iateyourkitten32 This movie sounds like it has potential. Don't be deceived, any potential it actually had on paper was tragically destroyed by the weak plot, horrible acting, and the overly dramatic cinematography. The first hour of the movie was a collage of me thinking "wtf!?" and cringing at the awkward acting.By the middle of the movie, I would have decidedly rather be spending my evening in a fist fight with an angry bear, or at least a bear cub, while listening to a song by Paris Hilton, on a malfunctioning CD player with earbuds that are far too big for my ears. The story was written around very few plot points, that are simple, unimaginative, and not intellectually stimulating. Not to mention the physics are complete BS in this movie. I understand it's science fiction but they could have at least tried.The only reason this movie is getting a 1/10 rating from me is because 0 is not a valid option. When I say it's the worst movie I've ever seen, I've seen some pretty bad movies. The worst one before this one was the One Warrior. Man, that was bad.Don't waste your time with this. The ending sucks. The beginning sucks. And everything in between sucks.

Wood Shampoo Blade Runner look & feel - check. 1980's sci-fi soundtrack - check. Good start - check. Turned into a crappy skin-a-max movie without the T&A - check. If you're considering watching this movie for a time travel fix, take a pass & watch Timecrimes - Mord ist nur eine Frage der Zeit (2007). For your sci-fi fix, watch Blade Runner again.

DrZom-77-388656 A time travel story is judged by how well it lives within its own created paradox. If you want to see that done well, choose "Predestination" over "Synchronisity".There are two ways a story can deal with the paradox: one is to allow it to exist and the other is to threaten destruction, of the subject, of the universe, or both. This movie sadly chose the latter course and that is very hard to get out of. If you travel back in time, say five days, you will have a five day long paradox. But that paradox both begins and ends when your primary self takes the trip back; a temporal loop has been formed where only for that five day period do you find yourself and your secondary self sharing the world. At the moment the primary makes the jump, at that instant the secondary becomes the one and only in the present, and the paradox ends. Almost a Hegelian Dialectic in its elegance.The clever writer can create loop over loop over loop with still a satisfying explanation and ending. Then there is the writer who paints himself into that corner of destruction and must find a way out. Some Deus ex Machina. I cannot detail how the god appears to rescue the character/universe from destruction in "Synchronisity" without spoiling the end. I do hate spoilers, but I walked away thinking I had my choice of endings. My advice to you is to first watch "Predestination" and then go to this movie. Oh, and some likable characters might have helped just a bit. I might have given a 3 out of 10.

Lee Prior Collier This is a low-budget tech-noir or sci-fi noir style movie. If you're expecting Hollywood glitz, you will be disappointed. It's been compared to Blade Runner, but that's really only the feel of the cinematography, not the plot or dialogue. It does look a lot like it was made in the 1980s, including a very old-school synthesiser sound track and pixellated computer graphics in the opening sequence. This is deliberate - embrace it and enjoy it, or don't watch the movie.As for the film itself, it's a "thinking" time travel movie in a similar vein to Primer, perhaps not quite so convoluted, more passionate and less ponderous. It's well-acted and carefully paced, there are the odd boring moments but there's generally enough going on to keep it interesting. It's hard to say much more without a spoiler. My advice is: if you're a real sci-fi fan and can overlook the low budget effects and quirky approach then go for it. I loved it.