Intense ... intensely stupid!
2 February 2004
First, let's get the whole "intense" argument out of the way. Yes, this movie was intense but not because of any miracle of storytelling. Basically, it seemed as if the writers opened up their Fodor's Guide To Disturbing Plot Elements and ran down the checklist. Child molestation ... check! Cruelty to animals ... check! Baby-killing ... check! Prison rape... check! Living life as an amputee ... check! Having a psycho take an aluminum bat and go yard with your skull ... check!

Intense subject matter does not a great story make. The basic premise of this film is that Evan (Ashton Kutcher) thinks he can go back in time and make the lives of those he loves better by eliminating one or more of the aforementioned miserable life experiences. Of course, every time he goes back, he throws the space-time continuum out of flux, thereby creating a ripple effect of alternate miserable life experiences and making things worse for himself. Not a bad premise--who among us has not wished for this power?--but the story exposes itself as a sham by the second act.

Case in point. Evan goes back to being seven years old, and averts a lifetime of child molestation for his friend Kayleigh (Amy Smart) just by getting in her abusive father's face. Do these writers know anything about abusers? Do they really think an alcoholic abuser would back down from a mouthy child, do a 180 and transform from a pedophilic creep to a loving father? But no, this one act is the difference between Kayleigh become a suicidal basket case and her evolving into a lovely, balanced college girl. Thank God one child was tough enough to say, "Leave us alone," and one pedophile was rational enough to stop. It don't happen that way, folks, and anyone who's been molested will say as much.

Trouble is, this one act may alter Evan's adult reality, but it still leaves a lot of other events in his history (events that by virtue of the butterfly effect should have been changed) unchanged. If his one act stops the child molestation, would the other events in his life--the murder of his dog and the death of the baby--also be different?

The biggest problem with the movie, though, is the utter irresponsibility of it all. During the first act, when we get to see all of the horrors of Evan's existence, the film works itself out like a piece of shock exploitation. You can almost see the writers yucking it up over scotch and soda by their word processor saying, "And then let's have Tommy put a dog in a sack and set it on fire! Boy, that'll freak people out!"

Okay, if this had been exploitation along the lines of "Ilsa" or "Salo," maybe this crap is appropriate. But this is a mainstream Hollywood movie, starring Kelso from "That's 70s Show," being touted by the blurbs on the TV ads as a "rollicking, high-speed, suspenseful rollercoaster ride"! This movie pushes the envelope, brings up some disturbing images that will traumatize those who have, unlike the writers, really experienced such horrors ... then it tries to wrap it all up with neat little answers.

Rated PG for Pure Garbage.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed