A group of young scientists are working on a secret project that may allow them to travel ahead in time. They test it by sending one of their own ahead one hour. He returns pleading with ... See full summary »
From the creators of The Signal (Sundance 2007) comes Synchronicity, a mind-bending 'Sci-fi Noir' in the tradition of Dark City, Blade Runner, and Alphaville. When physicist Jim Beale invents a machine that can fold space-time, a rare Dahlia appears from the future. He must now find the flower's identical match in the present to prove his machine works. Jim soon discovers that the Dahlia lies in the hands of a mysterious girl, who seduces him into revealing his secrets. Convinced that he's fallen prey to a femme fatale trying to steal his invention, Jim travels back in time to stop her betrayal before it happens. But once in the past, Jim uncovers a surprising truth about the machine, the girl, and his own reality. Written by
At 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..." See more »
[from control booth]
Balance metric pressure at 057.
[working in full suit]
Metric pressure sustaining 057. Releasing valves.
Prepare to load M.R.D.
Radioactivity meters online, ready for exposure.
See more »
I've read the negative and 'so-so' reviews here on this movie and wonder if we watched the same movie. References to Blade Runner, capturing 80's style production etcetera - sorry but I don't agree. I Hailed Blade Runner as the best futuristically dystopian Sci-Fi movie as the best I'd ever seen way back when it first came out, I have every version of it and still watch them on a regular basis - it never fails to satisfy and leave me with a feeling of calm satisfaction. Just about every movie that's ever been made just like every story that's ever been written owes something to those that came before it: as they say there is nothing new under the sun. Now back to Synchronicity 2015. It is a stand alone movie with (all IMHO) a solid well-written script, a sound and interesting premise, more than acceptably good special effects (which it didn't need to rely upon to tell its story), very well cast and well acted and although not a 'drivingly wild video game movie' (yuk) it never lags in pace or fails to hold the viewers interest and curiosity. Nothing is certain ... is it past or parallel, real or imagined, it leaves a lot for the viewer to decide which is, I surmise, why the movie gets such a mixed reception. Not a typical Hollywood style wrap it all up neatly in buttered popcorn it needs your attention and perhaps more than a single viewing to appreciate the content. The sexuality/physical attraction that has been called a love story is neither pointless nor gratuitous but serves a well-defined emotional purpose given the context of events and the nature of the relationship which intertwines the raison d'être of the two characters involved with the development of the premise upon which the film proceeds. If you want or are looking for a movie that is blunt force trauma to the senses then this won't be for you. If, however, you appreciate subtlety of expression, timing and story development then give this movie a watch. I enjoyed it and will watch it several more times to allow the subtleties previously unseen to fully develop. 7 out of 10 at least on my scale for a movie that not only entertains, but holds ones attention for the duration of the movie and has characters that are believable and very human.
52 of 73 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?