User reviews

Full review on my blog max4movies: 41 is an independent science fiction movie about a student of philosophy, who discovers a trap door in a motel room that leads to the past. The premise is basic but interesting, and the movie is mostly well executed, with great cinematography and an atmospheric score. The performances are somewhat middling, but the main actor mostly does a decent job. The plot is overall thrilling and clever, however, the ending will throw some viewers off, due to a central plot hole. Still, the movie is efficiently made and demonstrates that science fiction can also deal with very down-to-earth issues.

A time travel tale is a good start for any young director. The story was interesting and low on predictability.

The main character looked a little vacant at times, considering he found himself in varying degrees of stressful situations. But in the main, he was engaging.

Some of the dialogue was a little ropey and a few scenes had an air of awkwardness about them. I put this down to some below par screen writing and the odd inexperienced actor. The police scenes looked at times, like they belonged in a different movie. Far too hammy, and unnecessarily comedic.

The score was great and the movie does leave you thinking about the many possible paradoxes that the main character's actions inspire.

But as with most time-travel movies, don't think too hard about it, just focus on the bigger message. Which, at least is something that you are left with come the end.

Albeit a low cost production movie, the story is well played. Don't expect big expensive special effects or a new approach in quantum physics to time travel.

Just a simple, yet captivating story about a time traveller.

Movie starts off the usual way by presenting us the characters and then develops throughout the plot. So far so good, but in the middle of the movie things just kinda go slow, but then it picks up pace wonderfully until the end.

This is a curiosity. I like it. It's entertaining, and sufficiently engaging to keep watching through to the end. I don't have any specific reason to doubt the skills of anyone involved. I'd like to see more features from everyone involved.

Yet whether we're talking about Heath Brown's score, the editing or production of writer-director Glenn Triggs, or the performances drawn out of the cast, almost everything in '41' is unremarkable. I don't mean bad - it's absolutely not bad - just unremarkable. Almost nothing here is especially noteworthy; nothing leaps out as a defining element. I watch it and think to myself, "That was good!" - then move on with my day, end of story.

I did say "almost"; there are a couple scenes in the screenplay that stick out. For one thing, halfway through we get a dialogue in which protagonist Aidan joins a group of high-minded middle-aged men philosophizing about this and that, and he approaches them with questions about the time travel quandary he has stumbled into. One of these conversationalists is especially cynical, and as Aidan defines the hypothetical terms of time travel, that naysayer casts aspersions on the notions being put forth. In short: A character within the film is critiquing the plot of the film. I couldn't help but laugh; this was clever.

Second, in the last quarter of the feature, as Aidan seeks resolution to the issues at hand, he makes use of the time travel he has discovered in a way I certainly didn't anticipate. From very early on in '41' I thought I knew exactly where the plot was going to end up - and I was wrong. Kudos, Mr. Triggs; you got me.

And yet for all that the ultimate ending, the very last few minutes, aren't satisfying. I don't find this conclusion to the story convincing, as though there's a hole somewhere in the twisted weave of the time travel, and its tangled ramifications, that I can't quite place my finger on. Maybe that's just me. But it does mirror, in its own way, the vast majority of these 80 minutes that is just simply flat in tone, unprovocative in its build, and overall mystifying.

Again, '41' certainly isn't bad. I do like it; I think it's worth watching, if not necessarily going out of one's way to find. I just feel so much of it to be weirdly undistinguished, however well done it may be.

This movie has an admiring audience, and apparently I'm just not part of it. I'll say this much though, my curiosity is piqued by the bizarre duality of being largely unexceptional, yet still solidly crafted. It may be a subjectively wrong way of keeping my attention, but it was kept nonetheless. Well played, '41' - I think?

This is an amateur film and parts of it are good, but for the most part it is still very amateur. Perhaps the best aspect is the directing and editing, which are probably good enough for mainstream film, but nothing amazing. The editing was well done, but again, fairly standard. Like any amateur film the acting ranges from reasonable to bad, but that's not exactly the directors fault given the limited budget.

By far the biggest problem is the script which at times is quite poor, most noticeably when attempting to pose deep, metaphysical questions. At times I could hear the voice of the director speaking through his actors, and this sounded inept. In amateur film the scripting and plot are perhaps the only things not really held back by a restricted budget, and unfortunately neither aspect was that good. The film failed to evolve a coherent sense of empathy for the main protagonist, it feigned emotion more than produced any and nothing ever really became that interesting or exciting. Some characters, most noticeably the cops, were little more than 2-bit cliché's, and there were quite a few moments which were unnecessary, melodramatic and time-wasting.

Having said that it's not unwatchable and as amateur film goes it's probably one of the better ones. But the director, in my opinion, is not ready to make feature length titles and needs to develop his abilities further, especially his screen-writing and scripting if he wants to write his own material. On the positive, however, I have seen Hollywood films that annoyed me far more and that's saying something.

Like some of the other reviewers, I came upon this film completely by accident. And like one other reviewer, I planned to watch about 10 minutes and watch the rest another time. But the movie pulled me in and stayed with me until the end.

It's a most unusual time-travel story. Although some of the concepts have been used before, this takes them in a different direction. It's a quiet, slow-paced movie, so if you're looking for quick action, you'll find it in short supply. But the atmosphere is as important as the plot progress and the dialog. It reminds me a little bit of David Gerrold's "The Man Who Folded Himself".

If you're looking to settle down and watch something out of the ordinary -- and you're willing to give it your attention and accept its pacing -- you'll find it very rewarding.

Delving into this area of extremely low budget time travel sci-fi gets with it the inevitable comparison to 2004 film "Primer" which was a masterwork of excruciatingly hard sci-fi.

