Everywhen (2013) Poster

(2013)

User Reviews

Review this title
14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
Talented, though underdeveloped feature from 17-year-olds
OJT23 April 2014
To appreciate this you really need to know some basic info before viewing. Otherwise you're most likely to find the film awful. Like if I didn't know that Roberto Rodriguez first feature "El Mariachi" was made for a total of 8000 dollars, you wouldn't really think that the film is more than OK. When you get to know it's made in one shot due to the cost of 35mm film, you simply cannot be more impressed.

What you need to know about this film, is that it's made of a couple of 17 year old Norwegian high school kids with all amateurs in all roles. Then it's easier to get impressed. However this doesn't make this film more than a curiosity, due to this, because there's too much not functioning, though the idea is good enough, photography work is well done, the effects are OK for it's budget and the score functions very well. On the worse side is amateurish acting, incoherent storytelling, badly spoken English and cheesy dialog from most of the actors and a confusing rhythm. It's made with English dialog just to make the market for the film bigger.

But being made for less than 10.000 dollars, there's quite a lot which surprises. This film actually made it to Cinema release at a couple of cinemas in Oslo, with quite good turn up, and is released on Blu-ray and DVD in quite a handful of countries by Another World entertainment.

We're in a future world where teleporting is as common as making phone calls, when 18 year old Ian Finch loses his five year old adopted brother Dylan, when he disappears like half the population of the world goes missing. Dylan seems to be a bit sad, and he strangely enough puts a paper note into his brother's pocket. When Ian later on finds the note, he immediately runs back home, only to find some dusty remains of Dylan in the bathtub. He is then surprised by a boy at his own age, facing him with a gun.

The film could have been much better if it wasn't made out to be an action movie. The fear in threatening and the use of weapons make the bad acting come to be too obvious. This is shot digitally, which means they could have managed to train away the bad acting with more than one take. Can't say anything other than that the bad acting ruins it for me.

The best scenes are shot in Oslo (which is not supposed to be Oslo, though), without any actors. Another running scene with no dialog is the film's best scene. The two main actors, Harald Evjan Furuholmen and Hugo Hermann, related to the missing 5-year-old, have their moments, and shows there's some acting talent there, but mostly runs around looking cute and estranged cheeky. They should have had some hours of theatrical training to use their voices. I think it would have been better if shot in Norwegian. A couple of the lesser roles are played brilliantly, though. Graeme Whittington is by far the best. Maybe this was bad casting in several roles?

Well, it suits as an example of what is possible to do on a shoestring budget today with digital technology. The two teenage creators Jarand Breian Herdal (writer and director) and Jens Peder Hertzberg (Visual effects creator) are talented, but in need of a more time and professional supervision when it comes to many things. Using 10 minutes of the running time of the film on character development in the film would have helped a bit, and much more rehearsals for almost everyone involved. The two trailers made for this, both featured on the DVD and Blu-Ray are giving the impression of a better film than it is, and shows more quality and talent than the film.

See what youngsters today are capable of achieving in both film making and distribution, even if it lacks some serious quality, is very interesting, though. We haven't heard the last of these two film makers. Let's hope they attend film school before they do another feature, while rehearsing on making short movies and improves on their own quality measures.

The DVD and Blu-ray version, very professionally packaged by Another World Entertainment has a 3 minute (why not longer??!!) "the making of"-interview with the two young film makers, also in English, and this gives some of the thoughts behind the project as well as how they managed to make the film in less than 10.000 dollars.

I think this film might be used in start of film schools and media classes, but maybe just in parts, as a discussion around how it shouldn't be done. It's suited to inspire young film makers, no doubt! I give a weak three stars (out of ten) for the overall effort, obvious drive and talent. More precisely: Packaging (9), score (8), sound effects (8), photography (6), trailers (5), visual effects (5), plot and idea (5), locations (5), casting (4), But dragging down is dialog (1), instruction (1), acting (2), script (3).

Still will be looking forward to see what's next, but in a few years time. Far away from low budget young debuts of the likes Steven Spielberg (18 when made "Firelight") or Xavier Dolan (19 when made "I killed my mother"). Hope they doesn't take as long as Uwe Boll, but more like Peter Jackson (both with directorial debut as 27!) has in turning out decent movies, and hope they are connected with talented people along the way. There's loads of film talent in Norway, so my hope is hanging up there!
47 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
'A' for effort...I guess.
CabbageCustard28 May 2019
Someone tried to make something interesting here. They failed.

I don't know anything about the people who made this, but I'd like to. I'm guessing they're college students, or maybe even high schoolers and this is their first attempt at a movie. If so, good try guys. Better luck next time.

This really is a paradox of a movie. It's sort of quirky and has some original ideas and yet it's horribly cliched as well, full of characters and plot devices you have seen before in much better movies. You will find yourself wondering what is going on right from the outset. Part of that is obviously intentional, but most of it is due to a poorly-written script. When the thing comes to its conclusion and all is revealed, you will be none the wiser about what it was all about. I found myself wondering if this movie would have been better if it was longer and there was more time for the story to unwind and develop. Being honest though, I think the 70 minutes the movie does run for is about all I could take. It doesn't help that the acting and the dialogue are just abysmal or that there is no tension at all. Curiously, the producers of this seem to want us to believe it is set in the USA. The language is English, the character names are American, and you may even spot a US flag on one soldier's sleeve. Unfortunately, all the street signs are in Norwegian and so is the architecture, so that sort of spoils the illusion.

Would I recommend this? No. If you have an hour to kill though and you're prepared to lower your expectations (and I really mean 'lower') then by all means watch it. You won't enjoy it, but it will pass the time.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A very impressive science fiction story muddled up with over eager actors, and too little focus.
face-819-93372615 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a real mess, the amazing amount of effort the cast, and production team must have used to make it is the only thing worth seeing. The acting is abrupt, and sharply inconsistent, all of the players seem lost, and confused, but at the same time they are trying so hard all just itching to jump in with the lines they think they have learned. Great use of special effects, they floating screens are handled like it is very ordinary, and nothing new. The story is a disaster that makes complete sense. The edit feels rushed, and really off with the out of sequence scenes that are repeated (and just as bad when the story finally catches up to those points. The story is a disaster, yeah I said that, and that is how the story feels, you have a bunch of very willing actors in Norway who seem to think they are speaking clear English, and what seems like a bad translation that has not been explained to the actors properly, though the fiction holds up sort of. (side issues. If you have a gun in your pocket it should show in the mirror even if you don't, and is it only you that doesn't see your reflection in the mirror, do other people see you in it with them?) To be blunt, I really tried to Enjoy this movie, I was quite impressed by the effort that the cast gave, it is just a shame that they could not have just spoken Norwegian, and subtitled it, this might have seemed less like a college production. The special effects and the tech over all was well done, and gave a real feeling of our future, so if you don't mind something that fells like it was made by kids for nerdy kids, then give this one a go, they really do try hard these folks.

Jesse of www.Jesse.ca
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Interesting concept and attempted storyline
krotkruton-447-90282717 April 2014
So to be honest, I'd normally give this a 3/10 for the general feel of the movie, but I bumped it up a bit because I thought the concept and attempt deserved some bonus points. While it is definitely an amalgamation of previous time / space travel ideas and won't really provide anything new to any fan of that genre, I think this film had a unique flavor.

With that said, the rest of the movie was definitely lacking in polish. There were a couple scenes where you could see the shadows of the film crew (I thought someone with a gun had walked into the room, but after rewinding I'm pretty sure it was the boom operator), guns with suppressors aren't suppressed in the audio track, stuff like that. The acting is mediocre at best, but I wouldn't say it's horrible. The major issue is the execution of the plot. The scenes seem to jump around a lot in time, and it really wasn't necessary. It was hard to tell if they were trying to go for some Memento-style reveal at the end or if they were trying to trick the audience into thinking related things weren't related and vice versa, but failed to do both. It's definitely not a movie to mindlessly watch, because you'll lose track of what's going on very quickly. But if you're desperate to see something that isn't the same Hollywood blockbuster as last week, then this might do it for you.
30 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good idea - very bad implementation
player8472-119 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
First of all: I'm German and watched the movie in English, so i can't really say much about the vocals.

That being said, my thoughts about this movie: The general idea may not be original but it is good none the less.

I'd rate the movie as follows (out of 10): score (3), sound effects (8), photography (7), visual effects (6), plot and idea (2), locations (4), casting (5), acting (4), script (3)

The worst thing are the immense holes in the script and nearly impossible things like killing yourself by drowning (seriously: Did the writer read about suicides committed in the bathtubs and assume it would be by drowning?) Children dying by drowning didn't commit suicide, they either had an accident or were murdered. Secondly: Why do suicidal people have to be "cleaned up"? They either kill themselves or are of no harm (other than having a god complex it seems while watching the main characters).

