Okay, so after years of just hearing about this film and not seeing it (I have no excuses) I finally put it on. And wow, it's an absolutely fantastic film.

Ill start by giving my reason why I haven't watched for so long and that's because I was told it was really complicated and confusing. And I'll be honest, 10 minutes into this film I was completely out of whack. I had absolutely no idea what's happening. But after around half an hour or so it becomes really apparent what's happening and the story just becomes more and more interesting. So if you're worried about complexity of the plot. Don't, you'll be fine.

The ending as well I liked. You honestly don't know how this film will end, I was 10 minutes from the film ending and I still didn't know what was going to go down. But it's done really nicely and closes off any unanswered questions. Watching films like Donny Darko you end up confused by the end and have several questions whereas this doesn't have this and I prefer that. (Donny Darko is great by the way, I was just giving an example).

Beyond that I thought the acting was really good, the managed to pull off good character development and the changes of memory were quite obvious so there wasn't any overlapping or confusion on what you were watching.

It's just overall an absolutely fantastic film and I highly recommend watching this if you haven't done so already.

Every so often we all seem to move away from the usual nothings we talk about amongst our friends, and instead get into a deeply philosophical conversation about the workings of Chaos Theory and the existence of parallel universes. No? Okay, just me then. In any case, this discussion just the other day led to a friend recommending The Butterfly Effect, a film that puts both a stylistic and sinister spin on the idea that even the mere flapping of a butterfly's wings can result in drastic changes in another place or time. Being initially sceptical because of the generally negative reaction from critics, I was certainly not disappointed by film's end.

Ashton Kutcher couldn't be more different that his concurrent role as the dimwitted Kelso from That '70s Show in his lead performance as Evan Treborn, a man who has suffered blackouts since his childhood, and realises that he can access and relive vital gaps in his memory through the help of other sources like journals or images. He uses this skill to, in his eyes, right the wrongs of the past. Namely, injustices that were performed upon his friends Lenny and Tommy and only love Kayleigh (Amy Smart). What he doesn't realise is that the changes he thinks are made for the better actually result in a severely changed future that threatens his own life.

Without trying to sound like a sadist, The Butterfly Effect excels in presenting a consistently dark, melancholy atmosphere. Indeed, there is hardly a happy moment in the entire film, although that may be untrue depending on which ending you watch (more on that later). Any event that looks as if it might provide a slim ray of hope for Evan to make things right is quickly dashed by a sudden escalation of the plot, maintaining the viewer's interest the whole way through. The film doesn't shy away from heavy subject matter either, including prostitution, murder, paedophilia and drug use, all of which culminates in an enjoyably gritty, underground tone.

Positively, the menacing nature of the movie isn't weighed down by comic relief. I suppose when many of us think of this sort of plot, we first think of the Simpsons Halloween special when Homer invents the time-travelling toaster. Not knowing quite how dark the film would turn out to be, I was concerned The Butterfly Effect would go down a similar path, in which Evan keeps returning to the present to find that all humans have grown wings or Pauly D has become President. Instead, any changes are limited to the persona of the characters, rather than altering the physical environment, which was definitely the professional path to take.

The pacing is another strength. For a film that comes in well under two hours, directors Eric Bress and J. Mackye Gruber deserve credit for packing a lot in, and doing it well. Certainly, some thrillers benefit from slow-moving scenes to draw suspense (the superb Eyes Wide Shut, for example) but Butterfly manages to combine compounding urgency with engaging character development in constructing a fast-moving film that requires both thought and stamina to decipher, without being needlessly confusing.

Oddly, the film possesses four different final scenes, and so the lasting message of the movie may differ depending on the copy viewed. My favourite ending is the 'official' one applied to the theatrical release. It is satisfying, yet open-ended, as is the case with its alternate cut. Another is uncharacteristically upbeat and illogical, perhaps suggested in the editing room as a way of appeasing confused screen-test viewers. But if you really want to get down to brass tax, go with the Director's Cut: a far more morbid conclusion with a surreal twist. Intrigued? Don't let me stop you.

*There's nothing I love more than a bit of feedback, good or bad. So drop me a line on jnatsis@iprimus.com.au and let me know what you thought of my review.*

I seldom come out and write movie reviews in IMDb but I felt this one deserved some effort from me. I don't recall any movie which made me shiver thinking about what was gonna come next when I hit pause to go for a pee or any other reason. This one is really something. There is a "Lost Highway" feel to it and the themes are closely related but...The Butterfly effect is in fact more complex.It is a really disturbing movie, not so much for what it shows, but for what it keeps you guessing - like all true thriller masterpieces - , about events that take or might take place, and above all, about human sanity and the subtle twist there is between the average Joe's walk of life and outright perversion. Requires multiple - rewarding - viewings.

What if you could go back to major junctions in your life and take the other path? What if there's an alternate life for you somewhere, out there, where the cumulative sum of your choices leads to a better reality, a happier and more fulfilling existence? On the flip-side - what if, at the end of the day, you really can't achieve a solid grip on these things, no matter how hard you try?

A great deal of science fiction works of art have tried to approach these meaningful questions throughout the years, all presenting many philosophical ideas and notions as to how one man can change his own fate, for better or for worse. In this surprisingly good sci-fi adventure from 2004, directors Eric Bress and J. Mackye Gruber (who are also behind the screenplay of Final Destination 2) raise all these questions once again, but use a different angle this time around. Time travel is not the issue here. Instead, our lead protagonist, Evan Treborn (portrayed by Hollywood prankster Ashton Kutcher – but more on that later) leads his whole life up until his early 20's without knowing he has a rare medical condition that seemingly helps him shut away traumatic incidents that occurred throughout his childhood and adolescence years. All he remembers from these various occasions are bizarre blackouts. But when a blast from his past comes back into his life only to leave it ever so tragically (Kayleigh Miller, portrayed by the lovely Amy Smart who we've since seen in films such as Just Friends and Crank), Evan learns that he can return to those important lost moments in his life and re-inhabit his younger body, thus changing the present and future. However, with every shift in the past comes an alternate present that may seem better at first, but is in fact a far harsher reality than the original one Evan has left.

What truly touched me about this film was the essence in which it captured the troublesome youth of my generation, that was born in the 1980's, grew up in the 1990's, and is ever since trying to adapt to the ever changing reality in which we all live in. Here, one man tries to alter all this, and his own personal journey is parallel in many ways to the journey many young people go through nowadays. Part of capturing this Generation X notion is the pop-culture presented throughout the film. When you see the young actors and actress fall in love, fight, and grow up real fast, it all happens amidst references to films of the period (Se7en, etc.), outfits, 1980's technology and other devices that fill you up with an overwhelming feeling of nostalgia and sentiment, as if you were there yourself, living these events and going through all these horrible/wonderful events.

Above all things, the makers of The Butterfly Effect do the unbelievable and turn Ashton Kutcher into a good actor – a feat I thought was unachievable at best. However, in this sci-fi epic it appears as though anything is possible. Bottom line, it was a fresh breath of air when I saw it, left me pondering for days, and gave me the inspiration and write something myself after a long period of writers block. If a film manages to be this inspirational and keep you on the edge of your seat throughout its 113 minutes duration, all I can do is humbly bow down in front of its makers' talents. I'm eagerly waiting for other outings by these young folks.

Ashton Kutcher plays Evan Treborn, a troubled man who suffered blackouts as a child. When he discovers a way to travel back into the body of his past self, his time trips start to cause negative results on his present. As he uses his powers to try to fix his past and present, the effect escalates, creating alternate realities, many of which are worse than the past that he is trying to change.

The Butterfly Effect is a terrific thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat. The previews looked very intense and the whole film is pretty much like that. It held onto the audience right at the start and it didn't let go until the end. The plot is nothing new but the execution was very nice. It offers a bunch of interesting and unpredictable twists so it's hard to see where things are going. The whole film is like that, just one long engaging thrill ride.

The acting is okay, some people did better than others. Ashton Kutcher is surprisingly good as Evan and he does a good job for his first serious movie. Amy Smart is very pretty and talented and she plays Kayleigh perfectly. The only person I didn't really like was Melora Walters. She was pretty wooden and unconvincing. Besides for her, the acting was pretty good and convincing. No one really did a bad job.

This film was directed and written by both Eric Bress and J. Mackye Gruber. They did make their mistakes but the film is still pretty good. The critics never gave this movie a chance. As soon as they heard Ashton Kutcher was in it, they all prepared to give it thumbs down. The movie moves around a lot that its hard to keep up but it also keeps you paying attention. Plenty of movies have gone back in time before but this one does it so more effectively that its almost original in that sense. The beginning is done well, the middle it starts dragging but it starts picking up and the ending is done extremely well. This is one of the best films of 2004 and certainly an entertaining one. In the end, this underrated gem is worth checking out. Rating 8/10

Man... Whew... Wow! I'm at a loss of words to describe this high octane, tantalizing, brain-stimulating movie. The acting: excellent. The plot: superb. The story: great. The drama/suspense: mind numbing.

How the writers were able to put this story together so flawlessly, I don't know, and how the director was able to actualize it, even more amazing. There was plenty of visual stimuli as well as mental stimuli as you waited to see the outcome of each alteration made by the main character, Evan Treborn (Ashton Kutcher).

The movie kept me guessing and kept me at the edge of my seat, and the writers outdid themselves by making sure the movie didn't peter out with some lame ending. The ending was icing on the cake and it capped what should be a classic.

This movie received WAY too many bad reviews. The only reason was to PUNK Ashton Kutcher. Say what you will, Kutcher did a fair to midland acting job here. There have been a lot worse performances on film in much better reviewed movies. I tell you, you will NOT be disappointed watching the Director's cut Alternate ending. It is a story of how one action causes a series of reactions...no matter the intentions, be careful what you wish for. This film's biggest mistake was promoting it in the horror genre. It is NOT! It is a nice dark fantasy film, nothing more, nothing less. There are 2 different endings, with 2 different meanings for me. I preferred the Alternate ending in lieu of the Theatrical ending. A great "popcorn" movie. Don't believe the (bad)Hype!

The film has never been showed in Denmark, (where I come from) so the press has never reviewed it. It took me 2 times to get the point but when I realized every part of the film, I felt a huge rush! I'm sure when I see it the 3rd time it will be an even bigger experience to me. Every part of the film plays an important role to the main thread. Every details have a role! The film is like reading a poem from the 18th century, where every sentence means something. The director is a pure genius! Those who've criticized the film, should really see it again, because you'll then notice all the details which makes this film excellent! Without a doubt one of the best films I've seen!

I should state up front that this review is for the director's cut.

To put it bluntly, this movie suffers from having a smart heart and a stupid brain. Any movie like this requires the viewer to suspend disbelief. In doing so the storytellers have the option to establish replacement rules to govern the universe they've created. This movie sets up well, giving the main character (Evan) blackouts which it will fill in later. However, once Evan ventures into his past to 'fill in' the empty spaces, the movie begins to contradict itself. This would be excusable if it was a lighter, more amusing movie. But this is far from light material. It is extremely morbid. The audience is bombarded with this darkness, which attempts to engage us, to give us something deeper. Unfortunately, it doesn't take much digging before you get frustrated.

For me, there are two particularly frustrating aspects to this film:

First, the tagline of this movie is "change one thing, change everything". As such, I expected that when Evan goes back to change something, everything from that point forward will be different. In other words, if Evan has ten blackouts, and goes back to visit the fifth one, then all the following blackouts would either vanish or be completely different. Instead, the blackouts are always the same. Evan jumps around to whatever blackout is convenient. However, this betrays the movie's central concept. This could have been fixed with a more careful storyline, where the blackouts were visited in reverse order.

The second frustrating aspect is the gross simplifications in Evan's revised histories. When Evan goes back and changes over a decade of history, the effects of his change are summed up far too easily and conveniently, almost as if the other people are all in on some cruel joke being played on Evan. I understand that this is done to keep the pace moving, but again the central theme of "change one thing, change everything". But even after multiple changes, a lot of the world stays pretty much the same.

Comparisons to Donnie Darko are inevitable. Donnie Darko was a superior film in this regard because it did not make the mistake of laying down ground rules and then breaking them. Instead, it hides the rules from the audience and leaves them up for discussion. As a result, you have a much more interesting conversation piece. The Butterfly Effect essentially outsmarts itself by trying too hard.

For some, my comments may seem like cynical over-thinking. This movie has a lot of polish on it to make it look good, and if you want to keep your brain turned off, you may enjoy it considerably. Some people may not like Ashton Kutcher and discredit the movie based on that, but honestly I thought his performance was far more convincing than the script itself.

Like I said before, this movie does have a smart heart. It tries very very hard to bring something interesting to the table. The setup and ending are good, but the path between is too dark for its own good and ultimately a mess of contradictions. 6 out of 10.

If we want to analyze where this movie fails, we can look no further than the title. It alludes to a popular metaphor in chaos theory, the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings could cause a storm on the other side of the world. It also draws heavily on Ray Bradbury's classic short story in which the entire history of mankind is affected by someone stepping on an insect.

Based on this background, you'd think this movie would be about how tiny, trivial events can have monumental, unpredictable consequences. I would have liked to see a film that truly addresses this possibility, since most time-travel movies ignore it. In "Back to the Future," for example, I could never believe that Marty would ever be able to set the past straight after his initial interference. Just his setting foot in the 1950s ought to have threatened his existence. Why? It's quite simple. Even though his parents will get married to each other, how can he be sure they'll have the same kids? "Back to the Future" set the standard for the genre by narrowing the scope of possible changes when dealing with time paradoxes.

The main problem with "The Butterfly Effect" is that it doesn't transcend this level but simply thinks that it does. Take the scene where Kutcher tries to stop the exploding mailbox. The chain reaction of events that result from this act may be drastic, but there is nothing unpredictable about it. He affects a crucial event in his life and the result is a straightforward, logical consequence, hardly akin to stepping on an insect and changing the course of man. The writers could have used far more imagination when devising the plot. Other changes that the character makes are unconvincing, such as the notion that he could prevent recurrent child abuse simply by threatening someone on a single occasion. That scene, in any case, is not a good example of little things affecting the world in big ways. It's an example of wishful thinking, plain and simple. When the scenario finally goes wrong, it happens because of the way Kutcher's character acts in the altered present, not because of the altered time-line itself.

The film's first forty-five minutes are somewhat more promising. These early scenes deal with Kutcher's childhood experiences, how he blacks out whenever his life becomes too traumatic. It's an intriguing setup that would have left me wondering where the story was headed had I not already seen the trailer, where I learned that it was going to be about time travel. On a dramatic level, the movie's biggest failing is that it never follows through with the tone it sets up in the beginning. We're promised a thriller, but the movie degenerates into what can best be described as an episodic black comedy, almost a dark version of "Bedazzled."

This is sort of entertaining, but I was hoping for more. I may have been influenced by the fact that shortly before seeing the film, I read "Bid Time Return," the Richard Matheson novel on which the 1980 movie "Somewhere in Time" is based. This book, even more than the movie adaptation, strongly leads us to suspect that the time-traveling experience occurs only in the protagonist's mind. "The Butterfly Effect" has a similar ambiguity that it never truly addresses, perhaps because mainstream audiences would have found such an approach too disturbing.

You may notice that I have so far not talked about the acting, and I will resist the temptation to rag on Kutcher's performance more than others have done. He's not terribly engaging, but it's not all his fault (especially considering that his character is played by other actors for a good portion of the film). The real problem lies at the level of the script, which doesn't give Kutcher much to do. The film is so plot-driven it doesn't spend much time on its characters.

Ultimately, this movie has nothing new to contribute to the time travel genre. While it tries to pass itself off as a twist on the old premise, it quickly becomes a fairly routine thriller about a man tweaking his past. I hope that the next time they decide to do such a film, they'll leave cool metaphors like butterfly effects to a script that is truly willing to deal with such concepts instead of simply pretending to.

I was rather surprised with this movie, not expecting much from something with Ashton Kutcher in the lead. I just can't seem to him picture with him any kind of real acting ability. I just always see a Michael Kelso. But, Butterfly Effect changed my opinion a little.

The Butterfly Effect is another one of those science fiction stories in which characters, distraught with their present reality, can change that reality by revising their past decisions, even slightly.

Evan (Kutcher), as a young boy, endured a few childhood trauma along with his three childhood friends, Kallie, Tommy, and Lenny, such as his friend's pedophile father (Stolz). Evan has some kind of problem, however, that causes him to blackout during these traumatic, life changing events. These past events obviously effect the present as they mold the person the four children will become. And it isn't always pretty.

As a psychology major, Evan is inspired to study memory patterns, and consequently, discovers his neurological knack for forcing himself to remember things. When he does, he is able to transplant himself back to that time (through the help of his journals that he kept since he was 7) and, still knowing what he knows in the present, is able to alter the past, and also the present. So, his goal is to make all of his friends' and mother's lives at least as perfect as they can be by wiping out as much of the bad stuff as he possibly can. But not everything works well on the first try. In other words, it is an opportunity to be able to "redo" his past. Evan is able to give everyone a second (and third, and fourth) chance at life. Now granted, the story is a cool idea, but the idea may've been pushed too far. Why are the possibilities for a second chance endless? Why can't there be some point, or at least some possbility of Evan not always being able to go back, or not being able to revise things?

The problem with this movie at first glance is that the complexity of the story creates problems with details. For instance, in one of the times that Evan goes back, he is able to make some of the friend's life nearly perfect. Say, Evan is able to start off this perfection by going back to age 7, then we would not expect the bad events that took place at age 11 to involve him, as his line of perfection would've already been set in place. Yet, the journal entries never change. And that's a problem with this movie. Evan's life may change, but his journal entries never seem to, not even after his age of revision.

The second problem with this movie is that it is so excruciatingly stereotypical. When Evan improves the present for he and Kallie, she is the sorority girl and he the frat boy. They live in a nice place, he drives a brand new luxury car. When things go well for Tommy, he is a sweater vest wearing campus crusader for Christ type. Evan's roommate, Thumper, is the by-the-book version of "goth." There is no character that simply seems to exist as just normal, and not the stereotypical version of perfection or being utterly dismal. In fact, this movie may best be titled, "Equations for Being So Stereotypically White." But then again, mainstream pop culture exists on lumping people into one generalized group or another.

As a sigh of relief at least, thank goodness this did not turn out to be another piece of obnoxious teen movie garbage.

OK it's a bit to late to write a comment about this movie but let me tell you about it. Don't by any means watch the theatrical version!!! The first time I watched the movie was when I rented the Director's cut version. I was fascinated, really stunned by this movie. It kept me wondering why I haven't heard of that movie before and the answer was that people didn't see the Director's cut but the Theatrical version instead. Oh yes there are no similarities between those versions. The theatrical version is a light version if you like, a version at the end of which you will say "well OK nice movie", but(!!!!) the Director's cut gives the real meaning of the movie. It changes the whole idea, it adds new scenes and omits others, it changes the whole movie with a new outstanding ending and the plot in general is more concrete!!! I won't say anymore so jump to the Director's cut at once and if by any chance the TV broadcasts the theatrical version just change the channel!!!

I found "The Butterfly Effect" to be a pretty good movie for the most part. I saw nothing wrong with the acting and had no preconceived notions about Ashton Kutchner to poison my view (have never seen the Dude, Where's My ... movies). He played Evan well given how one would react to these events if they were to occur to one in real life.

The storyline was good and the powers that be brought the events together well, for the most part. The movie kept me interested throughout, although the mysterious events (blackout moments of Evan's childhood that are not shown to the viewer), while well hinted at before and after the blacked-out portion, were not handled well. Let me elaborate. Evan's friends would not tell him what had actually happened during these periods (for one reason or another). This, I felt, was a downfall of the storytellers. While it supposedly produced the effect on the viewer in wanting to know what happened, it left in me a feeling of unbelievability in the plot (somewhat).

As to what the Butterfly Effect is and Chaos Theory in general, note the following quote: "The flapping of a single butterfly's wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month's time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn't happen. Or maybe one that wasn't going to happen, does. (Ian Stewart, Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos, pg. 141)".

Chaos Theory can be explained using the Butterfly Effect but it's relation to the movie is in name only. I say this because the wing flaps (childhood events in the movie) are HUGE events in anybody's childhood. Changing these events would, of course, have a huge impact on any child's later life. So, this butterfly is one whopping big one.

The movie has some inexplicable events and doesn't tie everything up neatly for us, the viewer. This is a good thing in that it leaves them open for discussion as to what there meaning is. This is bad in that the lesser-thinking viewers may be left scratching their heads and disliking the movie because of it.

It all relates to the idea of time-travel and what happens in the original time-line. Will it, in fact, be affected by the subsequent time travel events? I don't want to get into the specific details as it would give spoilers. I can only say that these are the things that one is left pondering.

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT- THEATRICAL CUT (4 outta 5 stars)

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT- DIRECTOR'S CUT (3+ outta 5 stars)

Now normally I tend to prefer movies that let the writer/director tell the story that they want to without having to water it down for mass consumption. In this case I have to say that the ending they they were forced to re-shoot for the theatrical release of this movie is a much more emotional, resonant and appropriate ending than the bleak, cold and grotesque finale they had originally planned. On the US DVDs you get the choice of which version to see (foreign editions only have the less compelling director's version)... so North American viewers can make up their own mind about which ending they prefer. I would suggest watching the theatrical cut first... and then check out the director's cut... which would you prefer to think of as the "real" ending?

As for the movie itself... don't be put off by the idea of Ashton Kutcher in the lead role. He does quite a good job in a serious part quite different from his usual TV persona. He plays a college student who, having been plagued by mental blackouts all his life, devotes himself to the study of human memory. Eventually he finds that by re-reading old journal entries he can will himself back in time to experience the events he had blacked out... and even CHANGE THEM using the knowledge that his older self possesses. Unfortunately one small change in the past causes some HUGE ramifications in his present day world. Can't say too much more about the plot without giving away the many fun surprises. Believable performances and a basic seriousness give the film an urgency that is sometimes missing in modern fantasy films of this type.

With over 1000 reviews, chances are not many are going to read this, but I just have to say how much I love this film, which I just discovered about a month ago, and have now watched 7 times, once the theatrical version and six times, the directors version, which I greatly prefer, as it fits the overall script better and what was intended originally. I am 70, and hardly expected this or any new movie to make it to my top 10, especially since I am not a fan of fantasy or time travel movies generally, but "The Butterfly Effect" has become my 4th favorite of the nearly 3000 films I have viewed in my life. The movie has many disturbing scenes, but the pace is amazingly fast, the acting excellent for the most part, and the characters physical continuity from childhood through adolescence to adult was the best I have ever seen in a film with 3 separate periods. The plot has been so thoroughly reviewed, I won't waste time telling the details again. Suffice it to say, if you can handle the elements of child abuse and animal mistreatment, (not graphically depicted) and can ignore the critics and watch the film at least twice, I think you will appreciate what a great film this is. And I have recently watched the director's commentary and deleted scenes, which further illustrate what an ambitious film this is. It should have been a classic, and it shows how off-base the critic's fraternity can be. Roger Ebert was fairer to the film than most of the others among major critics, but I think they were determined to knock the film because they didn't like Ashton Kutcher, and the film came out in January, which predisposes most critics to expect a bomb. Do yourself a favor if interested, and rent this Infinifilm. If you like an intense and entertaining movie experience, you won't be disappointed, and you may be enthralled, as I was, and hope you will be.

The film that was underrated. The film that only appeared on US cinemas. The Butterfly Effect.

I think Ashton Kutcher did a good job on this film, along with Andrea Treborn. I recall that Kutcher has never made a film like this, and his first thriller was somewhat peculiar. Not just any old thriller, this one would keep you on the edge of your seat from the start to the finish. A weird title however, but the tag line explains all. Change one thing, change everything. I think this automatically gets you thinking, and as the film proceeds, it gets harder. You like thinking? Get this film, because you will not want to miss it!

A troubled young boy with the memory issues (Ashton Kutcher) is suddenly able to transport himself back into moments from his past, change them for the better and return to the present. The changes he makes affect not only his life but the lives of his close friends. The problem is - he never knows how exactly the changes made in the past would affect the present. The idea of the movie is anything but new - we all read Ray Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder," an unforgettable short story about a time-traveler who steps on a prehistoric butterfly and causes the horrible changes in the fate of the whole humanity. We've seen the films Frequency, Groundhog Day, and Memento - Butterfly Effect borrows a lot from them. BE is not as good as they are but it is a compelling and intriguing movie about making choices and taking responsibilities. I recommend watching director's cut with the ending completely different from the theatrical release. The ending that I saw really made this movie for me.

Very respectable even if not completely successful effort for Kutcher to do something different than Cheaper by the Dozen (2003), My Boss's Daughter (2003), and Just Married (2003).

It's a pity, I still ask me how is it possible to waste such a brilliant idea. From the beginning, the plot catch you, it seems twisted (it is), but easy to understand, and it is effective. Going on it fall into the banality, always worse going to the end. It seems like they had this starting idea, but they were not able to evolve it for the rest of the movie, so it remain as an embryo. It become obvious and often pathetic. The only message escapes is the classic and obvious:"if you want to change the future it could be worse". Another problem: actors! Incredibly not able to act, Kutcher (I don't know if famous in the States) is not "strong" enough to have such a responsibility, Amy Smart is beauty, but just that, Melora Walters is always crying, very far from the good interpretations with P.T.Andersson. Somebody compare it to "Donnie Darko". No way! Another World!