There is a rule in science that for an experiment to be meaningful, all the variables must be controlled but one. That rule could be applied to experimental cinema, too; at least it should have been applied to this film.

Time Code combines two experiments, one that has promise, and one that is doomed. The promising experiment involves multiple screens following different parts of the story in "real" time. The doomed experiment involves requiring actors to script and direct themselves.

In addition, this movie was shot in four simultaneous uninterrupted takes. Maybe this was an experiment, too, but it is comparable to live theater, which is not exactly a novelty. It is neither a good thing nor a bad thing -- and should be a matter of complete indifference to the audience, as long it works. Instead of cutting from scene to scene, our attention shifts from screen to screen.

The four-screen experiment did work reasonably well here, especially on DVD, where one can instantly back up to catch bits one missed. The multi-view device might even have been truly excellent in this film, had it not been for the other experiment -- the Absentee Director.

A feature movie is not an improv sketch. There is a reason that an army has one general, and that a movie has one director. Although each of these endeavors requires the effort and cooperation of many talented people, both a military campaign and a feature film must be focused on one person's vision and goals.

Time Code has the same fatal flaw as Dancing at the Blue Iguana. Each actor was instructed to invent his own character, and then to direct himself. In Time Code each performer was evidently told to make of his character a recognizable Hollywood stereotype. The result: eight variations on "coke-snorting pretentious but sycophantic loser," who all walk stiffly through their parts like zombies trying to perform soap opera. I cannot imagine how desperate a viewer would have to be, in order to care about any of them.

I suppose this should not reflect badly on the performers, although it cannot have helped their careers. I have seen most of them in other films, and they are all capable actors. It does reflect dismally on the director. Where was he hiding while the four cameras were running? Maybe he was busy watching four tumble dryers at the laundromat up the street.

Time Code might be worth a peek on dollar-day at the video store -- which is how I found it. Otherwise, forget it. 3/10.

I have always wondered if there was a film where it is basically one long take with no written lines, no cuts and no editing at all, and this experimental film drama from director Mike Figgis (Leaving Las Vegas) is exactly what I was looking for, in terms of freshness. The film consists of four frames simultaneously showing four different stories in real time, and once or twice meeting each other, and to help you know which of the four frames to look at there is a good use of sound cuts and bridges, and a little bit of music (by Figgis). The action all seems to lead to or from a (TV/film) studio where many members of cast and crew are going/come from, and the actors of course improvise every single line, and when they are not talking you concentrate on the frame that has sound. Starring Terminator 2's Xander Berkeley as Evan Wantz, Pirates of the Caribbean's Stellan Skarsgård as Alex Green, Golden Brooks as Onyx Richardson, Saffron Burrows as Emma, Super Mario Bros' Richard Edson as Lester Moore, Salma Hayek as Rose, Holly Hunter as Renee Fishbine, Executive; Danny Huston (son of John, and half-brother of Angelica) as Randy, Kyle MacLachlan as Bunny Drysdale, George of the Jungle's Leslie Mann as Cherine, Jurassic Park III's Alessandro Nivola as Joey Z, Ana's Assistant; Basic Instinct's Jeanne Tripplehorn as Lauren Hathaway and Dracula: Dead and Loving It's Steven Weber as Darren Fetzer. Apparently 15 takes of continuous filming were made over two weeks, the actors changed their clothes in each one so that they could not cheat in editing, and the actors were responsible for their own costume, hair and make-up. It may strain our eyes a little, and it may take you a few seconds to realise the frame you are supposed to be focusing at a particular time, but a very original and refreshing way of film-making. Very good!

In L.A., businesswoman Lauren (Jeanne Tripplehorn) slashes Rose (Salma Hayek)'s tires and tricks her to ride in her limo. Rose wants a screen test from director Alex Green (Stellan Skarsgård) and girlfriend Lauren had found out her secret boyfriend. Alex's wife Emma (Saffron Burrows) is having a session with therapist (Glenne Headly). Meanwhile there is a discussion about Alex's new project but he seems disinterested. Actors and staff comes in and out of the movie.

The screen is divided into four as it follows four different real-time POVs simultaneously that was shot at the same time. It's an interesting premise that may be too much of a gimmick. The one camera shot in each of the four sections doesn't lend itself to be watched by itself. It's actually tiresome to follow one screen. It's also tiresome to follow one screen to the next. Writer/director Mike Figgis pushes the audience to follow a specific section by turning up the sound in a specific section. It's a gimmick that interested me for 20-30 minutes but is a real drag for the rest of the movie. In the heart of it, there isn't a cohesive drama. I couldn't really explain what or who we're suppose to be following. I wonder if the story isn't so Hollywood inside ball, maybe an exciting thriller would be more compelling.