The story just doesn't make sense - and for me a low budget doesn't excuse that.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Possibly the worst film I've ever watched ...
vrvlvnd14 July 2014
I bought this film on DVD without reading the cover properly, thinking it to be of somewhat quality. Two minutes into the film I realize my mistake. Other reviewers have gone into detail about how awful this film is, so I won't reiterate on it. The film makers might be talented in some ways, but that's not enough to release this on the open market. Don't waste your time, people!

There is an interesting plot idea here (which is why I bought the DVD). Sadly it's nowhere near developed. The actors cannot act, the English Language probably looks passable in script, but doesn't work on film. Bad editing, holes in the storyline and some strange details (others have mentioned how a 5 year old contemplates suicide and Writes a note about it, for example ...).

On the plus side: Excellent cover, good enough to fool a hasty customer!
13 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Poor Quality on Every Possible Count
Diane-73676616 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
My initial review was going to start with "If a couple of high school students decided to make a movie this is the one that they would make." Imagine my surprise when I then read the previous review and found that this movie was actually made by group of Norwegian high school students. Nailed it.

The soundtrack is generic, the acting, dialog and overall screenplay values are that of a high school play. A badly acted high school play. Very. Badly. Acted. The camera work is amateurish and the editing is utterly confusing. I initially wanted to turn this piece of awfulness off within 10 minutes but forced myself to watch almost 30 in the unlikely hope it would get better. It did not.

There is nothing redeeming about this work and it is absolutely not worth watching for any reason save as a case study in how not to make a movie.

We now live in a world where a group of amateurs can create a movie (and I use the term generously) and have it distributed internationally on Blu-Ray presumably through manipulation of SEO. This is not a good thing. Don't waste your time.
13 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
If someone went and filmed a piece of turd drying out in the sun for 40 minutes, that would be an immensely better film than this piece of rubbish
jaodeballs4 October 2014
First of all, the decision to use English and not just subtitle the film (if they were releasing it internationally) was truly horrible. None of the actors can speak coherent English. Everyone swallowed their lines and had difficulty speaking proper English. That said, even if this was, at the minimum, understandable, it still wouldn't forgive the scattered mess that was this movie's plot.

Being 17 year-olds and amateurs does not excuse the horribleness of this film. You can be young and inexperienced and still make a great film. You just have to be a good storyteller.

This film lacked any sense whatsoever. Compounded with the bad storytelling, bad acting, bad directing, bad writing, and overall bad everything makes this movie an excrement that should never have even been released - except as a class project. And even then, should have been given a D. D for Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Possibly worst movie in history, no kidding...
roony197412 June 2017
Possibly worst movie in history, no kidding...

This movie should never ever have been released on the open market. It is actually a Norwegian school project made by a bunch of teenagers with a camera, not a movie at all.

You are better of watching just about anything else then this. Keep away at all cost, I mean it seriously. STAY AWAY !

There is nothing more to say about this "movie" but for the review to be accepted I must write more.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Hahahaha....
kai-9350924 July 2015
This have to be the worst film I've ever watched.

The plot was good, and I really wanted to see what happened next. It was hard to not turn it off. I only watched the whole thing because it was filmed in my home town of Oslo.

What ruined the whole film, and made me just laugh and shake my head through the whole film was the horrible horrible acting, and bad directing.

There where just so many things that just didn't make sense, and thing that should have been put extra focus on for it to make sense for the viewer. It was just bad all around.

Even the plot was bad. Good idea. BAD writing.

This film is so bad, it's almost so bad it's fun to watch. Almost..
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Surprisingly twisty and atmospheric.
ckand14 April 2019
I can't say that I exactly enjoyed "Everywhen," but I was impressed by how well shot and edited it was, and how well it conveyed a sense of alternate worlds and time...not so much travel as...loops. You even have some sense of character development, as the personalities of the two leads change over the course of the hour and even reverse, becoming more like the other. How and why those personalities change isn't very well established, though, nor is what exactly was happening or had happened that set the plot into motion. I suppose a grand answer to the question of "What's going on?" isn't necessary if you look at the film as a sort of chamber piece set within a larger story, but it's frustrating to be left in the dark. Nevertheless, in mood and atmosphere, "Everywhen" felt like a pretty good episode of "Fringe" or "The X-Files."

