lucvandenakkerveken
Joined Jan 2020
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings1.8K
lucvandenakkerveken's rating
Reviews2
lucvandenakkerveken's rating
Changing the past and adapting the present is something that has always fascinated me. I've seen tons of movies about it - Back to the Future, Twelve Monkeys, Mr. Nobody, Toto le Heros, Donnie Darko. And we can now add Back to Tomorrow to that list.
The film begins as an exciting adventure story (which is somewhat like the book De Zevensprong by Tonke Dragt): a student in the wonderful Leuven receives bizarre e-mails from an unknown person who apparently can see into the future. However, that history has a surprising end, and then we are suddenly 25 years later and a timid professor of quantum physics is working with his overenthusiastic assistant on a way to manipulate time. For example, they could send electrons to the past, and why not suddenly e-mails?
Giving away more of the plot would spoil the viewing pleasure. Because the trump card of Back to Tomorrow is that the classic story structure is exchanged for a winding path full of surprises and unexpected twists. The amazing aspect that science offers plays a major role in this, but so do the beautifully developed (and interpreted) characters, the humour, the tragedy and the phenomenal details (I want an Einstein and Hawking head too!)
Anyone who says playing with time also says paradoxes, so Back to Tomorrow is another film that will spark hours of debate among enthusiasts. And that's just what I love so much. So there is a good chance that I will watch this movie again soon. Because this compelling, swirling, exciting, beautifully portrayed, in short, atypical Flemish film, is one that you can chew on for a long time.
The film begins as an exciting adventure story (which is somewhat like the book De Zevensprong by Tonke Dragt): a student in the wonderful Leuven receives bizarre e-mails from an unknown person who apparently can see into the future. However, that history has a surprising end, and then we are suddenly 25 years later and a timid professor of quantum physics is working with his overenthusiastic assistant on a way to manipulate time. For example, they could send electrons to the past, and why not suddenly e-mails?
Giving away more of the plot would spoil the viewing pleasure. Because the trump card of Back to Tomorrow is that the classic story structure is exchanged for a winding path full of surprises and unexpected twists. The amazing aspect that science offers plays a major role in this, but so do the beautifully developed (and interpreted) characters, the humour, the tragedy and the phenomenal details (I want an Einstein and Hawking head too!)
Anyone who says playing with time also says paradoxes, so Back to Tomorrow is another film that will spark hours of debate among enthusiasts. And that's just what I love so much. So there is a good chance that I will watch this movie again soon. Because this compelling, swirling, exciting, beautifully portrayed, in short, atypical Flemish film, is one that you can chew on for a long time.
A bit of a disappointment, but still nice to see again. On the edge then.
And that disappointment is mainly due to the very implausible and rattling plot, and the rather questionable acting performances of CZJ and Connery. Lots of action and of course the sought-after choreography around the laser beams to divert attention, with CZJ's hindquarters in the leading role - there are films that have less to offer. But that's the only plus point, otherwise the review is somewhat disappointing, in my memory it was all just a bit better - the scenes on the walkway of the Petronas towers, for example, really don't look like it. And the end is all the cheesy at its best. Maybe it would have been better if CZJ's best scene had been at the end of the film, or the story had been a bit less ramshackle - now the tension is already a bit off halfway through the film. Too bad, that could have been a lot better.
And that disappointment is mainly due to the very implausible and rattling plot, and the rather questionable acting performances of CZJ and Connery. Lots of action and of course the sought-after choreography around the laser beams to divert attention, with CZJ's hindquarters in the leading role - there are films that have less to offer. But that's the only plus point, otherwise the review is somewhat disappointing, in my memory it was all just a bit better - the scenes on the walkway of the Petronas towers, for example, really don't look like it. And the end is all the cheesy at its best. Maybe it would have been better if CZJ's best scene had been at the end of the film, or the story had been a bit less ramshackle - now the tension is already a bit off halfway through the film. Too bad, that could have been a lot better.