web
counter
 

As Logic Stands You Couldn't Meet a Man Who's from the Future

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (52)



timecrimes_2007_9.jpg

Dear Dustin —

This is you. Future Dustin. I’m writing to you from one hour in the future. It’s difficult to explain. You’ll understand in about an hour. I’m writing to let you know that you’ve met your match. For the next hour, you will struggle mightily to explain the premise of TimeCrimes, a bizarre mindfuck of a little time-traveling movie. It’s an impossible task. Don’t bother.

As you’re reading this, you just finished watching Timecrimes (now on DVD). Your brain is still a little disoriented. It hurts to think too hard, right? It’s OK. You’ll start to come out of it in about an hour, when you decide to compose this letter to yourself. I just received a similar letter, from a version of ourselves an hour into my future (that’s two hours into your future). It’s suggesting that I not bother with this letter, but since my future self is telling me not to send this letter to you, you’ll understand why I have no choice but to do so. If I didn’t, Dustin one hour from now (two hours from now, your time) would have no reason to send the letter he just sent to me telling me not to send you a letter. So, clearly, I have to send you the letter so as to not disrupt the future, because — when you’re dealing with time travel — the future and the past are dangerously intertwined.

Confusing, isn’t it? A lot like the movie, huh? It makes sense while you’re watching it, but try explaining it to someone else. Am I right? A guy named Hector (Karra Elajalde) comes home from the store after buying his wife a table. He receives a strange phone call. He goes outside with his binoculars and spies a woman getting undressed. He decides to walk into the woods to see if the naked woman is OK. There, Hector is stabbed in the arm by a man with bandages around his head. The man with the bandaged-head chases Hector into a silo, where Hector hides from the man with bandages in a time machine. The time machine sends Hector back an hour, where — with his binoculars — he sees himself coming home with a table for his wife. In order to ensure that his old self winds up back at the silo (thus preventing two versions of himself from existing concurrently and eternally), Hector sets into motion the events that brought the old Hector to the time machine in the first place. He calls his old self. He crashes his car and wraps bandages around his face to stop the bleeding. He forces a woman to get undressed in the woods. When his old self comes into the woods to see if the woman is OK, Hector stabs his old self in the arm, and then chases him into the silo. But, something goes terribly wrong. So, he has to send himself back again to keep his second self from causing the tragic mishap that occurred when he was trying to ensure that his first self made it back to the silo.

Your mind just broke, didn’t it? Imagine what our readers are thinking. In fact, the version of myself one hour from now (two hours from your time) is telling me that the review did not go over very well, which is why he is asking me not to write this letter to you, because he says that you will simply post this letter in lieu of a review. He’s telling me to tell you not to do that. But of course, you must. Otherwise, you’ll disrupt the future, which can have dire implications on the past.

However, once you do come to your senses and write this letter, at least tell your readers that they really should give Timecrimes a chance, particularly if they are into time-travel movies. And that, unlike many other time-travel movies (The Lake House, for instance), there are no holes in the logic of Timecrimes. It’s a tight, gripping, logically sound, weird, funny, very cool little thriller. And that writer/director Nacho Vigalondo, despite having a name that sounds like something you’d really like to eat an hour from now, is one stupendous director. I would, however, warn you not to tell your readers that Timecrimes is a foreign film with subtitles (and one that is currently being developed for an American remake), because some of your readers may steer clear of it. However, if you do mention that it’s a foreign film, you should also mention that there are boobies in it, so perhaps those readers scared off by subtitles will be drawn back in by boobies.

Got it? Cool.

Signed,
Future Dustin

Dear Dustin —

This is you. Future Dustin. I’m writing to you from one hour in the future. It’s difficult to explain. You’ll understand in about an hour. I’m writing to let you know that you’ve met your match. For the next hour, you will struggle mightily to explain the premise of TimeCrimes, a bizarre mindfuck of a little time-traveling movie. It’s an impossible task. Don’t bother …









1997-98 Primetime Television Schedule | The Most Inexplicable Teen Sensations













Comments

This is finally out! Awesome, I've been waiting to see this!

Good review, thought it seems you had some difficulty with it.

Posted by: Snath at April 10, 2009 11:07 AM

There will never be a time travel movie more mindfucky than Primer. Never.

