IMDb RATING
4.5/10
3.6K
YOUR RATING
A scientist goes to a bank to meet a pretty bank teller. His time machine allows him to go 10 minutes back in time and correct his approaches to her. He's shadowed by two FBI agents and the ... Read allA scientist goes to a bank to meet a pretty bank teller. His time machine allows him to go 10 minutes back in time and correct his approaches to her. He's shadowed by two FBI agents and the bank gets robbed.A scientist goes to a bank to meet a pretty bank teller. His time machine allows him to go 10 minutes back in time and correct his approaches to her. He's shadowed by two FBI agents and the bank gets robbed.
Farouk Valley-Omar
- Taxi Driver
- (as Farouk Valley Omar)
Featured reviews
A world away from the 1989 sci-fi faux pas starring Mark Hamill and Bill Paxton that carried this movie title, this a low-budget film with an interesting cast. Most notably last seen in The Lord of the Rings, Sean Astin, Bosnian beauty Ivana Milicevic and Hertfordshire hardman Vinnie Jones.
However, despite being produced on a very limited budget, and in a remarkably short period of time (27 days according to van Eyssen), this film still remains watchable.
The script is good and delivery from Astin is excellent. Vinnie Jones plays well, Vinnie Jones and Milicevic has her moments; only plot holes in the screenplay itself, written by Louis Morneau and Phillip Badger, let the actors down in important scenes of interaction.
This film doesn't have the same seamless flow that other time-playback movies like the fantastic Run Lola Run or even Groundhog Day or Sliding Doors has. Consequently you're never quite sure whether you actually give a damn about the characters or not.
It becomes apparent as the film unfolds that the director had to cut corners (the budget was repeatedly slashed according to van Eyssen) and gaping wide plot holes are hurriedly painted over with techno-babble and the extremely convenient occurrence of events.
However, despite these issues, the cinematography in places is excellent and van Eyssen uses inexpensive camera techniques very well demonstrating that stunning big screen effects can be achieved without a Battlestar-sized budget.
A little bit of background info putting this movie into context will make it much more interesting and it's an enjoyable example of the potential of director David van Eyssen.
However, despite being produced on a very limited budget, and in a remarkably short period of time (27 days according to van Eyssen), this film still remains watchable.
The script is good and delivery from Astin is excellent. Vinnie Jones plays well, Vinnie Jones and Milicevic has her moments; only plot holes in the screenplay itself, written by Louis Morneau and Phillip Badger, let the actors down in important scenes of interaction.
This film doesn't have the same seamless flow that other time-playback movies like the fantastic Run Lola Run or even Groundhog Day or Sliding Doors has. Consequently you're never quite sure whether you actually give a damn about the characters or not.
It becomes apparent as the film unfolds that the director had to cut corners (the budget was repeatedly slashed according to van Eyssen) and gaping wide plot holes are hurriedly painted over with techno-babble and the extremely convenient occurrence of events.
However, despite these issues, the cinematography in places is excellent and van Eyssen uses inexpensive camera techniques very well demonstrating that stunning big screen effects can be achieved without a Battlestar-sized budget.
A little bit of background info putting this movie into context will make it much more interesting and it's an enjoyable example of the potential of director David van Eyssen.
Just watched this on DVD. Potentially a good idea, spoiled by woeful direction and some of the worst acting I have seen outside of a school play. Sean Astin puts in a reasonable performance and Vinnie Jones tries hard, but the rest of the cast was appalling. It's almost as if the principal cast was signed up, locations scouted, and then they knocked on doors at their locations and asked people if they wanted to be in a movie. The story had promise but it all fell in a heap. Awful. Time travel movies can tend to be disjointed, but if it's done well it all makes sense in the end. This makes sense it just doesn't seem worth the effort of watching. I ended up sticking with it till the end and was not rewarded for my efforts.
There's nothing more to say about this movie than the title of my review.
I don't know how could have come in my mind to buy that DVD...
After 15-20' it was clear it was a copy of that (fantastic!) X-Files episode (Monday - season 6 episode 14), and I'm surprised to read that no one of the other reviews has reported this...
I was going to stop the DVD after 20-25'... Then I wanted to watch all the movie to see if there was something better...
Useless to say, there wasn't...