Here, the mechanisms are largely unimportant, even though there is an entire scene devoted to basically expo-dumping how it works in the form of hypotheticals and quizzing of a small group of four philosophers and scientists.

Some guy named Aidan is driving in his car with his ex-girlfriend when suddenly someone jumps in front of the car while he's driving at night and it crashes, killing her and hospitalizing him. He meets a seemingly loony old man in the hospital who tells him to go to a motel and go to room 41 and crawl in a hole in the bathroom floor. Earlier in the film, someone who looked exactly like him told him not to go to that motel. So naturally he goes in.

From there he learns that going through the hole and emerging brings him about 12 hours into the past. From there, he tries to change what happened with his ex-girlfriend and the like.

Where the film falters, for me at least, is that it seems to not be able to decide upon what type of "time travel paradox" to go with. The presence of himself earlier in the film and the revelation about the cause of the crash would seem to imply a predestination paradox where he is in a situation where time is fixed, and any attempt he makes to change the past has already been done.

But then at the same time, other mutually incompatible paradoxes are toyed with as well, including a "multiple universes branching off" and some others. Toying with many different ideas for time travel would be something interesting to see if done well; the problem is it is not done well here. In some cases we don't even know what is happening and the determining factor as to whether Aidan is able to change something in the past amounts to "Whatever the script feels like".

As well, it drags in several places, and takes an awful long time to get to a really intriguing "Wow" moment, by which time the film was essentially over with barely 10 minutes left. Whether or not the extra focus or attention to detail would've helped or hindered the film I probably wouldn't be able to say, but for what it is, it was a neat enough film.

A most excellent and entertaining film, well written and scored. The dialogue was at times thought provoking and, to be honest, was more or less in line with my thoughts on time travel which is as good a reason as any to like it! Perhaps a better script might have ruined it, and special effects would not have suited the films nuances and quirks. I have never come across a bad Australian film and this, being no exception, is a better one than some other highly glossy and commercial ones. In many ways this reminds me of a typical British film shot with lots of love on a low budget - earthy and local, with no pretensions. Plot holes were easy to forgive given that there were few for the given budget, and that, apart from the police scenes, the acting was of a quality any director would be pleased with. I enjoyed it. I would have bought this!

I think probably the best elements of the technological age we live in is the opportunities younger and younger artists have to produce a decent product without the need for expensive cameras and production costs.

I know very little about Australian director Glenn Triggs except for what I found from his IMDb profile.

What I did find is he is a very talented and dedicated young film maker who is on the right road if he chooses to continue.

The thing most striking about '41' was it's absolute reliance on pure story telling without the luxury of CGI or other big-budget distractions like expensive props or exotic locations. Glenn and his tiny crew have used just what they had to achieve what they intended.

I found a few problems with the film (as I do with everything), but they were minimal and easy to address.

Number one, I always find time-travel themes frustrating to deal with. The paradoxical nature of these types of stories continually leaves unanswered questions and different possible outcomes. You just are not even going to come close to pleasing everybody with a movie like this.

Two, while the musical soundtrack was expertly crafted, I found it overused and begging for emotion where none was really required.

And three, Glenn's final cut has some extremely ham-handed segues that for the life of me I couldn't follow, but no matter.

At the end of the day, a fine story. I very much look forward to seeing more of this young man's ideas being brought to the screen.

This film is pretty good makes you think makes you pay attention. I thought I would turn it on and watch it for a few minutes and end up turning it off; like I do eight out of 10 movies these days. I found myself not wanting to turn it off. It's good and has a great twist.

However, dude man hits a golf ball into a lake, then is surprised that it landed in the lake. Philosophy is mainly bumper sticker philosophy. But i enjoyed all the nods and references to other time travel films. It is full of plot holes and pointless characters. I would watch more from this director if he had a bigger budget to hire an editor and dialogue writer

Sci Fi is always underated because of a significant bias against SciFi in general... lots with no imagination nor creativity just don't like fantasy or SciFi.. they can't help it. Fortunately most of us are both right and left brain and get the best of both worlds but a minority aren't.. I feel sorry for them.

I'm so happy I gave this great indie film a chance. It dealt with time travel in an emotionally intelligent way that made the potential problems of paradoxes irrelevant to the telling of the story. Really well directed with a great score, believable characters, well acted, original and quite entertaining. A bit of a tearjerker without any melodrama. Don't bother watching if you're looking for action sequences and special effects, watch it because it'll make you feel something! I suppose it could in a way be a low budget Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind -with a similar mood, but a completely different plot. Great film!

I stumbled across this movie by accident, but what a beautiful movie this is. It's slow pace, which let you enjoy all the nice pictures and think about it like a good art-house movie does. It goes beyond the typical techno-scifi but keeps facts straight. Plot is very well thought trough. Loved the way the director lets you think about life in a existential philosophical way. The whole atmosphere is beautiful. I wanted to watch only 10 min and watch the rest later. I watched the whole movie without pause or anything, the movie really pulls you in. For me that's a good guideline for a good and quality movie. Thus; Highly advisable, must see, enjoy the ride

If you've seen Primer it will come to mind pretty early on in 41. But whereas Primer, an earlier and also excellent independent time travel flick, is a very intense, mind-bending movie, 41 presents a more straightforward, less fraught paradox. There is suspense, and 41 is certainly thought-provoking, but, unlike the other movie, the emphasis is on poignancy and redemption rather than tragedy.

If you appreciate movies like Primer, George Pal's The Time Machine, Interstellar, and Predestination, add 41 to your list.

Be sure to watch movies 1 through 40 before watching 41, otherwise you'll be lost.

Sure it's low budget and doesn't have the best acting but it's a decent story. I thought I had it all plotted out but was pleased to find that I hadn't. I enjoyed it.