Time Lapse (2014) User Reviews

A Balanced Review

[johnbkaramazov · 7/10 · 6 January 2015]

I spent the first part of this film umming and ahing as to whether or not I was enjoying it, but towards the end I was totally gripped and at the end I absolutely loved it.

The story and pacing of this film are practically perfect, making it a definite winner in my book, but any prospective viewers might benefit from being aware of a couple of things before they decide to watch.

Firstly it looks kind of like a cheap made for TV movie. Some of the camera shots are creative and well thought out but the whole thing just oozes film-making on a budget, and some people might find that hard to get past.

The style reminded me of the remake they did of The Outer Limits in the 90s, rather than a film from 2014. Also, much like the aforementioned series the incidental music is horribly generic and uninspired (but thankfully used pretty sparsely.) The acting is mediocre from the three leads. Some people will find this grating, so prepare yourself. They won't be winning any Academy Awards anytime soon for their performances, trust me.

So why should you definitely watch this movie? Because despite the clunky dialogue and wooden acting the plot is entertaining, unfolds brilliantly and is executed just about as perfectly as a plot can be executed in a movie. It is a wonderfully self-contained story that builds to a satisfying denouement and keeps you guessing and totally gripped along the way.

If you go into this movie expecting every aspect to be amazing, you're probably going to be disappointed. Instead bear in mind the criticisms above and trust that despite these weaknesses it is an uncommonly enjoyable watch and well worth an hour and forty minutes of your time.

A highly enjoyable little gem of a science fiction thriller

[bob-larrance · 7/10 · 16 January 2015]

Time lapse is a very well-made and entertaining little movie, something that should satisfy the average science fiction/thriller fan. The three leads all perform at a high level. Matt O'Leary as a young artist is appropriately fragile, Danielle Panabaker is not the 'good girl' you might assume from her appearance and George Finn conveys real menace in his portrayal as their friend, sinister from the middle point on.

Settings are simple but effective and the atmosphere is well held together by the staging and the clean production. There won't be any awards for set decoration but it works and isn't a distraction to the story. Unlike many low budget efforts it doesn't have that 'cheap scenery' feeling at all.

The lean script has enough science in it to work, but not too much to make it muddled. You aren't going to cheat on your next physics project by borrowing from this movie but you won't be offended by the theory in play. The good news about the story is that it works and by the end of the experience you will feel entertained with intelligent and clever writing. Your brain will be teased by this film.

There are several dark moments in the movie that show some real Hitchcock influence, though a film maker worker in this milieu is wise to borrow from the master. In addition, from time to time the score swells into a legitimate (though very minor) homage to Bernard Hermann. Again, a very good idea. The windup is complete and clean, revelations during the body of the film become evidence that tickle with satisfaction as it ends.

Low budget, but you aren't going to feel like you are watching some derivative film school project. This is a good movie with young actors creating their own characters. I think almost all viewers will find it artistically fresh. This is the first work I have seen from this director and after seeing Time Lapse I will look for his name for future entertainment, along with the names of his young stars.

When you find a film like this with unknown actors, a director you don't recognize and subject matter that could easily become boring you are forgiven if you don't fully commit to a full viewing when the streaming or broadcast starts. Personally, I gave it 15 minutes to prove itself when I began and was quickly stuck on it until the end. You should allow it to be the only content showing at the moment for you and your co-viewers, this is one to pay attention to in order to really enjoy. But, I think enjoyment is nearly a done deal.

Clever and smart

[kosmasp · 7/10 · 31 December 2014]

Or maybe neither, depending on your view or perspective on the matter or characters that is. But you can't deny, that this movie (clue is in the title), is well thought of. You might not agree with all the twists and turns this takes, but it does so convincingly. Can you see a couple of things coming before our main characters spot them (no pun intended)? Of course you can. Still fun to watch though.

