I still fucking hate this film.

I also dislike Source Code, and am totally perplexed by the overwhelming critical praise.
It's an OK movie, but very forgettable in my book. The multiple universes stuff is the most interesting element, and they leave it off for the last 5 minutes and don't really explore it.

Much more interesting to me would be if they revealed the multi-universe thing early on, and had him have to figure out how far he can stretch the rules of the Source Code device.

Oh well, I hope this one enables Duncan Jones to work on more substantial/interesting sci-fi in the future, I loved the hell out of Moon for what it's worth.

To which Niels Bohr famously quipped, "Albert, don't tell God what to do."

I...so, wait a second. The TL;DR is, "This is the answer we know we have to get (because of the observable universe), so here's the math to get us there." I'm sorry, but that makes my skeptic sense tingle. I want to know that the math matches the experience, preferably independently derived. I know quantum mechanics is all weird in the hizzy, but it still seems like a party foul to say, "There's the answer we want! Now to get it at all costs!" Instead of, "Here's the math of what's happening, does it match the experience we're observing? Yes? Huzzah! We're all going to get laid!" Or, "No? Well then it's either not the right math or we're mis-observing the experience. Or Sagan help us, it's both."

Maybe it's just semantics and I'm being pedantic, but then again, even when using the half-way intuitive values (1, -1) to plug into the fancy pants equation, even then it doesn't work! What's the deal? I iz confused.