Things Will Be Different

The concept for Things Will Be Different (2024) sounded promising and definitely piqued my interest. Movies involving time travel can often be hit or miss, and unfortunately, this one missed the mark for me. The two lead actors do a decent job portraying their characters, and the movie is beautifully shot with an impressive visual style. However, the story and pacing are where it falls short.

The film raises numerous questions but only loosely answers a few. It takes nearly an hour for anything significant to happen, and even then, the movie remains barely engaging. This concept might have worked better as a short film or with a faster-paced script featuring more tension-filled scenes and action. Instead, the execution is too slow-paced, making it feel much longer than it actually is. Slow-paced movies can work when they don't feel slow, but in this case, you feel every minute.

Ultimately, the concept promised much more than the final result could deliver, so I can't recommend this one. [4.4/10]

I'm a fan of time travel movies and i'm always looking for new ideas in this genre. And it's not easy because the same cliches keep repeating (ha!) themselves. This movie SEEMS to be following the same path, but there's something about it that makes it different.

To decide whether to watch or not and to avoid disappointment, please note: location and cast are extremely limited, everything here is about suspense but not about action as such, the movie is disguised as a low-budget indie but in fact, it's well-made and well-acted, the plot and the acting have some rough edges, but everything is compensated by the last point - there's something to think about.

If these points are ok for you - go ahead.

Time travel movies. If done right they can be great and a lot of fun, but I find when they take themselves too seriously then they can become extremely tedious. This is a prime example of the latter. What could have been a fun and interesting concept, with a little bit of thoughtfulness still behind it if done right, instead becomes an absolute slog as it tries to prove to the audience how smart it is.

The movie forgets to give you a reason to care about anything. The most simple aspect of any movie is to create stakes, and this movie forgets to do it. After about an hour in it tries to force some drama and conflict into the mix, but by then it is both too little and too late (and too confusing).

I didn't enjoy this one much at all. A generous 4/10.

Wow. What a strong directorial debut! I am really impressed with Michael Felker's efforts here and am excited to see where he goes as a filmmaker. He has an obvious love for science fiction, and after watching this I have a sneaking suspicion he will go on to become a rising and strong voice in genre filmmaking.

The script and concept are really strong here, but for whatever reason this honestly just didn't connect with me as much as I hoped it would. I feel similarly about many of the low-budget efforts of Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead, both of whom serve as Executive Producers here (fantastic voices in genre filmmaking as well). If, however, you ARE a fan of any Benson and Moorhead films, I'm confident you'll feel right at home here; even if THINGS WILL BE DIFFERENT doesn't end up fully connecting with you like it didn't for me.

You'll find some interesting ideas here for sure though. The hook is a strong one and there are a couple fun additions thanks to some twists and turns throughout the story. The pacing can a bit slow though and the sibling dynamic pitched as the heart of tale ultimately fell flat for me. I hate saying that, as I know it came from a personal place from the filmmaker, but I do have to admit it left me feeling cold once the credits rolled. Will that be the case for everyone though? Absolutely not. As with all art, reactions to this will vary, but it's still a film I'd ultimately recommend (unless you've seen TIMECRIMES which this film may or may not borrow too heavily from).

My issues aside, I do stand by this being a strong piece of science fiction (with a dash of horror) and I'd encourage those with interest to check it out and decide for themselves.

RANDOM PRAISE +

• S/O to Carissa Dorson for some excellent cinematography. I'm not sure what the budget was for this but she really made the best of what she had.

RANDOM CRITIQUE -

• This may be a Midwest thing, so forgive my cultural ignorance, but both of our leads casually walk around a parking lot and diner with their rifles, which-if you live in a city like me, may be a VERY jarring visual and reality to accept.

TAKEAWAY ?

• Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

The basic premise of TWBD is that two siblings, Joseph (Adam David Thompson) and Sidney (Riley Dandy), are robbers on the run from the law. They proceed through the woods to a farmhouse. They enter the house and by following some instructions in a notebook, they are able to exit through a closet door and reemerge, as it were, in a different time (but same farmhouse) to wait out the police for fourteen days.

So far, so good. And the cinematography (by Carissa Dorson) makes the most of the rural location.

Of course, Joseph and Sidney end up getting stuck in the farmhouse. They discover that the location actually functions as the "property" of a mysterious guide who speaks to them through a tape-recorder and is willing to help get them back to the present if they complete a specific task: the elimination of a mysterious (third) intruder. It is only toward the end that we learn just how fraught that task actually is.

TWBD does its best work through visuals: not just the facial expressions of the two principal actors, but the flashbacks to childhood (blurred images of a parental figure at a piano); the various (presumably alcoholic) beverages and vintage glassware that are a constant feature of TWBD; the trees, fields, and hills of the rural Midwest; the strange photographs, paintings and tchotchkes of the absent prior owners; etc. A second viewing is almost required to make sense of the visual displays that kaleidoscope and change constantly.

That said, the film is not as friendly in linking the narrative together for the viewer. But the thread is there. And there is a discernible conclusion, which in my view has to do with "breaking" a cycle of decisions, and the sacrifice required to do that.

A lot of viewers appear turned off by the temporal twists and non-obvious narrative. However, I think you might like this feature if you like, for example, Flanagan's own debut ("Abstentia"), the films of Isaac Ezban or Moorhead & Benson's "Synchronic" or "The Endless." (Benson has a part near the end. It is easy to see why he agreed, given the subject matter. Well, that and the fact that he is one of the Executive Producers. :-) )

I will certainly be looking out for Michael Felker's next film. This was an impressive debut.