Which all comes down to a neat direction (for a low budget movie that is) and the stellar cast, that really do their best to convey a really "far out" idea. If you like Science Fiction Thrillers, that do use their head a little bit, you could do worse (a lot worse)

Good film, does what it's supposed to

[MovieSonic · 7/10 · 10 January 2015]

It entertains. It's not the best sci-fi film I've ever seen but it's reasonably high up the list and as a bonus, it keeps getting more interesting as it goes along and thankfully, the ending was fitting.

A few suggestions for improvement:

The characters all seemed like strangers in the beginning and they all waited a set time for their turn to speak which gave the film quite a stilted effect. George Finn was the only one who didn't 'look' like he was acting. Danielle Panabaker annoys me in most of her work because she tries to pull off being innocent and sweet when the character she's playing doesn't need it (either that or she just isn't any good at being 'sweet') - it comes across as being quite fake. The camera could have been expanded on for example; its creation, design, and they could have experimented with various settings. As it stands, I still don't know how they figured out certain things about the way it functioned (but I might have missed the explanation while munching).

Some praise:

Matt O'Leary pulled off a really funny 'wtf are you talking about' moment when his best friend and girlfriend were casually discussing a dead body. Although the opening scenes were jarring because of the lack of chemistry and low budget feel, with literally every scene, the film got more and more engrossing so stick with it. The story was really well written. It progressed at a good pace and although George Finn's character development seemed a bit over the top, I thoroughly enjoyed the film and for once, the ending was fitting and extremely satisfying.

I think everyone involved should be really proud, any criticisms are fairly minor, and I can easily recommend this.

7/10

Whats the first rule of Fight Club?

[A_Different_Drummer · 6/10 · 7 February 2015]

C'mon, you know this one.

The first rule of fight club is Never Talk About Fight Club.

Whats the first rule of Indie films? OK, times up.

The first rule of Indie films is ... Indies don't HAVE to be bad, people JUST MAKE THEM THAT WAY.

This indie opus seems to be the brainchild of Bradley King, who wrote and directed. His IMDb resume suggests mainly short subjects and TIME LAPSE looks like the attempt to break to the next level.

Let's start with the premise, the logline.

The other reviewers have already covered it.

Really clever. Way above average. While the "future cam" thing has been done before -- I remember this from a comic book in the 60s, actually -- the whole story is well thought out.

And the intro in particular, the setup, is very well done.

But ... the real issue ... is this a feature? Is this a full-length feature with ebbs and flows, ups and downs, that a viewer can connect with? Remember that for the producer/director/writer (on the other side of the camera from the viewer) the ultimate goal of an indie is produce a film at the lowest possible expense. Which means minimal actors, usually young or unknown, minimal sets, minimal special effects, and pretty much minimal everything.

And that is the issue here. This is a full length film, yes, but it hooked me, the viewer, for only about 15 minutes before I realized that the core premise was going to be stretched, and stretched, and stretched, with the same cast and same sets, and same "what if" circular dialog, until something broke.

In this case it was me.

Great idea.

[James_TheMan · 7/10 · 18 July 2022]

Even though the scope of such an idea asks us to venture beyond the setting of one area and perhaps expand to other parts of the town or even the world, the film-makers did well with the chosen set of spaces. Likely because of the harmonious casting and well knit story. A fine thriller.

If you're a slave to time, then you've got time to slave

[Drive-in_Zeppelin · 7/10 · 17 February 2015]

Directed by Bradley King, Time Lapse is the story of jealousy, time travel and the degradation of relationships through power and greed.

The story centers on an apartment complex where roommates Callie, Finn and Jasper (played by Danielle Panabaker, Matt O'Leary and George Finn respectively) discover that their neighbor has died. The twist and central conflict that arises from this discovery is that the neighbor was a scientist that invented a camera that is able to take a picture 24 hours into the future – and it's conveniently and frighteningly pointed at their living room.

How will they react to such a life-changing discovery? What possible negatives could come from being able to see the future? These are the conflicts Time Lapse deals with and just how the outcomes ultimately test the loyalty and relationships between our three main characters.

