>>68176382
Cool idea
Everything else was bad

I get that it's intentionally confusing but it doesn't really make for an entertaining movie and you just end up with "Wait what?" but not in a good way.

>>68176382
stupid movie

>>68176583
I think it caters to the very dwarf fortress type of autism in terms of depth. Not saying it's especially deep, but the way it plays with timeline causality is pretty neat.

Very good. Complete lack of exposition will disorient manchildren, but it's a very good script executed very well

Poorly produced, acted and edited, but it's probably the most well written time travel movie ever made
Very little plotholes, and everything makes sense if you think about it

Ahead of its time (no pun intended). The diologur is complex and deep and the subject matter too. Requires a few watches to make sense of why the characters act and say what they do, but once you understand it it's immensely entertaining

Pure ķïño

Divisive

>>68177306
>mumble mumble
>deep

Bad acting
Bad dialog
Bad plot
Bad characters
Neat idea

>>68177306
I'd say it's a bit pretentious, but not in the way that it seems to be full of itself. It's more confusing for no reason. I understand it after watching it twice and reading a summary of the timeline(s). But they made damn sure not to cut any corners on showing as little exposition as possible.

>>68177510
Would have been better if they sequenced it a little more linearly, bad acting and admittedly stupid plot aside.

>realistic take on time travel
>realistic

LOL
O
L