Collider (2018) Reviews

• Yet another goofy time travel flick

  Snootz2018-08-12

  It's getting to the point I'm about to swear off any further time travel flicks. They're all falling into categories: 1. Been done before and better 2. Make no sense at all 3. Make sense, but are just goofy 4. Have terrible endings 5. Is yet another time travel movie Seriously, this is a theme that has been done to death. And then killed. And then mangled. This film does no better. Halfway decent acting and it gives hints that fill in the storyline... but then yet another bogus ending that leaves the audience hanging with a "what happens IF" nuther bunch of nonsense. I don't go to a movie to have them leave ME to fill out the story line. That's their job, right? If I wanted to invent my own ending, I'd write my own script... and do a lot better job than these films we've seen come out of the churn lately. This is paradox within paradox, goofier than most, predictable non-ending, and just sloppy writing. Save yer time on this one.

• when your firestick leads you here

  jamesfortankiy2018-09-02

  When all the good movies are buffered out, at least this movie beats hunting down B' movies on youtube. If you like cute Asians (ok mixed) what do you have to lose?

• This time travel trip is BAD - The makings of a cult classic?

  TheFilmBug2018-08-26

  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!

• WTF?

  eric-5492018-08-11

  I wonder if anyone out there has any idea what the plot of this film is. Love time travel, but this is a waste of time.

• Better off if your head has a "Collider" with a large rock then watch this.

  yowilwasup2018-08-15

  (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.