This movie had promise, it was decent acting for some, and the photography was good, but the mistakes were in the story. The plot, what little there was, just fell apart. While I can suspend disbelief for the science, I can't for a plot that didn't go anywhere, and left you pissed and confused. Like other reviewers said, it's not My job to "come to my own conclusions". Where everything could have been concluded, instead the scriptwriter chose to leave you in a murky fog, with no conclusion or end to the story. I fully expected a "to be continued" script at the end, because that's what it felt like. There was no point to the 90 minutes of buildup. There was no end to let the viewer leave the theater happy with having watched this. I finished it going "is that it, where's the fkg ending?" I can't rate this title high, it just wasn't worth the time invested for a feeling of being let down.
25 Reviews
Yet another time travel flick
Snootz12 August 2018
There are time travel flicks that are good, and those that are terrible. Then there's this type, which is just jumbled. Typical trope: girl goes into the past to find her unknown family. The thing different in this one is that she is fully aware of the three different possibilities in time travel... and pretty much throws them all out the window just 'cos she really really wants to do this. Messed up jumbled stuff follows, as would be expected.
To give an idea without spoilers, see if anyone can answer this question: WHY did (unnamed character) try to shoot her at the beginning? I found no. Reason. Whatsoever. Throughout the entire film for that scene. I'm sure the writer and director knew why, but it sure didn't come across in the film.
See... in movies... the idea is for the director to let the audience in on what's happening and why. There's not much of that here.
The plot was interesting enough to maintain attention, but it somewhat screamed "amateur hour" all the way through. The ending is predictable (can't say more because of spoilers), but at the same time they just leave things hanging at the end... and the ending is fairly abrupt without even a clue as to what might happen next. Many reviewers have commented on this, and they're right.
If I wanted to invent my own ending, I'd write my own script... and I could probably do a better job than this flick.
Some of the acting is halfway decent. Some is half-baked. The script is pretty disjointed. The kinda-twist ending viewers see coming way ahead of time.
You can save time in your own life by giving this one a pass.
To give an idea without spoilers, see if anyone can answer this question: WHY did (unnamed character) try to shoot her at the beginning? I found no. Reason. Whatsoever. Throughout the entire film for that scene. I'm sure the writer and director knew why, but it sure didn't come across in the film.
See... in movies... the idea is for the director to let the audience in on what's happening and why. There's not much of that here.
The plot was interesting enough to maintain attention, but it somewhat screamed "amateur hour" all the way through. The ending is predictable (can't say more because of spoilers), but at the same time they just leave things hanging at the end... and the ending is fairly abrupt without even a clue as to what might happen next. Many reviewers have commented on this, and they're right.
If I wanted to invent my own ending, I'd write my own script... and I could probably do a better job than this flick.
Some of the acting is halfway decent. Some is half-baked. The script is pretty disjointed. The kinda-twist ending viewers see coming way ahead of time.
You can save time in your own life by giving this one a pass.
Suspenseful and Captivating
wheatieo18 June 2019
Better off if your head has a "Collider" with a large rock then watch this.
yowilwasup15 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
(see what I did with the review title? That bit of drack is more entertainment then you'll get from this whole movie)
The plot (my apologies to movies that actually have them) has something to do with a girl using time travel to figure out why she's in a orphanage. But it's not really and orphanage but rather a corporate prison for people who time traveled. Also there are parallel universes and alternate timelines and of course multiple intertwined and jumbled paradoxes and booze hidden in the woods. So in this film things happen. Such as characters moving from the outside to indoors. And people pretending to dig for coal that is already lying im piles on the grass. Polite attempted murders. People have conversations and i almost forgot there's lots of running on the woods. There are only two plot points that are of consequence. The first is the "title sequence" and the second is the "end credits". These let the audience know when they started wasting their time and when they have finished wasting their time.
The character's dialogue randomly reveals bits of unexplained motivations. Characters time travel for no good reason. Also the is a "resistance" of some sort. It was either the "People's Front of Judea" or the "Judean People's Front" (I get them confused). Now I have a confession. I'm not a doctor. But most of this movie indicates the creative force behind this fiasco is suffering from either
"Transient Global Amnesia" (thats the amnesia where you forget what you're doing or where you are) or
"Anterograde Amnesia" (that's the amnesia where you forgot what you did yesterday) either could explain the repeated scenes and complete lack of context and all the running through the woods. Unfortunate medical conditions aside. The big climax is a rambling speech by the "villain" that sounds like the dialogue from a dozen different time travel movies squished together. I think the screenwriter might have overheard while having diarrhea (from bad sharma) so he couldn't quite concentrate on which he wanted to use. Anyway to spoil it for you, when the heroin asks the villain "why?" (Why what? I don't know) the answer is something like "that's what we do, that's how it's always been done". I'd go back and get the bit of dialogue for verbatim but in an celebratory act of relief when the movie was over I tried to flush my TV remote down the toilet. So none of this schlock made sense. I didn't look into it but it's possible that most of the principal photography was lost when time traveling film critics travelled back in time to destroy the film but forgot to erase a partially completed trailer. Then in a herculean effort by the film's editor, the movie was reassembled from the little he had to work with. Why? Because that's what they do. That's what they always done.
A waste of time.
farleym-1944218 August 2018
If i had a time machine I would travel back 90 minutes and selected a different movie. Can't say the acting was bad as everyone seemed competent. Was it a bad script or bad direction that made this such a poor movie? I do not know.
I would have rather spend 90 listening to podcasts of Public Radio pledge drives.
I was looking for answers
romeolew-244-18480113 February 2019
I love time travel movies, but lots of times I'm disappointed. This movie was one of the disappointing ones to be sure. The dialogue was horrible, and the plot was as weak as they come. By the end I was thumping my head against the wall. I honestly don't have a clue what happens during most of the movie. I know things can get confusing when dealing with time travel but this was on another level of confusion. All I can say is why her(protagonist) did what she did, why them(antagonists) do what they do, and why this movie was made or released. Don't waste your time or you'll be wanting to travel back in time to choose a different film to watch
Deserves no stars
meyuk13 August 2018
This note contains NO spoilers because I don't know what it was about.
Oh my. Did I really spend time watching his pathetic excuse for entertainment? Yes, unfortunately. This was a pointless, badly dialogued, badly acted, mishmash of a film.
It was so incredibly bad I don't know how I have found so much to write about !
Oh my. Did I really spend time watching his pathetic excuse for entertainment? Yes, unfortunately. This was a pointless, badly dialogued, badly acted, mishmash of a film.
It was so incredibly bad I don't know how I have found so much to write about !
Back from the future
nogodnomasters1 September 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Rather than use the Internet to find her parents, Maya (Christine Mascolo ) travels back to her past. Here she collides with the past and might alter the future of multiple worlds paradox so CID is tasked to clean up the mess and preserve the present by cleansing the past, although they are not sure if they need to do that..but that is what they do.
The film is filled with all the idiotic paradox stuff geeks love. Time travel apparently can happen by 2033 by breaking down molecules and then passing them through a wormhole to the past and reassemble them at the other end using a device as small as a pocket watch. Sure.
If the paradox stuff doesn't bore or confuse you, the boring dialogue might as was some of the bad acting, especially by Elena Rose Davis who was everything but convincing.
Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.
The film is filled with all the idiotic paradox stuff geeks love. Time travel apparently can happen by 2033 by breaking down molecules and then passing them through a wormhole to the past and reassemble them at the other end using a device as small as a pocket watch. Sure.
If the paradox stuff doesn't bore or confuse you, the boring dialogue might as was some of the bad acting, especially by Elena Rose Davis who was everything but convincing.
Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.
Mystery Confusing slow Sc-fi + NOT pretty cast
staryzhelios20 September 2018
Cool little indie film with some great concepts
hey_you5663626 August 2018
Watched this movie on a whim, I love weird sci-fi, and i was more than happy with this film experience. The lead actress definitely carried the film, just a heart felt performance that had you rooting for her until the end.
I loved the multiverse concept and thought the whole premise of movie quite original and entertaining.
Collider Ending
wlacey-8310621 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I thought it was a good plot but not very well done. The acting was good but it seems like maybe they cut out a few scenes to many. Mainly the scenes that tie the whole thing together. There are a lot of scenes that go unexplained. The end seems to be abrupt and not very well explained either. You are surprised when the credits come up. But what they try to bring together in the end is not very clear if you miss the subtle clues. What has really happened is that Angelica is Maya when she was younger and now in charge of the orphanage. (See the scene where they focus in on her eyes. She has one Blue eye and one brown just like Maya.) She speaks to Maya about not being able to change the past and that her life is destined to keep repeating itself over and over. Angélica tells her to go ahead and try to change the past if she can and gives her the keys to unlock her handcuffs so she can go and fullfill her endless loopy cyclic life.
What isn't predictable is nonsensical
thebrucecarter20 June 2019
Obvious "twist" at the end, which does not explain the random editing cuts nor the "stub" histories that never went anywhere (or never happened in the first place). Too disjointed even for a time travel movie, with way too much teenage angst thrown in along the way.
Do NOT waste your time watching this!
roseliya26 August 2019
when your firestick leads you here
jamesfortankiy2 September 2018
Incredibly boring and uneventful...
paul_haakonsen21 November 2019
When I sat down to watch the 2018 movie "Collider" I had no idea what I was getting myself into, except for it being an action sci-fi.
Then I found out it was a movie about time jumping once the movie started, and I thought it might actually be okay. But my hopes and expectations were brutally cut down and murdered, as this turned out to be a tedious, boring and uneventful movie.
I managed to endure 32 minutes of the ordeal that is known as "Collider", and then I had more than my share of piled up boredom. The movie was unfathomably slow paced, with next to nothing happening in the 32 minutes, and whatever did happen made little or no sense, and it didn't help that the characters were about as interesting as sitting in Sahara and waiting for snow.
I have zero interest in returning to watch the rest of director Justin Lewis' movie, because it had absolutely nothing of any interest to entice me. And I must admit that I found the movie to be downright boring.
The movie didn't have any familiar faces on the cast list, which actually is something that I enjoy - because then there is no association to other previously portrayed characters. But the actors and actresses in "Collider" had nothing to work with in terms of storyline, script or characters, so they stood no chance.
My rating of the movie lands on a mere two out of ten stars. I can't really recommend that you waste your time, money or effort on this particular movie.
Then I found out it was a movie about time jumping once the movie started, and I thought it might actually be okay. But my hopes and expectations were brutally cut down and murdered, as this turned out to be a tedious, boring and uneventful movie.
I managed to endure 32 minutes of the ordeal that is known as "Collider", and then I had more than my share of piled up boredom. The movie was unfathomably slow paced, with next to nothing happening in the 32 minutes, and whatever did happen made little or no sense, and it didn't help that the characters were about as interesting as sitting in Sahara and waiting for snow.
I have zero interest in returning to watch the rest of director Justin Lewis' movie, because it had absolutely nothing of any interest to entice me. And I must admit that I found the movie to be downright boring.
The movie didn't have any familiar faces on the cast list, which actually is something that I enjoy - because then there is no association to other previously portrayed characters. But the actors and actresses in "Collider" had nothing to work with in terms of storyline, script or characters, so they stood no chance.
My rating of the movie lands on a mere two out of ten stars. I can't really recommend that you waste your time, money or effort on this particular movie.
Do not even try to watch.
samihhajhassan19 April 2020
This time travel trip is BAD - The makings of a cult classic?
TheFilmBug26 August 2018
By now, just a couple weeks after its release, despite limited marketing and advertising, "Collider" has somehow been found, rated, and critiqued by what I can only guess are avid moviegoers, time travel fanatics, and filmmakers - both experts and nonexperts alike. First came all the bad reviews, from "waste of time" to "time traveling to get their hour-and-a-half back" to one preferring his head colliding with a rock rather than watching the movie. We got it. You didn't like it. In fairness, though, here's a not-so-bad review for a change. What can I say? I'm a sucker for the underdog.
First, what makes a good movie? Is it having an A-list actor, a multi-million dollar budget, elaborate sets, exotic locations, and produced by one of the mega studios? If any of the above is among your criteria, then don't waste your time, because this movie is definitely not for you. For starters, a film such as "Collider" is for those who have an appreciation for the hard work poured into the filmmaking process - from pre-production (scriptwriting, funding, casting) and production (principal photography) to post-production (editing and distribution). Mind you, low budget means $1M-$3M, so anything less would be categorized as micro-budget; many, therefore, would fall under what would be considered subatomic (we have to call it something). So it would only be fair to factor in the budget when judging a film.
As for actors, Hollywood is notorious for bloated big names and nepotism. So, when a casting director discovers a gem of a find, such as the lead in this film, you can bet your bottom dollar that the talent will be bankable, as the producers behind this movie did, so much so that a whole movie was commissioned to be written with the specific actor, rather, actress, in mind (and other reputable teams have actually lined up to do the same). It should be no surprise if someday this fine young actress, who went far and beyond her comfort zone to meet the demands of this particular film, is recognized for her raw performance and natural talent.
As for the team, you don't know them yet, but they are actually, believe it or not, award-winning. Check them out and someday you will count yourself fortunate to have found them in their very beginnings.
Now, the storyline. As the others have already pointed out, there is, apparently, none. If you are the type who'd rather be spoonfed and follow a straight, direct, and linear path, then, I say it again, this movie is not for you. You're better off watching a rerun of "Seinfeld" for the nth time for a guaranteed dose of a good, healthy chuckle. Sometimes less is good; the more brainless the better. And many have made tons of money churning out pure and empty trash. (Not to say "Seinfeld" is trash. In fact, it's pure genius to make something out of nothing.) If, however, you are up to the challenge of figuring things out on your own, of retracing your steps to find out why things are, where things went wrong or how it all even began, of doing things over and over again until you get it right, then this movie may very well be for you. There is quite a bit of thinking involved to be able to follow this film and, if that sounds too exhausting, then just take the extra time to get a good night's sleep, because you may just find this movie so intriguing that it will keep you up all night thinking about the shoulda, coulda, woulda. Should you so choose to explore the film, you've been warned. You won't get your hour-and-a-half back, but, at the very least, your brain will surely reach optimal levels of mental activity which is not such a bad return on investment (now only $3.99 on Amazon Prime Video). Again, if the very concept of time travel confuses and frustrates you, do spare yourself the headache. You will just be lost in time with the going back and forth and, quite possibly and unfortunately for the rest of us, you might never again be found. If you did already endeavor to watch it and found yourself utterly lost, then, I'm sorry, but, unlike the lucky few, you simply just don't get it. It happens.
In the end, we are all entitled to our own opinion which is subjective and based on personal perspective. Someone else's trash is another man's treasure. "Collider" is either or both, a hit or a miss or somewhere in between depending on who you are. Glass half empty or glass half full? Perhaps, instead of taking the word of a self-proclaimed "one- or no-star" movie aficionado whose mission is to annihilate one unworthy movie after another, you would rather see for yourself what all the fuss (or no fuss) is about, to that I say, "Good for you!" As a fairly-respected movie critic emphasized, "'Collider' is a watchable film." I agree. After all, no less than Sony Pictures figured it was worth putting their stamp on and that's no easy feat to achieve.
Finally, I find the journey to be better the second, third, and even the fourth time around. I dare you to be the next Collider and see how you like traveling back and forth in time. Just make sure that CID doesn't capture and brainwash you. And, while you're at it, let me know what the heck it means -- Certifiably Insanely-Jealous Dudes? Remember, "One decision can change everything about you." Your decision to dive into the wormhole might just make you end up liking this "bad movie" after all!
In parting, I apologize if you find my review to be a pure waste of your precious time, but, give me a break, I read yours, too. Peace!
First, what makes a good movie? Is it having an A-list actor, a multi-million dollar budget, elaborate sets, exotic locations, and produced by one of the mega studios? If any of the above is among your criteria, then don't waste your time, because this movie is definitely not for you. For starters, a film such as "Collider" is for those who have an appreciation for the hard work poured into the filmmaking process - from pre-production (scriptwriting, funding, casting) and production (principal photography) to post-production (editing and distribution). Mind you, low budget means $1M-$3M, so anything less would be categorized as micro-budget; many, therefore, would fall under what would be considered subatomic (we have to call it something). So it would only be fair to factor in the budget when judging a film.
As for actors, Hollywood is notorious for bloated big names and nepotism. So, when a casting director discovers a gem of a find, such as the lead in this film, you can bet your bottom dollar that the talent will be bankable, as the producers behind this movie did, so much so that a whole movie was commissioned to be written with the specific actor, rather, actress, in mind (and other reputable teams have actually lined up to do the same). It should be no surprise if someday this fine young actress, who went far and beyond her comfort zone to meet the demands of this particular film, is recognized for her raw performance and natural talent.
As for the team, you don't know them yet, but they are actually, believe it or not, award-winning. Check them out and someday you will count yourself fortunate to have found them in their very beginnings.
Now, the storyline. As the others have already pointed out, there is, apparently, none. If you are the type who'd rather be spoonfed and follow a straight, direct, and linear path, then, I say it again, this movie is not for you. You're better off watching a rerun of "Seinfeld" for the nth time for a guaranteed dose of a good, healthy chuckle. Sometimes less is good; the more brainless the better. And many have made tons of money churning out pure and empty trash. (Not to say "Seinfeld" is trash. In fact, it's pure genius to make something out of nothing.) If, however, you are up to the challenge of figuring things out on your own, of retracing your steps to find out why things are, where things went wrong or how it all even began, of doing things over and over again until you get it right, then this movie may very well be for you. There is quite a bit of thinking involved to be able to follow this film and, if that sounds too exhausting, then just take the extra time to get a good night's sleep, because you may just find this movie so intriguing that it will keep you up all night thinking about the shoulda, coulda, woulda. Should you so choose to explore the film, you've been warned. You won't get your hour-and-a-half back, but, at the very least, your brain will surely reach optimal levels of mental activity which is not such a bad return on investment (now only $3.99 on Amazon Prime Video). Again, if the very concept of time travel confuses and frustrates you, do spare yourself the headache. You will just be lost in time with the going back and forth and, quite possibly and unfortunately for the rest of us, you might never again be found. If you did already endeavor to watch it and found yourself utterly lost, then, I'm sorry, but, unlike the lucky few, you simply just don't get it. It happens.
In the end, we are all entitled to our own opinion which is subjective and based on personal perspective. Someone else's trash is another man's treasure. "Collider" is either or both, a hit or a miss or somewhere in between depending on who you are. Glass half empty or glass half full? Perhaps, instead of taking the word of a self-proclaimed "one- or no-star" movie aficionado whose mission is to annihilate one unworthy movie after another, you would rather see for yourself what all the fuss (or no fuss) is about, to that I say, "Good for you!" As a fairly-respected movie critic emphasized, "'Collider' is a watchable film." I agree. After all, no less than Sony Pictures figured it was worth putting their stamp on and that's no easy feat to achieve.
Finally, I find the journey to be better the second, third, and even the fourth time around. I dare you to be the next Collider and see how you like traveling back and forth in time. Just make sure that CID doesn't capture and brainwash you. And, while you're at it, let me know what the heck it means -- Certifiably Insanely-Jealous Dudes? Remember, "One decision can change everything about you." Your decision to dive into the wormhole might just make you end up liking this "bad movie" after all!
In parting, I apologize if you find my review to be a pure waste of your precious time, but, give me a break, I read yours, too. Peace!
Interesting.
thejunktroller25 December 2020
Warning: Spoilers
A time travel movie with mystery. One where you and the main character know the same amount and so you both go on the same journey together not knowing exactly what to do or how to get there. And only knowing a few things with the desire and hope to change the crappy present by going to the past. I can only hope that there is a second movie that will pickup where this one leaves off.
I liked it but wish it didn't end so soon
rlatham-8645912 August 2019
Christine did a great job in this film, very interesting concept and story that left me wanting more after the credits rolled. Though I think there are enough clues in this film that tells you what happened next. But, if there is ever a sequel, I'll watch it!
Great Acting
menzelrafa21 August 2018
Lead actress was very good for such a young actor, she's got lots of potential and I hope to see her in Hollywood films soon! Bare in mind this is an indie film done on a very small budget and I think the team did a good job to pull off this film.
Interesting take on time travel
beckyvena22 August 2018
Collider explored what could really happen with time travel: what sort of paradoxes could result, parallel universes, etc. And I liked the ending! It made you wonder if anything can really be changed, and how many times Maya tried to change it before. Excited to see more from the lead actor!
Messing with the past
Woodyanders23 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
2033. Stubborn teen Maya (a fine and appealing portrayal by Christine Mascolo) lives in a hidden orphanage run by the strict secret organization C. I. D. Maya and her scientist friend John (a likeable turn by Michael Vasicek) create a makeshift time machine so Maya can travel to the past and uncover the truth about her parents.
Director/co-writer Justin Lewis relates the absorbing story at a steady pace, maintains a serious tone throughout, offers a stark depiction of a bleak future, and puts a welcome and refreshing emphasis on people over pyrotechnics. The solid acting from the capable cast helps a lot: Jude Moran as angry resistance leader Barry, Connor Greenhalgh as nice guy Tyler, and Elena Rose Davis as no-nonsense time cop Angelica. The surprise grim ending packs a devastating punch. A neat little flick.
Director/co-writer Justin Lewis relates the absorbing story at a steady pace, maintains a serious tone throughout, offers a stark depiction of a bleak future, and puts a welcome and refreshing emphasis on people over pyrotechnics. The solid acting from the capable cast helps a lot: Jude Moran as angry resistance leader Barry, Connor Greenhalgh as nice guy Tyler, and Elena Rose Davis as no-nonsense time cop Angelica. The surprise grim ending packs a devastating punch. A neat little flick.
What was this
bl-6397425 January 2021
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
