Au-delà du temps

Time travel. Man's greatest wish seems to be to go back and change the past.

Is time a straight-line, or a circle? Is it relative? Does changing the past create different, parallel universes?

For this TV movie, I took the view that most movies gave which is to assume time is a straight line. Unfortuently it makes the movie a lot more confusing and hard to follow.

This TV movie is much like the 'The Butterfly Effect'. Our hero wants to go back into time and stop the war in vietnam so that his brother can live. To this end, he believes stopping the JFK assassination will stop the vietnam war ever being conducted (as well as concluding the cold war 30 years early!).

But as ever, if you change the past something will happen to make things worse for the future. For some reason, Lyndon Johnson decides to nuke Vietnam as well as send in more troops. Heck, why don't you just use the fabled 'neutron bomb' whilst your at it.

Anyhow, everything cocks up and the time-travellers are left wondering if they can ever change the past. Our hero goes to a local hospital where he finds his younger brother and tells him to stay out of Vietnam.

But if he went in the past to prevent his brother going to vietnam, this means the hero would have no recollection of his brother ever going and dying in vietnam - thus he would have no reason to go back in time.

This is one of many time-paraodoxes that can hurt your head if you try to think about it.

What happens at the end? Well, lets just say time, it appears, has a concious.

Overall: 5/10.

The plot of this 1990 made for TV offering seems to have been the inspiration for Stephen King's "11-22-63" novel. King expands on the possibility of what happens IF you actually succeed in such an alteration of history. That novel aside, this flick is very enjoyable and gripping. I wish it were available on DVD or BluRay. I'm hoping it will be before my VHS copy wears out.

Grab your popcorn and enjoy this for what it is: a nice Made-For-TV movie.

Time-Travel has always amazed me. And I'm somewhat a student of the JFK assassination.

Wonderful cast. Nice photography, considering the very limited budget with which the producers had to work with.

And I've not seen it mentioned, but Smooley, the dog, is a wonderful actor!!! And where on Earth did they come up with the name "Smooley"???

Solid 10 for me!

It comes as no surprise to me this film was never big (25 votes) or a success, as it was good and written not with the intention of winning Oscars but of entertaining.

Almost from outset, it odes what any good film does & has the viewers mind wandering, you never know exactly where it is going, and you're hooked with interest. You even feel like you're in the film & start applying the concept to yourself.

Robert Hays is surprisingly very good, and it's a good family movie, not too far at all behind standard of Back to the Future and certainly alongisde any other good time travel movies ie Deja-Vu, The Final Countdown.

TV companies should show this more. You can't help thinking if only DeNiro, Pacino or Spacey had the lead, or a few exploding cars or some unnecessary violence cropped up, it would've had twice the acclaim.

It also gives some good insights into the Kennedy assassination, which I found fascinating.

But if you watch it in a light hearted manner, don't take it to seriously or be too critical, then it's great & explores one or two ideas.

A so-so movie. A couple goes back in time to stop the assassination of President John Kennedy. This time travel tale becomes all too predictable once you know that they will fail. The movie is adequately engaging to keep you in your seat, with a nice twist at the end. But once you've watched it, you kinda get the familiar feeling that you've seen it before. If you want a good time travel plot, watch the Back To The Future series. They're definitely more original and enjoyable. I'd give Running Against Time a 5/10.