User reviews

One of those films that's not a bad watch if you can't find anything else.

Yeah, it has a bit of a stupid plot, but if you just look at it from the point of view of a bit of innocent sci-fi fun, then it's an OK watch to pass the time.

The script could have been more solid, it definitely felt rushed and like it could have used another draft or two.

Isn't really any rewatch value there for me, it's a one and done type film.

Just don't go into it expecting an avant-garde sci-fi masterpiece and take it for what it is. People are judging way too seriously in these reviews. It's not trying to be Oscar-worthy, it's just a breezy sci-fi thriller.

While 57 Seconds had its fun moments, some cliche ideas let the movie down. It is not the best movie out there, but it is entertaining in it's own way and had the potential to have been better than what was released. Morgan Freeman is still a great actor that can make a bad movie look good with his topnotch acting. Josh Hutcherson did a great job too and I'll definitely love to see him in big budget movies. Nonetheless, 57 Seconds is a movie that contains a good dose of entertainment, a few laughing moment here and there and some solid acting. The story should have just been able to give us more.

Wow. I'm mind-blown.

Do you know when you are watching a science fiction movie or any movie really and you have those moments of amazement thinking "Wow! I feel like I'm getting smarter after every scene!", "This is so well written!" "This is so ingenious!"? Well, unfortunately, the complete opposite just happened...

It's remarkable how the decision makers involved in this project were able to set up this big scope involving as characters apparently two of the worlds most influential beings, the tech genius entrepreneur! And the pharmaceutical giant!, with the MIT graduate 'chosen one'!, and the movie be so ridden by basically idiotic/childish decisions and set ups. Everything just feels relentlessly cheap. How contradictory.

How to suspend your disbelief when the movie is set within such a wealthy and high-stakes scenario but you have everything surrounding your production (except Morgan Freeman) being not up to par? It just makes no sense.

Next time just tune/humble the whole thing down so that you don't have to simplify every plot point because you don't have the budget or the technical team/energy to make it.

I didn't like anything about this picture save maybe the possible potential for the story line. There were really no redeeming features to this film that I could find at any point during the development of the story. The main characters portrayal of his stupidity was only exceeded by his bad acting in general. In fact none of the characters had any credibility at all throughout.

The last scene in the aircraft was really pathetic from all aspects of this production.

The director should definitely keep his day job. I'm not a Hollywood critic just someone who has over many decades discovered what is a good movie from a bad movie.

Especially when one of my favorite actors Mr Morgan Freeman is involved.

He is far too good an actor to have been associated with this production at all.

Why he would have taken on this project to begin with is mystery to me?

Let's get this out of the way, this is not a blockbuster movie and there is nothing wrong with that.

If you are looking to watch an enjoyable film about time travel you'll be pleased.

The time travel element is actually perfectly done to avoid any typical cinema time travel complications. While a paradox does exist, you can easily ignore it and still enjoy the movie; if you even noticed it to begin with.

Morgan Freeman didn't need to be in the movie and is there to draw an audience (He was probably on screen for around 20 minutes, maybe). The character could have been played by anyone. The people that would watch this movie because Freeman is in it are probably not the audience who would enjoy the movie.

The runtime is short enough so it isn't a major commitment and there is enough suspense to keep you engaged.

I rated this a 7/10 because it is the minimum I would score a movie that I enjoyed watching even if I wouldn't watch it again.

The best part about the movie is that it has a beginning setup, a story, and an ending. The cherry on top was that they didn't leave it on a cliffhanger or a cut to black screen to keep you wondering (which I can't stand).

Please note that I am not overly critical of movies and my only requirement is that the movie is entertaining. In this regard, the film succeeded.

I don't know how the team that made the movie managed to land Morgan Freeman on their lap. Whoever made that happen is the only genius on the team.

Everything else is absolutely dumb and/or low quality about this movie.

The main characters make the dumbest decisions possible. Their reasoning makes no sense.

From the cinematography perspective, it's just awful. Most outdoor scenes are way too contrasty with blown shadows. It's like they hired a team of first year art school students and put them in charge of lighting and the camera.

Audio is awful too. Many indoor scenes echo like crazy.

Zero attention to details.

Do not recommend.

3/10.

Considering 57 Seconds has limited budget but attracting some good actors, that said a lot. The story has a lot of possiblity and potential, but quite a limited budget.

However, the director played it safe and made the story as enjoyable as possible. Boy met idol; boy got time jump back ring; boy met girl; boy met villains; boy got corrupted; boy broke up with girl; boy destroy villain for revenge; boy got invited to join conglomeracy; boy chose to stay sane and poor.

To submit with Hollywood formula: boy is white; girl is black; Morgan Freeman is the rich angel; villain is white; villain 's sidekicks are multi racial; showcase consumerism to the max with sport cars-private jet-privilege lifestyle.

What can go wrong? Well, it makes 57 Seconds became an average B movie, with better special effects and cool rental vehicles. In short, an average action flick.

This film is just terrible. The premise is okay but the main character is poorly written. The way he acts and his motivations are that of a 12 year old. This is as bad as that lame Jason Momoa film "sweet girl" where every point they want to portray is so on the nose that it all ends up stinking. Although I couldn't make it beyond 20 minutes of that tripe, I did make it further on this one. This script really needed another 6 or 7 rewrites. Maybe this script was written by ChatGPT? No? Or maybe it needed to be? This could've been so much better if it had been properly script doctored but we will never know.

Sure you have the legendary Morgan Freeman sandwiched in here at the beginning and end, but even he's a lost cause in this flick. Also all the action scenes are laughable. We've all seen movies with large fireball explosion where characters have to quickly run away, or instances where guns are pointed at someone's head, and times where someone gets knocked out, drugged or kidnapped.

I think the writers missed out on the element of flashback - perhaps show some scenes of Franklin's twin sister, so that we can unravel how close the siblings were and how her passing affected his life. Franklin really is a poor character because we can't tell if his heart is in the right place. He is labeled as heroic, but most of the time he uses the ring for personal gain (to gamble) and not for the greater good.

This film is neither bold nor intrepid, and Josh Hutchinson does the bare minimum here. I don't think he's cut out for an action thriller.

The low reviews are admit they didn't finish this movie. Silly.

It seems a lot only watched it because Morgan freeman is on the poster and then we're disappointed it's not Shawshank redemption

This is science fiction first and foremost, if you're not into sci-fi don't bother.

This thing isn't going to hand hold you through to the end explaining how ever nuance of tech details that simply don't matter.

The entire concept is around what one would do and how their life trajectory would shift if they stumble upon some future tech.

Anyone claiming they would have reacted differently is missing the entire point of the movie and likely didn't watch it to the end.

I cringe to think of the boring and mediocre story that would have taken place if the haters had been the ones to find the ring.

Josh Hutcherson and Morgan Freeman were great as always. The movie poster is misleading as Josh Hutcherson's character only holds a gun like one time, he's not a hitman or FBI agent.... Morgan Freeman's sidekick was weird and unexplained. I think they could have lost that character altogether. He seemed unnecessary to the plot and made the movie feel hokey from the beginning. Perhaps the script and editing could have been sharper. It feels like a small budget film that didn't save much for postproduction. All in all I was entertained. The actors are good and carried the movie. And it is always good to be reminded that big pharma is the bad guy. I would watch again.

I liked it. It was rough around the edges, a bit light/superficial, and had some polish/taste issues. But it was fun, and exactly what I wanted on a Sunday evening. Not too long. Not too intense. Not perfect but not boring. A decent tv movie that leaves room for "it would have been better if ....." or "they could have gone deeper with..." I don't want to give the impression it was bad, because I did fully enjoy it, for what it was, but imagining a sequel or how it could have been better is.... inevitable, and, kind of a positive -In a way, that's what good art does, drops the idea off and now your mind can run with it. A+ idea, C+ writing, B+ experience. Do recommend.