The film examines their motivations for using the camera, the slavery they build for themselves through it, and the ultimately we find that the real villain of the story is simply Time. Time as a weapon, paradoxes as the consequences, who could ask for anything more?

I was so encapsulated by this film that I'm sure I looked ridiculous to my fellow theater patrons. I love time-travel movies simply because they, like all good sci-fi, are just vehicles to examine human drama. What if you could use time to your advantage, say…to make a whole lot of money? Biff did it in Back to the Future II. They did it in Primer. Looper even made use of time travel as a means to an end and JGL even made his weight in gold and silver in the process.

The thing that really stood out for me in this film was the fact that it manages to keep track of its internal logic, which as most of you know is no easy task for a time-travel movie. If you've seen Primer, which this movie reminded me a lot of, I'm pretty sure you need a freaking diagram to keep track of how that all works. In Time Lapse we at least have physical representations in the form of Polaroid pictures that the machine spits out to keep developing the plot and creating the increased paranoia and tension between the roommates.

This film like all the other ones at the festival has that indie film vibe to it, but I can definitely see why it was the Festival Centerpiece at Other World's Austin this year. It's disturbing, suspenseful and exactly what you'd expect from a Hitchcockian sci-fi thriller. The performances are great, the minimalist sci-fi is great, and it's refreshing to have a good time-travel movie since it's been a long wait for a train don't come the past few years (Excluding Looper of course).

Read the full review and others like it on the Drive-in Zeppelin Website

Very impressive small budget sci-fi thriller

[MattyGibbs · 8/10 · 17 November 2014]

Time lapse is an independent film about a group of friends who discover a camera that can take pictures of the future. It's a nice concept and is executed very well.

This is only a small budget film with few special effects, instead it relies on a sharp script, good acting and an interesting story. It doesn't take long to set the scene and is always interesting. As things go from bad to worse for the three friends there are a number of tense scenes and some surprising plot turns.

As the film is set in one location it really requires strong performances from the cast and thankfully all three leads excellent as are all the supporting cast.

This is a clever, impressive and very entertaining film which really shows what can be done with a limited budget. This film deserves a much higher profile and I would expect it's current rating of 6.9 from 437 votes to increase over time.

Highly recommended.

Verdict: Intriguing

[MoviesReviews101 · 7/10 · 21 November 2014]

Story: Time Lapse starts by meeting struggling artist Finn (O'Leary) as he can't find his inspiration for his next piece of work. We see how he works as a building manager to keep money together, we meet his girlfriend Callie (Panabaker) and his roommate Jasper (Finn). The friends investigate a resident who seems to have gone missing and discover a camera taking photos of their living room. Upon discovering that the camera takes a photo of the next day, the group try to figure out what is going on and discuss what they could use to their advantage. While they continue to make money from the camera suspicious starts to grow on them. Ivan (Spisak) Jasper's bookie learns of the camera and soon ends up forcing them to continue getting the photos results so he can benefit from them. The friends grow distant as they continue to question why they end up in the situations in the photos. Time Lapse gives us a time travel films that gives us plenty of questions, with each photo putting the group into a situation they can't explain. This gives us as viewers the question what would we do if we saw ourselves in a photo that hasn't happened in a position we could explain. Where the story get let down is in the generic characters that do the trademark time travel mistakes. We have the greedy monetary, the one who sees things improving for them personally and the one who gather inspiration even though they question the morale side. As many time travel films do they test the character development even when the science behind it all never gets fully explained. Time Lapse is a very interesting story that keeps you guessing without really pushing you to any limits. (7/10)

Actor Review

Danielle Panabaker: Callie aspiring author who wants to continue working on her work and see the camera as a way to make money and focus on her work. Callie turns out to be planning to gain more attention from her boyfriend with the photos. Danielle gives a good performance and shines when the final twist is revealed. (7/10)

Matt O'Leary: Finn young artist who has been struggling with his work but after the camera shows him his next picture he agrees to join in the work. The reluctant member of the friends who gains motivation from what he sees in the photos. Matt gives a good performance. (7/10)

George Finn: Jasper gambler who gets the three into trouble by making too much money after the camera reveals the results of the races. The member who gets caught up in his gambling addiction and becomes obsessed about photos, leading to his friends to be put in danger. George gives a good performance. (7/10)

Support Cast: Time Lapse only uses a few supporting characters who each offer something to what happens, be it explaining what is happening and what could go wrong with it.

Director Review: Bradley King – Bradley does a great job directing a time travel film that really makes you think. (7/10)

Sci-Fi: Time Lapse uses the theory of time travel to push a story where the characters get pushed into action they couldn't. (7/10) Thriller: Time Lapse doesn't fit the full thriller side a story uses but keeps you wondering what will happen next. (7/10) Settings: Time Lapse only uses one setting being a residential home where the three friends live together showing that they have become trapped in the world where they can't escape a future they think they can't change. (9/10) Suggestion: Time Lapse is a film that should be tried by all fans of the time travel genre because it really shows you don't need too much to get everything you need in a film. (Try it)

Best Part: Time Lapse best part is the theory behind the camera. Worst Part: Time Lapse weak point in never really explaining the science behind the camera.

Believability: No (0/10) Chances of Tears: No (0/10) Chances of Sequel: No Post Credits Scene: No

Oscar Chances: No Runtime: 1 Hour 44 Minutes

Overall: Great Time Travel Film

Check out more reviews on http://moviesreview101.com/

If you like seeing people make stupid decisions, this is the movie for you.

[zaoseternal · 1/10 · 8 January 2015]

On the first page of the IMDb reviews, people are showering it with praise with bullshit such as it being "intelligent, smart and coherent" which makes me wonder if they even know what these terms mean.

First of all directing your "future" self to do things so that a camera today can reap the fruits of your label seems a bit too paradoxical, but okay fine, I will accept it, I'm open-minded enough.

But then everything just goes from retarded to worse. Why would you need a crooked bookmaker to place your bets to begin with? It's not like that would be the only way to make tons of money.

How can the painter not have inspiration, but his future self does? It makes no sense, but whatever, I'll again open my mind and accept it.

And after what's-his-name kills the bookmaker and his goon, that girl acts completely ridiculous towards her boyfriend, I really despise lack of logic or just general stupidity.

Then in the end "what's-his-name" learned from "what's-her-name" that altering the time-line doesn't incur death. You think? Really? Like maybe use the frigging internet to look up theories on alternate or parallel time-lines before you start acting like a retard and lock your supposed friend up in the basement.

Supposed friend breaks free and manages to bluff "what's-his-name" into handing over his gun to the girl. Later on he manages to turn the tables around again and hits the gun out of his hands and never bothers to look behind him that hey maybe the girl heard their struggle and might be looking for a way to take matters into her own hand.

And that right there was the point I just thought, quit it, this movie strives on stupidity. I should have turned it off earlier, but hey I had nothing else to do.

I don't care for the low budget concept. The only thing low budget is the lacking amount of logic in this movie. Ugh.

Tightly knit, well written, fast-paced thriller!

[dallasbagley · 8/10 · 13 June 2014]

I caught this film at the Seattle International Film Festival a couple weeks back. Film makers, as well as the cast were there, answered questions, pleasant experience over all.

So here it is...

We got 3 close friends, various character types, all sharing an apartment together. One of which is the property manager. Things happen regarding one of their tenants, provoking concern, and leading the manager to go check on this individual. Upon doing so, a massive contraption is discovered in this tenants apartment, radiating an ominous green light, with photos of the three main characters tacked about the wall.

Upon brief research, they soon learn this to be a camera that takes pictures 24 hours in advance. Oh, and the camera is pointed directly at their living room. And with it being so massive and complex, they can't exactly bring it where ever they want. So it's in this living room, where they leave clues for their past selves.

Obviously (like most would), they use this invention for person gain. One of the three has more of a selfish intent, while the other two sort of superficially resist for a brief moment.