Posted by: twig at April 10, 2009 11:10 AM

When I first glanced at that picture, I thought it was a dude with bacon wrapped all over his head. Like a bacon mask.

Mmmmmm....bacon.

Posted by: Groovekiller at April 10, 2009 11:11 AM

"...He goes outside with his binoculars and spies a woman getting undressed..."


Sounds like they had no trouble traveling to the past to steal a major plot point from De Palma's Body Double.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at April 10, 2009 11:12 AM

Sounds AWESOME.

Posted by: Bucko at April 10, 2009 11:14 AM

Why you gotta harsh the buzz, barbado?

My mind is spinning trying to grasp this concept. Time travel has always been a point of contention with me as there are always holes. I'd give this a try though. Or maybe I've already seen it and haven't caught up to that fact yet.

Posted by: Duane at April 10, 2009 11:16 AM

Good time travel stories are almost impossible to find, because authors rarely actually can wrap their minds around four dimensions. Back to the Future is a hideous abortion. I cannot watch the Heroes episodes with time travel. This sounds like a really well done story.

All You Zombies is perhaps the seminal piece of time travel, a short story by Heinlein. The catch to it (and this a looooooooooooooooooong spoiler warning so if you want to go read it, you don't stumble onto the next bit because you read ever so fast) is that every single character in the entire story is the main character, including his father, mother, recruiter, etc.

Posted by: Steven Lloyd Wilson at April 10, 2009 11:17 AM

I have to admit I was totally thrown by the logic of the movie. My husband and friends got it (damn right brainers). All I really remember is that they tried to explain it to me afterwords, that it included a few colored sugar packets (Splenda, Raw, and Regular) and lots of fervent gesticulating.

To no avail. I still don't understand how the plot works, only that it did. And that the movie bears repeated viewings so you can be mindfucked about how 'tight' the plot is.

Posted by: Stella at April 10, 2009 11:19 AM

The angels have the phone box

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 11:20 AM

No logical holes in a time travel movie?

This I gotta see ...

Actually, this sounds a LOT like it was stolen from the series where Calvin tries to avoid doing his homework by hopping into the transmogrifier and traveling to the future where he figures his future self will have done the homework, so he can just pick it up and bring it back ...

What? No, not the movie. Your REVIEW.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at April 10, 2009 11:20 AM

Someone get me a cigarette, for I have just been mindfucked. Owwww...

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at April 10, 2009 11:21 AM

or was that supposed to be "involved" instead of "included"? I can't tell and my tummy is grumbling, so I guess I should finally have breakfast... I'm told it helps with helping your brain work.

Posted by: Stella at April 10, 2009 11:21 AM

...helps with helping... gah!! no more posting!

Posted by: Stella at April 10, 2009 11:21 AM

Ugh. LAKE HOUSE. I will never forgive my summer camp for all those years of being forced to watch awful movies. Timecrimes sounds cool, if only for the alleged "no logic holes" aspect. I wish I had the ability to jump back in time so I could refuse my 2 AM booty call.

Groovekiller, I thought he had Baconface too.

Posted by: SaBrina at April 10, 2009 11:28 AM

Hah! Awesome, Rowles. That pretty much sums-up the mind-fuck of that movie. I'm also glad you included the boobies.

And twig, my brother's been going on about 'Primer' for ages--I heard it requires intermittent pausing just to make sense of it.

Was that redundant?

Posted by: Sapphiar at April 10, 2009 11:28 AM

Stella, I did have breakfast already, and I still really don't trust myself to make any thoughtful comments on this here thread.

I just had someone try and explain their interpretation of "Donnie Darko" to me yesterday, and I realized I'm more than happy to NOT understand the logic of time travel movies. "Total suspension of disbelief" is my motto.

Posted by: frumpiefox at April 10, 2009 11:31 AM

OH, and I finally got a headline lyric! Whoooo!AND I understood a Jay reference. I'm on a roll.

All we've ever had was now...

Posted by: SaBrina at April 10, 2009 11:31 AM

And you know what? This was also the whole plot of Dexter's Laboratory's "Ego Trip" one hour special episode.

HA!

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at April 10, 2009 11:36 AM

I've never really understood the premise of not being allowed to have two of oneself around at the same time, much less the absolute taboo on meeting ones former or future self. I think we all accept that if this happens, SOMETHING TERRIBLE WILL HAPPEN, but what if it didn't? What if future PaddyDog and current PaddyDog just had tea and a good old natter about how great it is that they've discovered a way to stop hair going grey? And then future PaddyDog jollies off to wherever she came from (maybe leaving a quick note about the winner of this year's Kentucky Derby lying around as a little thank you to her hostess) and all returns to normal. Would that be so awful?

Posted by: PaddyDog at April 10, 2009 11:36 AM

Reading this review I suddenly got a visual of, "And surely I cannot choose the wine in front you . . . So obviously I cannot choose the wine in front of me . . . I'm just getting started!"

Posted by: BWeaves at April 10, 2009 11:39 AM

FuturePaddy's inevitably gonna get asked an awkward question and FuturePaddy can't bear to answer it and PresentPaddy's gonna plotz. That's the Murphy's Law of talking to yourself. One or both are gonna come away feeling uneasy or guilty or tense.

Don't do it!

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 11:48 AM

Didn't Fidelity or some "financial advisor" type company feature commercials where someone is sitting and then starts talking to their future self who they don't immediately recognize? The point being the future self is in good shape because the current self invested wisely. I believe the worst one is the dude sitting in the hospital with his wife in an ostensibly touch and go surgery.

Posted by: antietam at April 10, 2009 11:53 AM

Sounds like they had no trouble traveling to the past to steal a major plot point from De Palma's Body Double.

As long as they also stole a pair of boobies as magnificent as Deborah Shelton's.

Posted by: alone in the dark at April 10, 2009 11:54 AM

Meeting a near-future me? I like to think it would end erotically. And I'd feel dirty afterwards.

Posted by: Optimus Rhyme at April 10, 2009 11:55 AM

That's the Murphy's Law of talking to yourself. One or both are gonna come away feeling uneasy or guilty or tense.

I thought it had to do with the same matter not being able to occupy the same space thereby turning you into a pile of goo when you touch, or has Timecop led me astray again?

Posted by: branded at April 10, 2009 11:55 AM

Well, that too of course, but I meant more the softer side of paradox.

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 11:57 AM

What if we don't touch? Are we good then?

Posted by: PaddyDog at April 10, 2009 12:01 PM

Don't touch and don't talk and you'll probably get away with it.

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 12:12 PM

I've never really understood the premise of not being allowed to have two of oneself around at the same time, much less the absolute taboo on meeting ones former or future self. I think we all accept that if this happens, SOMETHING TERRIBLE WILL HAPPEN, but what if it didn't?

I take it you haven't seen Time Cop? Because SOMETHING TERRIBLE DOES HAPPEN: Jean-Claude Van Damme tries to act in a science fiction movie and ruins Mia Sara's career. He must be stopped!

What if future PaddyDog and current PaddyDog just had tea and a good old natter about how great it is that they've discovered a way to stop hair going grey?

Upstairs or downstairs?

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at April 10, 2009 12:14 PM

"...SOMETHING TERRIBLE DOES HAPPEN: Jean-Claude Van Damme tries to act in a science fiction movie and ruins Mia Sara's career.."


BAM!

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at April 10, 2009 12:18 PM

Whee! I remember when I sent you the trailer and you didn't know what to make of it. I cannot wait to see this. I think it'll be like Lost times ten.

Posted by: Cindy at April 10, 2009 12:22 PM

Oh, we would have our tea party downstairs of course!!!!!

Posted by: PaddyDog at April 10, 2009 12:31 PM

Groovekiller, I thought the same thing. I bet his head would taste good pan-fried.

Posted by: Lucas at April 10, 2009 12:54 PM

Don't touch and don't talk and you'll probably get away with it.

"Never interrupt me when I'm talking to myself."

Posted by: branded at April 10, 2009 12:56 PM

i've been listening to the hooter's 'all you zombies' on youtube (because i'm too lazy to look for my cassette) for the past 30 minutes.

Posted by: gp at April 10, 2009 1:05 PM

Meeting a near-future me? I like to think it would end erotically. And I'd feel dirty afterwards.

Posted by: Optimus Rhyme at April 10, 2009 11:55 AM
---
Go fuck yourself.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at April 10, 2009 1:09 PM

(because i'm too lazy to look for my cassette) for the past 30 minutes.