Overall, I liked this movie. The acting was adequate, and it kind of reminded me of Nick Cage and Jessica Biel in Next. One of my favorite 'special ability' type movies. But in this telling of the story, instead of seeing a couple of minutes into the future, the main character can travel backwards in time 57 seconds and re-do situations. It is effectively the same thing. Anyways, although the power is used and abused, as to be expected, is it done so for the purpose of entertainment. There is enough drama, substance, and thought provoking happenings to hold the viewers attention. I'm sure everyone has ideas of what they would do differently if they had the power, but main character is relatable enough. Good movie. Not great, but good.

This movie is truly abysmal and probably the worst one I've watched in at least 5 years.

The premise is fine but nothing you haven't seen multiple times already, the story is incredibly rushed and the characters aswell as the dialogue is as shallow and generic as they could get.

I understand this movie had a very limited budget and the producer worked with what they had, but plenty others have produced great films with less.

The least they could do is give the script a couple of more rewrites and show us consumers a bit of respect.

Please don't waste your valuable time on this atrocious movie.

This movie is alright, but derivative.

If you like the concept, but want to see a much better movie, check out "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, 2010".

The acting is much better, but I don't want to totally dismiss this film.

The concept is top drawer! Combining AI with a time device, would be a total game changer.

The AI would detect danger at a speed humans aren't capable of, then throw you back 57 seconds to avoid the danger, either manually or by the AI.

It's a genius concept, used a lot in the film, less the AI, he does everything manually.

I would recommend this film on the concept alone, however, it's a waste of Morgan Freeman's talent.

But hey, everybody can use an extra paycheck, LOL!

Was discouraged by the reviews (as usual) but basically title. Movie is exactly what it wants to be, and what I wanted to see. Great idea, great execution, solid seven in the never ending ocean of garbage movies, but gave it an eight because of all these "guy makes decisions like a 12 yeara old" reviews.

Yeah, I know. If you'd find a ring like this, your first thought would be Woah, I can move 57 seconds back in time, let's end world hunger. Lol. Gtfoh. I know exactly what you'd have done.

And great cast too. Josh and Lovie are amazing, with a chemistry you don't see often these days, especially in Hollywood. (Looking at you, Antman ...;)

Tldr, perfect Sunday evening entertainment. Really liked it.

Don't get me wrong, it's NOT winning any awards but I found it a fun watch right before going to bed (not too exciting - more on the relaxing side)

First, how can you not love Morgan Freeman? He's the GOAT! The storyline, while a bit slow, was decent. It's very relevant to today's climate with 2 big pharma companies competing for the future of their companies rather than the actual health of their patients (sound familiar?) 1 Company is trying to make life better with pills and the other is trying to do the same with technological gadget - saying he could CURE everything... society would never need pills again.

As you can imagine, these 2 companies were mortal enemies, mutually exclusive - 1 wins and 1 loses!!

And a reporter/blogger struggling to figure out which side he belongs on and how to do right by his gf/fiancee.

I'd recommend a watch when you're just looking for something to relax to. Maybe older kids (there are some 'easy' women in the movie several times - but not too much shown).

Josh Hutcherson cannot act; And that might not have ruined the movie on its own, but he cannot narrate either. No offense to him, but he simply did not have that acting talent to pull it off credibly.. The story was juvenile, as if it were written by highschoolers. Even the script needed several more rewrites to be worthy of being made a movie. The storyline concept was capricious, and because of that, unbelievable. Supportive acting was hyperbolic, exaggerative, and the cinematography was very wooden- like a movie from 1975. Like most of the other reviewers, I'm just perplexed how they got Morgan Freeman to appear in this movie.

This has to be the biggest inconceivable waste of money ever...I presume there is at least one professional amidst the team creating this movie that could see the total failings of this creation.

It really has no redeeming factors....script is so prescriptive and adolescent, acting is pass mediocrity. What are those involved in making this thinking of? Appreciate there was some investment to bring this to the big screen, why not do a advance screening and some peer feedback, if they were not interested in doing that even asking their friend what they thought would have highlighted it's absolute failings in terms of entertainment value.

Please can we stop destroying the movie industry by having this absolute nonsense being released.