It's from there that this close-quarters-adventure begins. Things get out of hand, characters change, we get a few laughs, jumps and an unforeseen reveal in the third act (you probably won't see it coming).

I personally thought the film to be brief, clean cut, tightly written and straight to the point. It's also in my opinion, highly marketable. The direction was concise, production was smart, and casting was thoughtful. Nothing about it felt pretentious in the least, and I'm thankful for that. I got a few minor nit picks, but I'm a critical prick, so don't be surprised. What makes the film good, far out weighs any minor short comings.

See it.

A low budget scifi-ish thriller, full of plot holes and characters as stupid as a can of Spam!

[Dr_Sagan · 23 January 2015]

This is most definitely a very low budget film. You could classified as a sci-fi movie but it really isn't.

The premise seems simple, but it is like the writer couldn't decide which way to go and the script became confusing.

The 3 main characters are as stupid as a can of Spam!

If I wanted to summarized in a sentence with a moral in it I would say: Assumption is the mother of all fu**-ups.

You need to keep your self calm throughout the movie not to throw something at the screen, with the decisions these young people are making.

The 3 main characters might be a bunch of idiots but the 3 main actors actually make a really good job bringing up to life a so-so script.

As I'm reading the movie won several awards in some local festivals. In my opinion is the acting of George Finn especially and Danielle Panabaker to thank for those.

Overall: Do not expect to be amazed by the premise. Ain't that much to go for. But it does have some thrilling moments (triggered by the stupidity of the characters) that you might find entertaining.

.

Had more potential than it reached

[jk-692-236394 · 6/10 · 10 January 2015]

I am not sure if this has any spoilers, I try to not write reviews like that, but I checked spoiler alert, just to be safe. I love all things time travel. I have watched all time travel themed movies made, and there are some pretty crappy ones. This one falls in the middle. It moves at a good pace, the premise is pretty cool, the camera set up is cool too. I liked all of that. Where it falls down is the story they concocted for the three lead characters. The idiot one who gambles, is so lame and careless that you can see what is coming for that part a mile away. The part that disappoints me in movies like this is how small they make the story, come on you can know the future, go bigger! Instead they just focus on these three and their relationship. Yawn. Who cares? I wanted to see them find some success, revel in their found opportunity, change with that success and see some of that kind of story before the mayhem starts. It would of been so easy to fit in. It would not have to be big budget at all. Flip scenes fast showing them taking advantage of this scenario. But no they are barely a few days into the thing before trouble comes a knocking with the bookie, (what a predictable and boring plot device). Seriously what an idiot to bet sure winners with a shady bookie. Dude, go place your bets somewhere legit, then spread it around, do not just bet on the dogs! Stupid writing like this that frustrates me. The story continues, still revolving around the three of them and their relationship with each other, but really you ask yourself, what the heck are these people even doing living together? It is almost claustrophobic watching it. How did they even become friends in the first place and who are these people? The gambling cliché loser roommate is a total jerk. (well played I will say by that actor). You think he is the main problem, but in a few surprise twists at the end, they did manage to show some creativity there. I liked that. I would of liked to see a little bit of the guy who invented the camera when he was alive, like in a flashback, or them running into him at some point. Just sitting here I can think of 5 fun creative twists and things of interest that they could of done to make this a better movie. It had great potential. I still think it is good enough to watch for sure. The actors all did a good job, even the small parts. Enjoy. Then think about how you would have told this story!

Dumbest movie in history... I wish I could go back in time and stop myself watching this garbage.

