Timecode" doesn't work very well. But at least Figgis tried. We need more efforts like this that explore unusual ideas, both in technique and in story concept, to foster originality, creativity, uniqueness, and courage, in a contemporary Hollywood that has ossified into an assembly line of vacuous, copycat, cinematic trash.

Man I am one that hates the modern day overuse of that word. But this ladies and gentleman is exactly that.Moreso than anything else this is on an entirely different level conceptually I've ever seen. This can be easily evidenced by the fact that there is no spawn of this movie. Someone's making blair witch project spawn right now as we speak.But its now 8 years later... no one's copying this for one reason. THEY COULDN'T IF THEY TRIED!!! Pick on Ms. Hayek all you want, but I enjoyed the acting. It just felt like I was watching people living their lives. Man that's all its about creating an reality on screen to tell your story. And this in fact wasn't that 3 act tale well all love, but equally brilliant.

Seems good plot. However, the idea of showing the movie in real-time in four different quads ruined the whole thing. One can watch it for 15 or the worst for 30 minutes like that, but it is really too much to stand it for the entire movie. The directors or whoever decided to do this should have opted for different means. The same plot could have been made better in different ways - but this was more than annoying to watch all four quads at the same time and to come for a conclusion to judge the movie However, the story and the baseline of the plot are still interesting. Casting, music, coordination all are, in fact good. In summary, they could have avoided this 4-quad plan.

As I sat down to watch this movie I was cursing because I couldn't find the remote. Lucky break for me! After a few minutes of uncomfortable misgivings, I mean! 4 screens of hand-held camera with weirdly variable sound - Oh God, what am I watching here? I slowly became hooked and hypnotised. I would suddenly realise that I had been so intent on the top left corner that the situation in the bottom right had changed from an interior with one character to an exterior following another and I hadn't noticed when and how this had happened. If I had the remote I would have been constantly stopping and rewinding and I would have totally destroyed the flow.So, here's the thing thing. If you are watching this movie for the first time on DVD or VHS - loose the remote control! Not a Great Film but an interesting and noble experiment. (And heartening to know there are still some grown-ups left in Hollywood).