Liam es un investigador científico que se ha quedado atascado en el tiempo. A medida que sus saltos en el tiempo se hacen más extremos, es guiado al futuro por un misterioso anciano, donde e... Leer todoLiam es un investigador científico que se ha quedado atascado en el tiempo. A medida que sus saltos en el tiempo se hacen más extremos, es guiado al futuro por un misterioso anciano, donde es testigo del fin del mundo.Liam es un investigador científico que se ha quedado atascado en el tiempo. A medida que sus saltos en el tiempo se hacen más extremos, es guiado al futuro por un misterioso anciano, donde es testigo del fin del mundo.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 5 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
The high rating reviews are totally manufactured. No doubt about it. This film is low budget and guess what? It feels cheap and that has a reflection in the acting, the pace and more importantly the infantile, confusing and non-sensical (even for sci-fi!) plot.
At times I felt second hand embarrassment from watching this.
I watched many low budget sci-fi films, badly done, but with a good plot. That is all you have in these situations, just a good story. This film is not one of them.
I really regret having rented this film. I could have use those four quid to buy sleeping pills and I would've had more fun than watching this film.
At times I felt second hand embarrassment from watching this.
I watched many low budget sci-fi films, badly done, but with a good plot. That is all you have in these situations, just a good story. This film is not one of them.
I really regret having rented this film. I could have use those four quid to buy sleeping pills and I would've had more fun than watching this film.
Firstly, do not believe the 10/10 or 9/10 reviews for this movie: it is a low-budget, poorly-acted, and directed, movie with low-quality props that were supposed to give the illusion of a new and radical method to travel through time.
There is no chemistry between the two main characters (Liam and Emma): they come across as unsuited to each other and one questions why Zoe Cunningham was cast in the female protagonist lead role to begin with - oh, wait, she was one of the producers, that must explain it...
Apart from the laughably poor 'acting' by Zoe Cunningham, it was the prop used to represent the control panel for the incredible 'time machine': what looked like a Betamax A/B offline editor with only the power chord plugged into it despite it being easily discernable that the 'control panel' had numerous inputs and outputs that were simply going unused. How did the control panel actually control anything? Maybe this was one of the 'sci-fi' elements the director and producers wished to get across - machinery that operates entirely wirelessly even though the Garret character had to refer to his analogue wristwatch to time events... laughable at best.
And the Garret character themselves: every sentence ended with 'mate'. Every sentence! Now, I am Australian and we do use the word 'mate' a lot, but even we do not finish every utterance with 'mate'.
The movie is a joke and not worth your valuable time. The only grace was that Jonny Phillips who played 'Carter' looked like he knew what he was doing even if that character was pretty stereotypical.
There is no chemistry between the two main characters (Liam and Emma): they come across as unsuited to each other and one questions why Zoe Cunningham was cast in the female protagonist lead role to begin with - oh, wait, she was one of the producers, that must explain it...
Apart from the laughably poor 'acting' by Zoe Cunningham, it was the prop used to represent the control panel for the incredible 'time machine': what looked like a Betamax A/B offline editor with only the power chord plugged into it despite it being easily discernable that the 'control panel' had numerous inputs and outputs that were simply going unused. How did the control panel actually control anything? Maybe this was one of the 'sci-fi' elements the director and producers wished to get across - machinery that operates entirely wirelessly even though the Garret character had to refer to his analogue wristwatch to time events... laughable at best.
And the Garret character themselves: every sentence ended with 'mate'. Every sentence! Now, I am Australian and we do use the word 'mate' a lot, but even we do not finish every utterance with 'mate'.
The movie is a joke and not worth your valuable time. The only grace was that Jonny Phillips who played 'Carter' looked like he knew what he was doing even if that character was pretty stereotypical.
I enjoy sci fi. It's my favourite genre. I even enjoy bad sci fi. But this movie takes bad to a whole new level.
I could only manage watching half this movie. There may very well have been a logical ending tying in all the confusing bits, but the monotonous pace of the first half made it seem unlikely.
Nobody is acting, they're simply reading their scripts. The ever present clipboard must have been helpful for the doctor in learning her lines. There's no character development. There's certainly no action.
Do yourself a favour and go watch 2012 again. At least that movie is good for a laugh.
I could only manage watching half this movie. There may very well have been a logical ending tying in all the confusing bits, but the monotonous pace of the first half made it seem unlikely.
Nobody is acting, they're simply reading their scripts. The ever present clipboard must have been helpful for the doctor in learning her lines. There's no character development. There's certainly no action.
Do yourself a favour and go watch 2012 again. At least that movie is good for a laugh.
Rating based on entertainment value not on production extravaganza. Giving it a 9 instead of a 10 only because of the lack of production extravaganza. After all production extravaganza adds to the entertainment value of a production. Plus contributes to the required character count by using phrases in multiple instances using extravaganza four times. Anyway while not big budget extravagant the acting and directing are good and the characters are engaging with good chemistry between the likeable leads. Intriguing premise aptly brought to the screen on an obvious shoe-string budget. Enjoyable satisfying.
This is one of those smartly written, low budget sci fi films that tackles a big concept on a small budget. The mystery and relationship are interesting and compelling. I was surprised by the twists, but I never felt lost. The acting, writing and direction are all very good. I don't post very often and only when I really like (or dislike) something, and so I was genuinely surprised by the negativity in some of the posts. Maybe it comes down to expectations. This is not an action film. It's a quiet, thoughtful sci fi story with a good little mystery and a nice human relationship at its heart. I enjoyed it.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe inkblot test given to Liam features several of the real Rorschach test cards, some of which are in color, which are almost never used in media depictions of such tests. Several entities, such as The American Psychiatric Association, and Hogrefe & Huber Publishing, have fought to keep the real tests secret, claiming they would pollute future test results if patients saw the tests ahead of time. But as the copyright period on the inkblots have elapsed, they are in the public domain.
- ErroresWhen he's in the machine, he cannot sit in a chair because he might get fused to it like the mouse in its exercise wheel. But there's no concern that he might be fused to his clothing.
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Breaking Infinity?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 26min(86 min)
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39:1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta