Opiniones de usuarios

Joseph (Adam David Thompson) and Sidney (Riley Dandy) meet up at a diner. They are both armed and carrying a bag of money. They go to a pre-selected farm house. There is a specific procedure of changing the clocks, opening a door, and dialing a phone in the dark. They arrive back to the house which is fully stocked. Their plan is to stay there for two weeks and wait out the cops.

This is a low-budget high-concept sci-fi crime drama. I like the general premise and the curious door procedure to start the story. The problem is that it doesn't entice the audience to invest in these two characters. These are not famous faces and they don't have any exposition. Once things start going wrong, the rules are not clear. Nothing is that clear in this movie. The reveal is the reveal. I expected something like it. It's fine. The overall execution is a bit lacking.

I give it 6 stars because although it kind of comes together in the end, the plot is very intriguing. It keeps you guessing and forming your opinions heavily throughout the film. It had a feel like the movie "The Endless" where the characters are stuck in this loop only it was a bit harder to understand. What the endless had that this movie doesn't have is an ending that sufficed although it couldn't really be explained. This movie had me staring at the screen for a minute after it went off still trying to figure out the hows and whys. I liked the acting very much. All in all it's a good movie with subpar explanations. In the end they tied it together but again with no clear explanation to how "the enemy" even got there or who that person was looking for.

The movie's premise was quite good. The siblings hide in a temporal B&B to avoid the law. However, they soon discover that leaving is not as easy as they thought. They can communicate with the people responsible for time travel using a tape recorder locked in a safe. They are tasked with confronting an adversary who appears later in the story.

The execution, however, leaves much to be desired. I agree with other reviewers: the cinematography is excellent, the sound and music are above average, and the acting ranges from superb (the brother) to good but somewhat forced (the sister). The main drawback of the movie is its screenplay. While it has potential, there are super boring parts interspersed with a few sudden twists. Moreover, many elements are either left unexplained or explained in a lacklustre manner.

Despite its shortcomings, I enjoyed the movie. It would have benefitted from being 30 minutes shorter, featuring more realistic sibling dialogues, and providing better explanations for a few key elements, for example, delving deeper into the adversary's identity. Still, it was more than satisfactory for a low-budget flick.

P. S.

A few other movies gave me similar vibes, most notably Timecrimes (2007), The Field (2019), and The Endless (2017).

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 actors were great, the script not so much. I was bored and falling to sleep watching this dull movie. Confusing storyline that made you not care about the two leading characters. A brother and sister duo hide out in a farmhouse in a psychological thriller masquerading as a horror film. The brother and sister are stuck in a time loop and they can't seem to escape this farmhouse, the movie goes on and on as it tries to explain to the viewers the premise of the characters and film. But as the film ends you still feel like what in the hell did I just watch. A mishmash of me praying will this movie ever end.

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.

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.

I love Science Fiction and TimeTravel. However, this movie is so clueless and plain stupid that it hurts - clearly a waste of time! The scenery is ok, the set is ok, the camera shots are ok - the dialogue is stupid and uninspiring. I am writing the review out of kindness for anybody considering to watch this movie. Do not waste the time of your life - do something else!!!

I watched this thing because of a YouTube recommendation and it was worthless! I will leave a similar commend at YouTube to prevent everybody from wasting their precious time!

Do something constructive - talk to a friend, your kids or your love!

The writers and director appear to have been absolutely convinced that they are producing High Art, while they were in fact cobbling together a mess of plot holes in the shape of a film.

The premise is silly: you need to lay low after a crime, so naturally you teleport to a bizarro world frozen in time? What, you couldn't just go camping? You've got a child at home that you "must not grow up without a mother" but dimension jumping sounds reasonable?

Why did the Vice take so long to introduce itself? Why can't they detect the visitor? How and why do they maintain the house? Why did the visitor need to get through the door, and how'd they get there in the first place? Why?

Rather than bother to fill the movie with plot and dialogue that might explain some of this though, we're treated to achingly long silent scenes of the actors making a sandwich, or just starring off into the horizon. I'm sure some film student really appreciated... something out of all that, but when you fail to define why anything is happening, you force the viewer to ask why they're wasting their time watching.

High concept movies, like this one, usually don't take much time to explain what is happening and why it is happening. The outcome, right or wrong, depends heavily in how consistent that, which hasn't been explained, is treated through the movie. In this film, as in other produced by Benson & Moorhead, the director has a clear vision of his ouvre, and how and why he will deliver what he's foreseen, which make it worth the time. Maybe it's a bit obvious, but beyond any pretentiousness, it does what it has to do.

I'm giving this film 8 stars because I enjoyed it, pretty much all-round and all throughout. The setup is good, after which things get interesting, after which things get a bit slow, after which things get all riled up again.

And the plot isn't everything, as it is with films. The scenic shots (although familiar after some time) are well-imaged, the soundtrack (although minimal), does really come through when it comes.

I did find myself pauzing, rewinding, and getting a bit closer to the screen at times to follow along with the plot. Some communication in the film is done through text. It's done through woodcarving, actually, and although it looks good, it's not always the most legible. If you're not reading the text, some scenes might become a bit more mysterious, although I do believe plot-crucial elements are also conveyed via audible dialogue.

The star of this film is obviously Michael Felker. His alter-ego appears near the end of the film. This is pretty much a story of Bonnie and Clyde Meet the Wizards of Oz. Michael is one of the wizards.

A sister and brother have robbed a bank and are hiding out in a farmhouse. The farmhouse makes Saw look like a pleasant experience. They are now trapped in a time freeze (to match the pleasant weather outside). The writing for this film is extremely creative, and kudos must be given for its originality.

However, there are a few slow spots, and a few things that are currently not possible in current science. We must suspend our disbelief in order for the plot to unravel. The conclusion is highly satisfying, however, as neither of these gene pools would have been useful for mankind.

Not sure where the horror was supposed to come in but I'll move on from that

The scifi is time travel and an interesting concept

Now maybe if they script writers could have wrote some interesting things to happen or twists or turns or them finding things but nope

Instead you get to watch almost two hours of two bumbling stupid american siblings argue and act like alcoholics

Then at the end they try to throw in some cheap twist and if anything it ruins any kind of story they were trying to build

Stupid movie - stupid characters - stupid tropes

Honestly even my 4/10 review is pushing it this was a complete waste of time.

Never mind that this mess has more holes in the story than a fishing net, but it defies basic logic, reasoning and more importantly, basic storytelling. It is one of the worst written and directed films I've seen in a long time.

I'm not sure what the professional critics over at RT watched with their 81% Certified Fresh 52 reviews, and am baffled who they, the mostly professional and educated journalists who know how to write editorials, were impressed by such convoluted nonsense. I mean paint drying is more exciting, and at least makes sense.

Almost every single scene in the dragged out 102 min runtime defied logic and reasoning, and as mentioned, basic storytelling. A fifth grade drama class could write a more cohesive and believable story.

What's worse, is that writer-director Michael Felker had all these apparent "Easter eggs" with random shots of photo frames and other props, that had zero value, credibility or substance. For that matter, every single scene and dialogue defied basic logic, and all these so called hints Felker added to make himself and the story seem clever, where nothing but useless red-herrings that induced constant eye-rolls and cringe.

This mess may have been better produced as a short no-more-than-20-min film, but would still need a bunch of edits to have some sort of cohesive story. Even the ending was baffling and contrived nonsense. Just a little effort and basic reasoning could've at least had some sort of real closure to the otherwise underwhelming and laughable ending.

It's a generous 2/10 from me, all going to the actors who did their best with the mess they were given, and an actually impressive score.

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.