Timecode
2000 · 97 min · Director: Mike Figgis
Show plot summary (may contain spoilers)
The primary story with this movie is that it is shown in four simultaneously filmed ninety-three minute single shot takes (in other words, shown in four quadrants), with the actual plot secondary. The four cameras follow the players involved, with two or more of the four cameras sometimes filming the exact same scene from different angles and thus different perspectives. The audio on each of the four quadrants is turned up and down based on which quadrant(s) the viewer should pay most attention to at any given time. The actual plot, which takes place in Hollywood, involves the pre-production by Red Mullet Productions for the movie "Bitch from Louisiana". The production team is in an executive meeting to discuss several aspects of the movie, including problems with one of their own, Alex Green, who has been missing in action from much of the production and this meeting. Alex's problems stem from his substance abuse and philandering, his wife Emma who is contemplating leaving him, of which he is unaware. Lester Moore, the movie's director, is also causing the producers some concern as they believe he again is using drugs against company policy. The production team is also talking about casting the role of "The Bitch". One actress who wants to audition is Rose, who is having an affair with Alex as a foot in the door. Rose does not officially have an audition, although she tells her controlling lover, Lauren, that's why she is going to Red Mullet's office, while she really is meeting with Alex for a tryst. Lauren, however, believes that Rose is indeed cheating on her. Through it all, Quentin, a masseuse, is present giving free massages as a means to gain Red Mullet as a corporate client. Their goings-on come to a head during a pitch meeting by visiting European actress, Ana Pauls, who is accompanied by her agent, Bunny Drysdale, and her musician boyfriend, Joey Z.
Your viewing check-in
Emotional fingerprint
Timecode (2000) — Movie. Top emotional signals: Confusion 30%, Anxiety 25%, Curiosity 20%. Source: AI estimate. Shares describe emotional signal, not percentages of people. Your experience may differ. How we measure
- Confusion30%
- Anxiety25%
- Curiosity20%
- Excitement15%
- Awe10%
AI estimate · no viewer votes yet
How we measure
AI estimate
Share of emotional signal, not the percentage of people or a probability of enjoyment.
Each viewer contributes one response, split equally across their selected emotions. When available, an automated estimate supplies a prior that is blended with those responses. Counts include distinct viewers, not automated estimates or archived anonymous votes. Fewer than 3 viewers is an early estimate; more responses do not guarantee certainty.
Why it feels this way
The strongest emotional signals are Confusion, Anxiety, Curiosity. Genres: Drama, Romance. AI estimate.
Is it worth watching?
Consider this title if you are looking for Confusion, Anxiety and Curiosity. Its IMDb rating of 6.0/10 suggests a generally positive audience reception. For these leading emotions, its Feel Score is 62/100.
How did it make you feel?
Votes are saved to the fingerprint once you’re signed in.
Pick up to three · 0/3
Emotional journey
- Tension
- Sadness
- Curiosity
Not enough subtitle evidence
No dominant emotion
Dominant emotion: Curiosity
Dominant emotion: Tension
Dominant emotion: Sadness
Dominant emotion: Humor
Dominant emotion: Love
Dominant emotion
| % | Approximate minute | Dominant emotion | Overall intensity | Tension | Sadness | Curiosity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.5 % | ≈ 2′ | Curiosity | 43 % | 36 % | 13 % | 42 % |
| 7.5 % | ≈ 7′ | Curiosity | 39 % | 32 % | 14 % | 33 % |
| 12.5 % | ≈ 12′ | Tension | 39 % | 34 % | 20 % | 27 % |
| 17.5 % | ≈ 17′ | Sadness | 37 % | 30 % | 18 % | 24 % |
| 22.5 % | ≈ 22′ | Humor | 38 % | 18 % | 9 % | 21 % |
| 27.5 % | ≈ 27′ | Humor | 42 % | 16 % | 5 % | 20 % |
| 32.5 % | ≈ 32′ | Tension | 40 % | 25 % | 14 % | 19 % |
| 37.5 % | ≈ 36′ | Love | 44 % | 31 % | 31 % | 18 % |
| 42.5 % | ≈ 41′ | Sadness | 46 % | 30 % | 36 % | 19 % |
| 47.5 % | ≈ 46′ | Humor | 41 % | 23 % | 24 % | 17 % |
| 52.5 % | ≈ 51′ | Love | 41 % | 24 % | 24 % | 16 % |
| 57.5 % | ≈ 56′ | Sadness | 42 % | 29 % | 26 % | 21 % |
| 62.5 % | ≈ 61′ | Humor | 43 % | 36 % | 15 % | 28 % |
| 67.5 % | ≈ 65′ | Tension | 50 % | 45 % | 9 % | 30 % |
| 72.5 % | ≈ 70′ | Tension | 50 % | 42 % | 6 % | 24 % |
| 77.5 % | ≈ 75′ | Humor | 44 % | 29 % | 5 % | 21 % |
| 82.5 % | ≈ 80′ | Humor | 50 % | 39 % | 14 % | 26 % |
| 87.5 % | ≈ 85′ | Tension | 71 % | 67 % | 37 % | 31 % |
| 92.5 % | ≈ 90′ | Tension | 84 % | 82 % | 56 % | 32 % |
| 97.5 % | ≈ 95′ | Not enough subtitle evidence | Not enough subtitle evidence | Not enough subtitle evidence | Not enough subtitle evidence | Not enough subtitle evidence |
Icarus
Rags to riches: The emotional tone rises from negative to positive.
Riches to rags: The emotional tone falls from positive to negative.
Man in a hole: The tone falls, then recovers.
Icarus: The tone rises, then falls.
Cinderella: The tone rises, falls, then rises again.
Oedipus: The tone falls, rises, then falls again.
AI reading of the film’s English subtitles (dialogue and sound cues) — not viewer votes. How we measure ↗
Kadri — your film companion
AIAsk anything about Timecode. From the film’s own dialogue and FeelDB data, at your spoiler level.
Kadri
Hi, I’m Kadri. Ask me anything about Timecode — I’ll stay inside your spoiler line.
Premise onlyAfterward Reveal viewer responses · may contain spoilers
Viewer responses about feelings after the title ended, separate from feelings while watching. No AI estimates.
0 responses so far
Feeling details appear after at least 3 viewers respond, to protect privacy.
Cast
Auditioning Actor
Auditioning Actor
Drug House Owner
Penny (Evan's Assistant)
Details
- Directed by
- Mike Figgis
- Written by
- Mike Figgis
- Type
- Movies
- Released
- 2000
- Runtime
- 97 min
- Country
- United States
- Ratings
- Feels mostly
- Confusion
- Data updated
Where to watch
Rent
Feels similar
More like this →Emotion overlap shows mood similarity, not a prediction of enjoyment.