[anour-maa · 1/10 · 31 May 2015]

All positive reviews about Time lapse must be fake. Don't watch it , it's a waste of time. At one point I had to fast forward the movie just to get some peace of mind, thinking perhaps watching the end would give me some sort of closure. But unfortunately I realized that it was in fact one of the worst movies in history. I just wasted an hour of my life watching this bulls... I would recommend watching the wall instead of watching this crap. All the characters are awful and direction is slow and tedious. Storyline is weak at best, and slow , painfully slow. Even the location made me depressed. My only pleasure is knowing that not a lot of money was wasted on this "movie" On the other hand, if they had a bigger budget, they might have been able to hire real actors, buy a decent screenplay and not that toilet paper, or at least hire a director worth the air he's breathing, but on the other hand , that would have been another movie altogether. The only reason I wrote this review, was to prevent people from making the mistake I made thinking this movie is anything but utter crap. PS sci-fi my ass

Problematic, but fairly effective for the most part

[jimbo-53-186511 · 6/10 · 21 April 2015]

Callie (Danielle Panabaker), Finn (Matt O'Leary), and Jasper (George Finn) are three people who are sharing a place together (with the former two being girlfriend and boyfriend). When Callie goes to check on their neighbour Mr Bezzerides after he hasn't been seen for a few days, she discovers that he has a giant camera that takes pictures 24 hours in advance. Initially, they exploit potential money making opportunities that such a device will give them, but our trio discover that knowing what's round the next corner may not always be a good thing....

Although it's a little bit goofy and jokey at the start the film soon settles down and becomes a fairly effective thriller. The simple hook with this film is wanting to know what lies ahead for our trio and how, in this case they prepare for the 'expected' rather than the 'unexpected'. For the bulk of the story that's all there really is to this film, but the screenplay is constructed in such a way that once the mystery begins you'll find yourself fully involved in the proceedings. This is all helped by the fact that there are lots of loose ends left untied throughout the film and there are various other strands of the story that may leave you puzzled whilst watching the film. Thankfully it's not a lazy film and it does tie everything up nicely at the end.

Things take a further turn when Jasper's bookmaker becomes involved in proceedings when he becomes enraged at Jasper's sudden good fortune at gambling. Whilst arguably this element probably wasn't necessarily needed, I did welcome it as it did help to keep things reasonably tense and suspenseful - even though the resolution to this aspect of the story was rather predictable and clichéd.

The film becomes a little bit sloppy and chaotic towards the end - although this is also where you'll find some nice twists and surprises so there's both good and bad here. The performances from a relatively unknown cast are reasonable (although there is one cast member that's in this film who is well-known, but there's no way you'll recognise him!!!).

For me, Time Lapse isn't the best thriller ever made and it's hardly edge of your seat stuff. However, I have to admit that once it got going I did enjoy this film even though it was a little sloppy in one or two areas.

Characters were predicting the future not the machine

[anonselfset · 7/10 · 7 June 2015]

I liked the movie the actors were great. The idea of the camera snapping images of the future was interesting until they tampered with. still trying to figure out why they posed for a picture they already seen? doesn't it means that the next day the image will still be the same? perfect example..The bet results was not clear. Jasper wrote down the winners so why did he have to see it the next day to bet on the winning results? and at the end "don't get caught by the window" Seem as if they were the ones predicting the future and not the machine.. :) I believe the movie overall was good. cinematography was great.Characters were played very well by the actors they just kept me watching all the way to the end.

Awful Plot

[jamie_faram · 8 January 2015]

The acting in this film was pretty good with the script they were given, that being said if I was handed a children's book I could probably act it out pretty well too.

The characters don't build the back story enough, who are they why have they ended up together, why does it take so little effort to turn them all into homicidal maniacs? They make no effort to understand the machine or why its pointed at them not some where useful, nor do they put the machine to any use what so ever. The movie is less about time travel and more about bookies, watch get shorty at least you might have a laugh.

Nothing groundbreaking, but good enough

[joris-nightwalker · 7/10 · 19 January 2015]

Sci-fi topics about time and alternative realities provoke thoughts about determinism and free will. Same goes for movies that use those topics, no matter how bad they are. If it's +1, The Adjustment Bureau, The Matrix, Primer, Looper, Source Code, Predestination, Donnie Darko, Waking Life or Abre los ojos, they always seem to have an effect on my thinking about those subjects. Time Lapse is no different. Some reading on the net about this film taught me about the bootstrap paradox and Novikov's self-consistency principle. Exactly the kind of ideas I love to read and learn about after watching a film like Time Lapse. Although the acting wasn't that good (at all, actually) and it wasn't a visually daring or striking film, I found joy in discussing some metaphysics afterwards. Isn't the ability of provoking such thoughts an accomplishment to be taken into account when rating a film like this? I certainly think so. Entertaining stuff, probably too obvious and lame for science-geeks, but some philosophy majors and genre aficionado's will have fun with this.

For an unpretentious and understated film, it turned out to be very effective, intelligent and well-made.

[filipemanuelneto · 7/10 · 6 June 2022]

In this film, a group of three young people who live together (a couple and a single friend who lives in the house) discover that the old man who lives in the house in front of theirs, disappeared a few days ago and no one knows about him. When they investigated, they discovered a large camera in the middle of the room, and a collection of photos of their living room, taken by that mysterious machine that, to their surprise, takes pictures the day before they can happen. Reluctant to interfere in the future, they decided to imitate the photos, ensuring that nothing bad happened to them and fearing that the inventor had fallen, victim to any attempt to alter the future. But everything will get complicated when they start using the machine to earn extra money.

The movie is quite good, and the story works on top of an intelligent and well-written script, which guarantees us an hour and a half of good cinema, although it is not completely free from predictability or cliché situations (such as the situation of love betrayal among the friends). For a film with low budget and high creativity, the result is quite positive.

The reduced cast is expertly led by the trio Matt O'Leary, Danielle Panabaker and George Finn. The three actors seem to have a good rapport for the cameras, or that translates into a more harmonious and efficient work together. The film still has other actors, such as Amin Joseph or Jason Spisak, but only the three central actors that sustain the entire plot.

On a technical level, the film is quite limited due to its setting, but what was done is very good, and care was taken in the technical execution of the film. The photography is quite good, and all the visual and special effects work was equally effective.

A suspenseful sci-fi thriller worth watching

[veronica-sanchez-jones · 8/10 · 9 July 2014]

I recently screened Time Lapse and was pleasantly surprised by many aspects, including performance, direction, cinematography, and overall story. The wonderful performances of the three lead characters, Callie, Finn, and Jasper kept me invested in the story from beginning to end. Without giving away any of the story, witnessing both the slow and sudden transformations of each character were both entertaining and jarring as a viewer.

In addition to the realistic portrayals on screen, I found the look and feel of the film to be particularly noteworthy. The director, and team, did a fine job in creating both tension and apprehension throughout the film by way of his shot selections as well as his set, sound, and art design choices; each which lent to the steady decline of the characters and their spiraling environment. Furthermore, the cinematography fantastically added to the suspenseful pace and mood in which the story unfolds by realistically portraying a normal everyday world made up of friendship and love that quickly transforms into one made up of antagonism, manipulation, and greed.

Time Lapse is 104 minutes of suspenseful and thrilling entertainment. It is also a film you'll want to watch again. I know I will!

Tight little thriller

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 8 July 2015]

I always hate it when something I've read in someone else's review gets stuck in my head and that's all I can think of when I try to review a film myself. But, there's no other way of describing 'Time Lapse' – someone else wrote that it's basically 'Shallow Grave, but with time travel.' That's basically it in a nutshell.

Three housemates (instead of finding a bag full of money) find a time travel machine in the flat next door. Rather than sending them naked into the middle of Los Angeles or thirty years in the past by speeding up to eighty-eight miles an hour, this one is a little more 'low key.' It simply takes a photo of your front room twenty-four hours from now. Hardly as spectacular as sending a cyborg to kill the mother of your enemy, but it does work out pretty well if you bet on the horses and can now let yourself know every last winner.

And then they lived happily ever after. Only that would be a pretty dull film. Guess what – playing with time has consequences and, sooner or later, the body count is going to rise.

That's all you really need to know about the film. It's one of those stories where you only get the enjoyment of watching it once and not knowing what's going to happen. There are a few nice twists and turns along the way, so saying too much about the story will give those away. The actors all do their jobs pretty well. There's no real stand-out performances, but if you're looking for a nice little thriller and don't mind a small dose of science fiction, give this one a try.

A rubbish straight-from-the-set-of-your-High-School-production cast do rubbish, predictable and foolish things

[TheDroidYouHaveBeenLookingFor · 1/10 · 29 October 2015]

(few mild spoilers)

This film had an intriguing premise, and a lot of potential. The concept of a future snapping camera is one that would allow for a lot of fun and creativity. Alas, it failed to translate to an even remotely entertaining film.

First on the long 'con' list is that I do not believe it would be possible to create more predictable, stereotypical characters. The Teletubbies have more substance. First we have the obviously amoral, rogue druggie who (surprise surprise) elects to use the camera in a poorly thought out, unimaginative way. Oh wow Jasper, you really didn't think that going through a shady bookie would be a bad move? If you want to use such an incredible device in a shallow money-making scheme then how about going about it in a more legitimate fashion which doesn't garner quite so much attention, huh? Next up we are lumbered with a perpetually dull, distant, goody two shoes artsy guy. Not much can be said about this generally expressionless character other than the fact that he was predictably moral and consequently your classic hapless victim. And of course, a typically innocent by default female is thrown into the mix but OH WAIT! Shock horror, she's actually a psychopath who would do anything to get more attention from her stale sandwich boyfriend. What a terrific plot twist! Not.

Also I just have to ask whether any of these characters have had any exposure to time travel based science fiction. Either they were all raised under a large rock or they are just all very stupid, because only a stupid person would assume that changing one's future would result in your face being burnt off. PICK UP A NOVEL, WATCH DOCTOR WHO or maybe just use your common sense please. Whatever happened to the universally accepted idea of the future being in a constant state of flux?

If you like endlessly boring, infuriatingly unimaginative and poorly acted films then this is perfect for you! Just awful.

Intense, Polished Movie

[autlea · 9/10 · 20 June 2014]

I was lucky enough to catch a screening of Time Lapse recently, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It really feels like you are going on this adventure with the characters.

Each of the three main characters were played well. The writing was really well done, and I particularly enjoyed the character of Jasper. The whole movie felt more and more claustrophobic as it progressed, and the ending was just flawless.

Time Lapse was definitely one of the most intense films I've watched recently and I found myself both eager to know the resolution and wanting the movie not to end. I highly recommend watching this when you get the chance, I can't wait to see it again.

great sci-fi premise

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 1 November 2015]

Finn (Matt O'Leary) is a struggling painter and Callie (Danielle Panabaker) is his girlfriend. Jasper (George Finn) is their gambling roommate. Finn is the super in the apartment complex. Callie goes over to their neighbor Mr. Bezzerides and discovers a giant Polaroid which seems to take pictures of their living room one day into the future. Callie theorizes that they must fulfill the future pictures or else they can't exist in the timeline. Jasper immediately proposes to use the machine to win race bets. Events spiral out of control.

This is a great premise. It would make for a great Twilight Zone episode. At certain points, I'm not sure if the premise completely holds. It's a mind-bender and I'm willing not to question it. The three main leads are pretty good. The final picture is compelling. It's a well made sci-fi indie.

My first IMDb review...

[mmt-franco · 1/10 · 12 September 2015]

I think this is my first IMDb review. I'll keep it short as I feel I've lost a lot already with this movie. The good reviews are either fake or people have gone crazy or something. I enjoy variety enough and tend to think of myself as open minded in terms of genres and budget range. However, despite the movie concept be interesting enough to warrant all sorts of ideas, the execution is so insanely stupid regarding every character decision it is just over the top unnerving. Every single big decision by every one of the characters, in every scene, is simply idiotic to say the least. I don't want to "spoil" it for anyone who plans on watching it, but if you were able to see into the future and planned to become rich with it, what would you chose: a)place a winning lottery bet or b)place numerous small winning bets elsewhere, to a point where you raise suspicion as to how information privy you are ? Can you guess what our characters here do?