Posted by: gp at April 10, 2009 1:05 PM

----------------------------------------------

SO how ARE things back there in, 1988?

:)

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at April 10, 2009 1:10 PM

FINALLY, GOD you reviewed this. Or did I catch a super early special release forever ago and didn't know it?
I loved this movie, it was so well done and interesting. Also, the theater showed some of Vigalondo's short films which were fantastic. Everyone should check them out:

Domingo

and

7:35 de la manana

Posted by: Sharon at April 10, 2009 1:32 PM

"Jean-Claude Van Damme tries to act in a science fiction movie and ruins Mia Sara's career. He must be stopped!"

Using the words "Mia Sara" and "career" in the same sentence doesn't make a whole lotta sense, TB.

Posted by: TK at April 10, 2009 1:53 PM

SO how ARE things back there in, 1988?

Like we're not that old, Slim. Besides, you know that's from 85.

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 2:23 PM

Sharon, I was surprised the 'Mo actually played this, I was totally expecting to have to see it at the Arboretum artsy movieplex, which, horror of horrors, would have meant no booze during the screening.

Posted by: Stella at April 10, 2009 3:16 PM

Me too, Stella!
The g/f and I caught it at the Village however long ago.
I like the Arboretum just fine, they do get those arty independent things that even Alamo passes on, but GOD I hate the pre-movie bullshit commercials and trivia. Hate hate hate. I think one of the last movies I caught there was Tell No One which was awesome. But the people behind me kept whispering loudly like "Oh my god, is she dead? Is the dog dead? Ohhhh, who is she?"
Kill.

Posted by: Sharon at April 10, 2009 4:40 PM

i saw this movie the other day. i really liked it, except the fact that i thought the main character was a pervy motherfcker. rule #1 in any movie: if you're a pot bellied middle-aged man, don't investigate hot naked chick in the woods. it will only lead to you getting stabbed by timeparadox-you.

Posted by: clarevoyance at April 10, 2009 5:34 PM

Sharon, that's the last movie I saw at the Arbor too!
And the stupid stupid pre-movie bullshit is EXACTLY why I hate non-Alamo theaters. At least the crowd that was with us at the Arbor (is that what it's called???) for Tell No One knew how to behave.

Posted by: Stella at April 10, 2009 5:52 PM

Don't go early, don't go at night, be happy.

Posted by: Jay at April 10, 2009 5:55 PM

Reason #2 I am spoiled by the Alamo:
Aside from the booze (which I love), I can have real butter on my popcorn. And the Bat Wings are finally a regular menu item.

By the way, Stella, have you tried the weekend brunch? I finally went and HOLY SHIT those bacon cheddar scones are wicked. As is the Creme Brulee French Toast.

Posted by: Sharon at April 10, 2009 8:23 PM

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ... creme brulee French toast.

Where is this Alamo you speak of?

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at April 10, 2009 9:04 PM

Alamo Drafthouse in Austin. South Lamar, Village, and Downtown locations now offer brunch. Lake Creek (the one that's 2 whole minutes from where I live) does not. Unfair.

Hey, did I miss the part where bucdaddy decided to pull a Prince thing? Do you write "slave" on your cheek as well?

Posted by: Sharon at April 10, 2009 9:07 PM

Tried but my Sharpie won't write through a beard. Colors the gray nicely, tho.

Austin (f***in' Austin/SXSW again) is juuuuuust a little far to drive even for creme brulee French toast. Gotta be a recipe I can find on the Webnets ... right after I make Esquire's banana bread French toast.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at April 10, 2009 11:18 PM

Whoa, look at all the eggs. My heart doctor wouldn't like that ... if he ever knew about it.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at April 10, 2009 11:28 PM

Am I the only one who looked at the photo on the hoempage (before reading the review) and wondered what hell kind of movie had a character who wrapped his face in uncooked bacon?


Posted by: gforcetwo at April 11, 2009 12:56 PM

Well I'm extremely glad I only read the first paragraph or two of this review before seeing the film, because after coming back and reading the full thing I realised that you ruined the first two thirds of the movie. Great job there.

Posted by: ben at April 13, 2009 2:00 AM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time