AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
5,4/10
12 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
O cientista Jim busca abrir uma fenda na Terra para criar a viagem no tempo. No entanto, tudo fica ainda mais complexo quando ele conhece a bela Abby e se torna cobaia de seu próprio experim... Ler tudoO cientista Jim busca abrir uma fenda na Terra para criar a viagem no tempo. No entanto, tudo fica ainda mais complexo quando ele conhece a bela Abby e se torna cobaia de seu próprio experimento.O cientista Jim busca abrir uma fenda na Terra para criar a viagem no tempo. No entanto, tudo fica ainda mais complexo quando ele conhece a bela Abby e se torna cobaia de seu próprio experimento.
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 1 indicação no total
Chad McKnight
- Jim Beale
- (as Chadrian McKnight)
Claire Bronson
- Helen
- (não creditado)
Derek Ryan Duke
- Resident
- (não creditado)
Andrew Shelton
- Jim Beale 2
- (não creditado)
Elle Sunkara
- Waitress
- (não creditado)
Erik Thirsk
- Limo Driver
- (não creditado)
Avaliações em destaque
The film has everything you could want: a 1980's soundtrack, a noir look a la Blade Runner, a scientist mad with the possibilities of his time travel machine and a beautiful girl to make it all worthwhile. Add to this Michael Ironside, who just lends gravitas to the entire thing and the only thing you could be missing is a smart script. And you are not, because this movie is smart.
So why didn't it become an instant classic? Because in the end, it was one hour and forty minutes for a punchline. The possibilities were infinite, pardon the pun, but the movie did not capitalize on them. That is why many of the people are either disappointed with the result or frustrated for not getting the complicated mechanics of time travel.
For me, it was a stylistically beautiful movie, with a lot of love poured into it. The acting was good, the story interesting. Most stories are usually broken by the addition of time travel or are based on it so much that they ignore anything else that might matter. Synchronicity did not fall into the first category and came very close to slip from the second and into the one of great films. I am sure that if it would have been done in the 80s, the time it seemed to belong to - pardon the pun again, it would have had a great success.
Bottom line: clearly better than average, but not consistently so. It has great moments and silly underdeveloped ones, it has a story with a lot of potential, but only a bit of it capitalized into anything. Certainly worth a watch.
So why didn't it become an instant classic? Because in the end, it was one hour and forty minutes for a punchline. The possibilities were infinite, pardon the pun, but the movie did not capitalize on them. That is why many of the people are either disappointed with the result or frustrated for not getting the complicated mechanics of time travel.
For me, it was a stylistically beautiful movie, with a lot of love poured into it. The acting was good, the story interesting. Most stories are usually broken by the addition of time travel or are based on it so much that they ignore anything else that might matter. Synchronicity did not fall into the first category and came very close to slip from the second and into the one of great films. I am sure that if it would have been done in the 80s, the time it seemed to belong to - pardon the pun again, it would have had a great success.
Bottom line: clearly better than average, but not consistently so. It has great moments and silly underdeveloped ones, it has a story with a lot of potential, but only a bit of it capitalized into anything. Certainly worth a watch.
A team of scientist is frantically pursuing a breakthrough in their work. They are developing a kind of black hole back-door to communicate through time and space.
As in most time travel stories, the plot twists and turns and multiple perspectives on the same scene from different angles make up a lot of the fun in these kind of movies. And Synchronicity does this well given the available resources. To be honest, this is not the most sophisticated time travel movie, but it has character and is well-made. It kept me hooked and interested.
Michael Ironside probably is the most appealing name of the cast, he has a minor role as an investor/shareholder in the project. Main characters McKnight and Davis have a nice chemistry together and carry the movie with their performances.
As in most time travel stories, the plot twists and turns and multiple perspectives on the same scene from different angles make up a lot of the fun in these kind of movies. And Synchronicity does this well given the available resources. To be honest, this is not the most sophisticated time travel movie, but it has character and is well-made. It kept me hooked and interested.
Michael Ironside probably is the most appealing name of the cast, he has a minor role as an investor/shareholder in the project. Main characters McKnight and Davis have a nice chemistry together and carry the movie with their performances.
Not much to say about this movie. The story line was weak. The acting mediocre. But the most maddening thing was the very obvious attempt to reproduce the look and feel of The Blade Runner. In that, it only partially succeeds by making it clear which shots were being replicated (har har).
Deckard's apartment is the most obvious source for the apartments of both the main character and his romantic interest: The light streaming in through blinds of vehicles flying by as an example. The scenes where elevators are moving up and down the external side of a building very much like the Tyrellcorp building elevators is another.
At one point there is a scene where the female love interest is asleep and the physicist is on the left side of the frame backlit. Very very reminiscent of the "do you trust me" scene in The Blade Runner. The apartment intercom is very very much like the scene where Deckard calls Rachel from the bar. Combine all of this with the use of Vangelis-like sounds that never quite go to the right places, and you have the makings of a film that elicits some amount of grief and a yearning for someone to do things right. This is not that film.
If you've never seen The Blade Runner, you need to see it and decide who does this better. Stories are completely different, but the attempt of look and feel is very obvious and ham fisted. If you haven't seen this movie, just go in expecting the quality of a 1990's SciFi original and you will not be disappointed.
Deckard's apartment is the most obvious source for the apartments of both the main character and his romantic interest: The light streaming in through blinds of vehicles flying by as an example. The scenes where elevators are moving up and down the external side of a building very much like the Tyrellcorp building elevators is another.
At one point there is a scene where the female love interest is asleep and the physicist is on the left side of the frame backlit. Very very reminiscent of the "do you trust me" scene in The Blade Runner. The apartment intercom is very very much like the scene where Deckard calls Rachel from the bar. Combine all of this with the use of Vangelis-like sounds that never quite go to the right places, and you have the makings of a film that elicits some amount of grief and a yearning for someone to do things right. This is not that film.