Honestly, the worst thing about "Everywhen" were the gunfights between the protagonists and the police, including SWAT units, which were ridiculously one-sided. Those felt like childish male fantasies, straight out of video games these days, or one-sided games of cops and robbers back in the day.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pretty good Sci-Fi
sleepydvdr15 June 2014
After watching this movie, I read a review that was enlightening about how it is a low budget, amateur made movie. That makes this movie more impressive than if it were a big budget movie by experienced crews.

I thought the video quality, special effects and acting by the two main characters were impressive. The plot was thought provoking but at times I did get confused. Now for my criticisms... The audio was mostly fine (I think there were a few instances of audio clipping) but there was way too much bass in the sound. I have my home theater calibrated well and the bass was so powerful that it shook my projector and the movie was visibly shaky at times because of this. The worst acting was by the woman who played Jane Scott. Her acting style was mainly just having an intense look on her face and looking side to side when she talked. Lastly, the SWAT team in this movie almost seemed inept at times. In most scenes, they had to get into position and were slow to shoot, making them easy targets for the teenage leading characters to kill off.

Overall, I applaud this movie. It reminded me of the American movie called Jumper, which is the highest compliment I can give it. Those involved in creating this movie could become very successful with a little bit more experience and refinement.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
short and boring
bzitnak8 September 2020
This movie was dumb and way to short, how it started was stupid, the end is sad
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What Boys Love Most To Do...
pontram15 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
...is not masterb*t**g, no, of course, it's shooting. Handling cool weapons.

In the opening, there are two boys, which are the main characters in the movie, fighting inside a research building against numerous enemies in SWAT uniforms, defeating them, and then disappearing using some Hi-Tech devices they were searching for.

After that, we follow a young man, Ian Finch, one of the two boys we've seen before, going out for a walk in the morning with his 6 years old brother Dylan, before Ian has to leave Dylan for work. First Dylan seems to be a bit sad, but when they are on the walk, he is OK. Back at home, he puts a notice into his brother's trouser pocket, and when Ian finds it on his way to work, he is alarmed and immediately runs back, but only to find some remains in the bathroom which are looking like ashes.

Next, Ian is facing a mysterious, hostile boy, the other one of the two at the opening, in his own home.

While to this point there maybe enough for a viewer to be caught for watching the whole movie, it became obvious that this is not a really professional production. In fact, it is a project from students of the - what I read - Ullern Highschool in Norway, funded with a budget of circa 7000 Euros or about 9600 USD. That is very few money for a movie, and we have to honor that the director/producer was able to make a movie with it.

Also to honor is the basic idea - three billions of people disappear and the main character is on the run to rescue his little brother - and the professional camera-work and scenography, and especially, a compelling soundtrack.

But there most of the good ends. One can literally smell the spasmodic efforts (in the cut-room) to make this a good modern movie, and technically, with the above said, this should work. Although, it doesn't. On the contrary, it fails on the most important occasions. The dialogs are often very cheesy, while meant to be cool, especially when it comes to revealings. Scenes from the future of the storyline, at an investigation office, are placed against the flow of the story, seemingly to polish up the thing, while they are only annoying. The movie tries to put a puzzle together, or, two parallel universes, but a lot of logic and consistency is lost during the process, and the plot itself has not enough substance for advanced puzzling. That's sad, because with more care and a more mature approach, it would have had the potential to be a decent movie.

And, someone may have thought, that showing people who are permanently waving guns is essential for a good movie instead of being more subtle.

Subsequently, the focus of the adventure goes to practice in handling guns, a big firefight - that from the opening - and teleportations like in "Jumper", but through public accessible portals, while escaping the authorities. A certain revelation at the investigation office mentioned above, near to the movie's end, is out of the blue and not understandable. It's verbal Deus Ex Machina like in some SciFi of the sixties. Only the last look in the mirror is something appreciable.

So, I say, the creators are talented, even gifted, but obviously do need professional support and supervision in storytelling, character development, dialog writing and script QC for coherence. The movie itself maybe finished for its makers but is in a raw state and should not have been released on DVD before a rework.

Theoretically someone will buy the idea and do a remake, which may or may not be better, but more watchable.

But, to see what today's 17 years old youngsters are capable of achieving, its a good occasion, and only one worthwhile hour to spend.
10 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed