User reviews

I found this a very interesting concept and story, ruined by some terrible acting (apart from Ryan Kwanten) and the lead character spending most of the movie blubbering and crying (even more than Burnham on ST: Discovery!!!). Also, the music score is absolutely woeful. So many bad choices for the scenes they were meant to enhance. Bigger budget and a better cast may have helped.

I am a fan of what the Mothers of Invention called Cheapness. Science fiction movies, primarily from the 1950s and 1960s, in which you could tell Godzilla was a man in a rubber suit, or see the strings suspending the rocket against the black backdrop of outer space. This film, made in Australia, is a modern version of Cheapness. The time machine at the center of the story appears to be a large piece of concrete piping decorated with blinking lights and plastic tubing. There is absolutely no CGI and only one or two soundstage sets. Paintings are used to depict future cityscapes. The story is disconnected, the script straight-up-corny, and the antagonists predictable. But, if you relax and enjoy, without looking for the lack of continuity, it's entirely enjoyable escapism. I really don't think this movie takes itself too seriously and you shouldn't either.

Don't really want to slate this as it tries really hard. Kept me up til 1am and I still rated it a 6. Low budget (tried a bit hard to be higher budget) sci-fi with just enough to make you want to see it through. Music was a bit over the top in places, the actor that played the little kid (although small part) is going places, watch this space. Trailer made it look much better than it was unfortunately. 6/10 seems fair.

Never ever came across a sci-fi with people shedding tears almost in every other scene. A bit over the top 'emotional weight' quotient I'd say! You'll know when you see it.

A bit interesting in parts. Visuals of apocalyptic+future earth are definitely super good. A one time watch on a lazy afternoon

I see that movie as a failed chance. The basic story is solid good from the beginning on, the acting is not bad. I like the effects and the ending, but in-between it has serious logical errors, get's too cheesy at a few moments and the music is sometimes over the top. The message is ok, but at some points it seems to be constructed with a common set of story elements, which are used in other movies. That happens especially when it comes close to the end. For me as a movie dude it feels like I saw those in another version earlier with other actors. I think if they would have spent a little more money for a better script, it could have been more delightful. The idea of this movie is good.

I would recommend it for people who like environmental scifi movies and who didn't see many of them.

What could have been brilliant was spoiled by a huge inexplicable plot fail. Poor acting generally and I'll conceived casting. Except for Ryan who added some well needed substance. Good plot except for the massive hole in it. Hard to believe someone would sign off on this prior to release, or at some point say... hey... hang on a minute, this doesn't actually add up!

For those complaining about all the "emotions"... I'm quite positive that faced with the prospect of being catapulted some 400 years into an uncertain future world, via a big sizzling Dyson vacuum cleaner controlled by a super computer that still uses a blinking cursor and a keyboard, leaving behind your dying significant other, with no return ticket and the fate of all humanity resting on your very narrow shoulders... one would shed significantly more bodily fluids than a few blubbering tears. I mean honestly people... 2067 is currently rated somewhere between Super Mario Brothers and Tank Girl... Obviously "fair" is not a grown-up word.

So here is an honest review... I watched this movie with very low expectations having seen its score and read a few reviews. I was pleasantly surprised that it held my attention to the very end. I was impressed with the visuals and special effects. The "science" and storyline do require a modicum of suspension of disbelief, but remember why most of us watch movies... To escape from our miserable realities for a couple hours... So we can forgive ourselves for putting our Underoos on and just enjoying a movie every once-in-a-while without screaming for a full refund on the last 2 hours of our banal lives. As relatively unknowns, I feel the cast earned their paychecks, as I'm certain none of them raked it in, and I found myself actually caring about these characters whom I'd only met mere minutes earlier. Lastly I was happy I was eventually able to wrap my head around the plot without suffering an Inception-like brain freeze.

Have faith peeps, you can make it through this movie... And if you're not too careful... You just might enjoy it.

I really liked the twists and turns this movie goes trough. i'm glad i didn't read the reviews beforehand. otherwise i wouldn't have watched it...

the CGI is pretty nice too. the acting could be better (although maybe more dialog writing based?) but is not bad. the plot twists though... very nice!

Almost missed this one because of the rating, but two reviews helped me to finally decide to watch it. The movie has a solid story line and the actors were playing without any major hickup. I liked the atmosphere in the movie. There was something positive shining through all the time. Bad days but it's gonna be fine. No messing with our "logic" of time, so nothing new in this case. It sticks to the rules and doesn't try to make any stupid new advancements into that direction.

Well, for a Sunday evening to relax and just let it flow it's a solid movie. Low budget, yes, but personally I don't care, some movies don't need all that FX that is thrown at us all the time. Plain, solid, good.

If you need constant action and fighting and people jumping from houses and land on their feet, this is not for you.

Scientists can't keep trees alive in the laboratory but they can invent a time machine? This movie is a joke. Don't even want to go into low budget, low quality acting

Not a bad flick, but not noteworthy either. The effects were decent and gave it a proper sci-fi setting. The Dialogue was wanting, and to be honest, too much crying going on, far too much! It is one of those sci-fis were you have to ignore the science, just accept the plot holes the inaccuracies make. The acting was pretty stiff. It tried hard and probably the effects were the best feature of the film - which is a bit worrying. All in all though, still gets a 5 for a Sunday afternoon which is a pass and not a complete fail

Bad acting. Stupid dialogue. Protaganist has one setting: panic with emotional blubbering.

Good Concept; Earth devastated by climate change and an nuclear war. The O2 level on earth is running out because of these events. One City has been able to hold out thanks to synthetic oxygen but the oxygen also causes The Sickness.

Below Average Plot; Boring slow middle part Bad Acting; Main are OK Bad Dialogue; Below Average Fun;

Good Decor/aesthetics; Futuristic Neon City, Cyberpunky apartments with visible decay, The opening scene with Bladerunner/Cyberpunky city streets & the transparant television screens is great. There is a great shot in the office of Regina the acting and dialogue in this scene is average at best but the decor is really good imo. There are a few cool shots like of the city skyline around 23min or the shot at 1:02 with the decayed/overgrown city looks like Kingdom of the planet of the Apes.

I rate this film a 5/10. I like the aesthetics but its barely an Average Film.

It's a pretty solid story. There's no huge twists or turns, it just tells itself. There's some sci-fi paradoxy stuff, but nothing too big.

The best part: since it's Australian there's no need for "we the best ever so we will save everyone hooraa!" stuff. And it's much better because of it.

Just one person's journey and choice in a dying world.

There was so much potential that was lost in ridiculous science and poor directing of actors.

For a low budget sci-fi, this is about as good as it can get. And it is a unique take on the 'send someone to the future to save the world' trope. With some better dialogue and more cohesive storytelling, this could have been great.

It is good sci fi story with suspense, making you guess what will happen in the end. The visuals are good, and the emotional subplot is engaging. I enjoyed it.

I wasn't expecting much from this with a 4.7 rating and I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie. The best Australian movie I've seen.

Sure, the acting could have been better, but it was a hell of a lot better than I thought it would be. This movie is definitely worth watching.

I don't understand why people gave this movie bad reviews. Their acting is great. Have you Americans watched your Hallmark movies? Jeez. The plot was really interesting. On a better budget this would have been amazing.

This was obviously cheap scripting and dodgy direction because it made even the normally good actors sound and look like they were overacting.At times Deborah mailman looked like she was horribly uncomfortable I think this was poor casting it didn't suit her. The poor acting made me cringe so bad I stopped watching a few times but I wanted to see it through so I watched it over 3 nights to 'get through it'. The main actor who plays Ethan was painful to watch, they picked the wrong guy. His overacting end inconsistency was annoying the forced character arc was very visible. They wasted Ryan Quanton on a rubbish character that made no sense. They should have made him the lead, at least he can act but you could tell even he struggled with the rubbish script. Next time they want to put their time into a movie they should spend more time on the script. With a story like this the script makes it or breaks it unfortunately. It could have been a great movie but instead it was frustrating to watch and I feel bad for the actors who signed up for it. The young Ethan was probably the best actor out of all the unknowns. But it was very hard to believe that he was the same character because the actors presented so so different it was incongruent.