Don't watch it... In case watch the original one: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0751163/
Just to say, the movie begins after a long, boring and senseless opening title I personally jumped...
I don't know how could have come in my mind to buy that DVD...
After 15-20' it was clear it was a copy of that (fantastic!) X-Files episode (Monday - season 6 episode 14), and I'm surprised to read that no one of the other reviews has reported this...
I was going to stop the DVD after 20-25'... Then I wanted to watch all the movie to see if there was something better...
Useless to say, there wasn't...
Don't watch it... In case watch the original one: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0751163/
Just to say, the movie begins after a long, boring and senseless opening title I personally jumped...
This is the kind of movie that could be decent, but becomes unwatchable because the director's so in love with his/her techniques. The plot's not groundbreaking, but it is different from most time travel movies where you keep going back in time. Unfortunately, the director likes the soundtrack and sloooooow motion so much he keeps using it over and over, resulting in something you may enjoy if you love meaningless pontification on our existence or what-not. That is, the film doesn't provide for it but David what's-his-name probably wants you to ponder and reminisce during the frequent slooow-motion rewinding of history. The premise is hard to believe already. It's a shame he decides to be clever with techniques. Over and over and over again.
An interesting time-travel-correct-your-mistakes story with a lot of possibilities, unfortunately told by a director who seems to be far more interested in slow motion car crashes (and ludicrous gunbattles) than in telling a coherent story. It also doesn't help that the dialog is often laughable, and spoken too quickly and/or flatly (especially by Sean Astin -- but that too is the director's fault. I'm not sure van Eyssen was actually paying attention during dialog scenes. It's clear that if he was paying attention, he wasn't interested in it.)
Perhaps with a different director this would have been a clever little film, but alas not. This was filmed as if it was a very long commercial (indeed, the director's experience appears to be entirely in the realm of television commercials), rather than a conventional movie. Perhaps this style appeals to audiences whose attention spans are all microscopic (and so the fact that many scenes don't make sense even internally, must less to the rest of the movie) -- because they simply are incapable of noticing such flaws. But I sure as heck did.
For you budding directors who want to make films, please use this movie as an example of what not to do. Don't show off, don't try to be 'impressionistic' -- it's clear that the monumentally pretentious positioning and use of the camera was intended this way -- don't use flash cutting and vary the film speed just because you saw in in a Tarantino flick, a music video, or someone else's commercial. Just tell the flippin' story, OK?
... hey, mentioning QT: *that's* where I saw that whole stupid bank-robber subplot in this flick that didn't matter -- "natural born killers" (from me, this is NOT a compliment, by the way.) And I am STILL trying to figure out that whole cell-phone tower thing... But give this a pass -- a great little movie idea that didn't get the story-telling it deserved.
Perhaps with a different director this would have been a clever little film, but alas not. This was filmed as if it was a very long commercial (indeed, the director's experience appears to be entirely in the realm of television commercials), rather than a conventional movie. Perhaps this style appeals to audiences whose attention spans are all microscopic (and so the fact that many scenes don't make sense even internally, must less to the rest of the movie) -- because they simply are incapable of noticing such flaws. But I sure as heck did.
For you budding directors who want to make films, please use this movie as an example of what not to do. Don't show off, don't try to be 'impressionistic' -- it's clear that the monumentally pretentious positioning and use of the camera was intended this way -- don't use flash cutting and vary the film speed just because you saw in in a Tarantino flick, a music video, or someone else's commercial. Just tell the flippin' story, OK?
... hey, mentioning QT: *that's* where I saw that whole stupid bank-robber subplot in this flick that didn't matter -- "natural born killers" (from me, this is NOT a compliment, by the way.) And I am STILL trying to figure out that whole cell-phone tower thing... But give this a pass -- a great little movie idea that didn't get the story-telling it deserved.
Did you know
- GoofsThe action is set in the USA, but the bus in the hostage scene is right-hand drive and the door is on the left. This configuration is not used in the USA, but in South Africa where it was filmed.
- Quotes
Stuart Conway: What happened?
Sarah Tanner: You were dead. He shot you.
Stuart Conway: Again? Will you please stop shooting me.
- ConnectionsReferences Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)
- How long is Slipstream?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 29m(89 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content