If you've never seen The Blade Runner, you need to see it and decide who does this better. Stories are completely different, but the attempt of look and feel is very obvious and ham fisted. If you haven't seen this movie, just go in expecting the quality of a 1990's SciFi original and you will not be disappointed.
This movie boasts a "sci fi noir" tag and I gotta say, it's a cop out. It's more of a b grade movie than a noir film of any kind.
The soundtrack was repetitive cut and pastes of 80s "sounds" which were super cheesy and just gross. Look back to The Machine for an example of a decent sound track, this sounds like the version done by an inexperienced composer.
The plot it's self is basically what Primer did much better but it had a romance that was essential for the plot to work and unfortunately this writer and the lead actress cannot pull off romance. Don't make a romantic relationship the key to your plot unless you're as good at romance writing as you are science fiction writing. The other aspect of the film, which many unfairly compare to Dark City, is that they use an endless amount of gloss and dark lighting to try to make everything seem dark and gritty. Combined with the music it was just tedious to take in.
Don't get suckered in by the comparisons made to better movies or the "noir" tags.
The soundtrack was repetitive cut and pastes of 80s "sounds" which were super cheesy and just gross. Look back to The Machine for an example of a decent sound track, this sounds like the version done by an inexperienced composer.
The plot it's self is basically what Primer did much better but it had a romance that was essential for the plot to work and unfortunately this writer and the lead actress cannot pull off romance. Don't make a romantic relationship the key to your plot unless you're as good at romance writing as you are science fiction writing. The other aspect of the film, which many unfairly compare to Dark City, is that they use an endless amount of gloss and dark lighting to try to make everything seem dark and gritty. Combined with the music it was just tedious to take in.
Don't get suckered in by the comparisons made to better movies or the "noir" tags.
Synchronicity is an interesting movie that makes you think. I've seen others movies on the subject of time-travel but few that goes that deep into the subject and explaining it that well.
It's by no mean an easy movie to understand as a whole plot-wise because of the whole time-travel paradox , but it actually illustrate the complexity of it in a very elegant and subtle manner without too many shortcuts.
The movie has its flaws however,some of the plot devices related to the time-travel paradox seemed a little bit too convenient in my opinion, and the ending could have been better. But as a whole I liked the story even though I didn't understand all the details involved. There is also a nice little love story which actually fitted quite well in the overall plot.
The cyberpunk setting wasn't a bad idea for the movie, but I wished they had been a bit more subtle about it. Some of the scenes of the movies were almost screaming "We bloody love Blade Runner" at us. I still liked the style and music but I think it was a bit overdone.
Apart from Ironside all the actors are refreshingly unknown, and do a very good job given the complex story they play.I liked the characters which were both human and interesting.
Synchronicity's story is by no mean easy to grasp , but I enjoyed it. It wasn't overly complicated but still gave me something to think about after watching it. I recommend this movie if you're in the mood for a bit more serious scifi.
It's by no mean an easy movie to understand as a whole plot-wise because of the whole time-travel paradox , but it actually illustrate the complexity of it in a very elegant and subtle manner without too many shortcuts.
The movie has its flaws however,some of the plot devices related to the time-travel paradox seemed a little bit too convenient in my opinion, and the ending could have been better. But as a whole I liked the story even though I didn't understand all the details involved. There is also a nice little love story which actually fitted quite well in the overall plot.
The cyberpunk setting wasn't a bad idea for the movie, but I wished they had been a bit more subtle about it. Some of the scenes of the movies were almost screaming "We bloody love Blade Runner" at us. I still liked the style and music but I think it was a bit overdone.
Apart from Ironside all the actors are refreshingly unknown, and do a very good job given the complex story they play.I liked the characters which were both human and interesting.
Synchronicity's story is by no mean easy to grasp , but I enjoyed it. It wasn't overly complicated but still gave me something to think about after watching it. I recommend this movie if you're in the mood for a bit more serious scifi.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesWhen Jim goes to Abby's apartment for the first time, you can read on the intercom :"Sebastian, J.F. #2019". J.F. Sebastian is a character from Blade Runner: O Caçador de Andróides (1982), set in 2019, and directed by Ridley Scott. Just above is "Scott, Anthony #2012". Anthony Scott, aka Tony Scott, director known for Top Gun: Ases Indomáveis (1986), Jogo de Espiões (2001) and Maré Vermelha (1995), among others, died in 2012 and was Ridley's younger brother.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the beginning when Matty is putting the MRD inside the 'holder' to insert it into the machine, Jim says "Hold exposure to no more than ten seconds" and starts counting down from ten. Jim's warning is not very clear, as it takes at least twenty seconds from the time the MRD is exposed to when it is put into the machine, exposing Matty and Chuck to its lethal radiation. Before Jim issued the warning, it had already taken Matty about five seconds to pick it up and put it into the 'MRD holder.' The time from when Matty actually picks it up and puts it into the machine is about fifteen seconds. It would have made more sense if Jim had started his warning with "Remaining hold exposure..."
Also, exposure to radiation has a gradual effect. It's not something that is perfectly safe at 10 seconds, and then deadly at 10.1 seconds.
- ConexõesReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 550: Synchronicity (2016)
- Trilhas sonorasOver the Bridge
Performed by Ori Vidislavski
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Synchronicity?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Eşzamanlılık
- Locações de filme
- Atlanta Georgia, EUA(location)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 4.505
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 2.859
- 24 de jan. de 2016
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 4.505
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 41 min(101 min)
- Cor
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente