Synchronicity (2016)

Best movie of this year hands down!

Touches You

That was an excellent one.

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

The film has everything you could want: a 1980's soundtrack, a noir look a la Blade Runner, a scientist mad with the possibilities of his time travel machine and a beautiful girl to make it all worthwhile. Add to this Michael Ironside, who just lends gravitas to the entire thing and the only thing you could be missing is a smart script. And you are not, because this movie is smart.So why didn't it become an instant classic? Because in the end, it was one hour and forty minutes for a punchline. The possibilities were infinite, pardon the pun, but the movie did not capitalize on them. That is why many of the people are either disappointed with the result or frustrated for not getting the complicated mechanics of time travel.For me, it was a stylistically beautiful movie, with a lot of love poured into it. The acting was good, the story interesting. Most stories are usually broken by the addition of time travel or are based on it so much that they ignore anything else that might matter. Synchronicity did not fall into the first category and came very close to slip from the second and into the one of great films. I am sure that if it would have been done in the 80s, the time it seemed to belong to - pardon the pun again, it would have had a great success.Bottom line: clearly better than average, but not consistently so. It has great moments and silly underdeveloped ones, it has a story with a lot of potential, but only a bit of it capitalized into anything. Certainly worth a watch.

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

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

As you can read in the title... The movie starts as a bad SF movie, weird scene with various scientific vocabulary that the viewer doesn't understand (in purpose I imagine), the movie starts with an invention discovery : time travel, and the scenes going and ongoing, every single scene becomes more clear to the viewer. Some scenes would just, at first, seem bad-played by the actors, but at the end gain logic and the role-plays take every of their logic. The movie is about time travel, parallel universes, and the whole plot is mind-blowing. What I thought first being an easy-to-watch movie, finally became a really deep-movie with an incredible plot. If you liked Inception, you'll probably like this one as well. Get ready to have your mind blown... This is definitely worth its 1 hour and 40 minutes.