|
Directed by: Eric Bress & J. Macyre Gruber Starring: Ashton Kutcher, Amy Smart, Ethan Suplee In The Butterfly Effect, Ashton Kutcher plays Evan, a brilliant sophomore in psychology that has been plagued by blackouts his entire life. As he reads through his journals, he learns that he can somehow travel back in time to the gaps in question and relive the situations. When painful reminiscing leads to the suicide of his childhood girlfriend Kayleigh (Amy Smart), he sets off on a quest back through time to make a better life for the both of them. Predictably, he fucks up. Screenwriters Bress & Gruber bring to life all the science five minutes worth of reading a Geocities site could teach you. Why even give the movie the title if you aren't going to at least marginally attempt to link it with the subject matter? We might as well retroactively retitle Armageddon, The First Law Of Thermodynamics. Besides that superficial gripe, we've seen this before. It's a tired premise. The supposed moral of these movies is that you can't play God. Well, in Hollywood terms, you can't play God, but once you learn this, you can play God just enough to tie up all the loose ends. Gruber and Bress faked an ending that involved Kutcher living out his days in an asylum, his journals and time-travelling merely sick delusions. That was okay, but these dipshits had to pull something poignant out of their rear end to shoehorn in one more time jump for Evan to save the day. Every character is so cut-and-dry. Tommy, for example, goes from a scheming youth deliquent that sets dogs on fire ("Ruff! Anybody order a hot dog?") to a clean-cut youth councellor without the bad influence of deadbeat dad. The assumption that parents alone can turn rays of goodness into demonic little poo poo-stirrers is preposterous. So the kids wouldn't have started smoking or blowing things up if their dad hadn't beat them? And subsequently, one speech from a possessed little boy can make a pedophile change his evil ways? Another example is the fat Goth (Ethan Suplee) who gets to gently caress a hot dominatrix-looking chick in every scene. In real life, fat Goths don't get laid. Ever. Every character Evan meets recognizes him immediately, as if only as much time had passed in their lives as had taken place in the movie. Every character talks about "that time at the junkyard" or "that time in the basement" or "that time when we blew the baby up" as if nothing notable had happened since or without Evan's involvement. Amy Smart is a terrible actress. She can't even play a sorority girl with any conviction, and I'm sure that's really stretching her acting chops. She had a scene where she had to run down a dark street at night crying, and she decided to be creative and add in some hysterical arm-flapping. It was so lame I had to laugh. It reminded me of Scary Movie, except for that part where I laughed. The Butterfly Effect is a failure on practically every level. I'll give it two for the unintentional humour, as when Ashton wakes up as an amputee. lol punk'd RATING: 2 PROS: Unintentionally hilarious CONS: Bad script and acting, inplausable logic ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:32 |
|
|
God, this movie was so awful, I walked out. It fails on every possible level. 0.5/5
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 20:24
|
|
|
I thought the movie was decent due to the simple fact that Ashton Kutcher played a character that wasn't Kelsoesque for once. He is the exact same character in everthing he's done except this. He did as much with his acting as a script where a fat goth gets laid would allow him to do.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 20:24
|
|
|
Despite the review by Nadzilla, I really enjoyed this movie and thought Kutcher was good in his first serious role. It wasn't even close to making the list of my favorite movies but I am still going to give it a 3/5.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 20:44
|
|
|
i have to say that i was pleasanstly surprised by this movie. kutcher did his job. he wasn't mind-blowingly outstanding, but he was a solid actor in a solid script. he and his younger counterpart did good, all things considered. i like that the "don't play God" message (injected briefly but wonderfully by Keith Rennie) gets undone by Evan's character. with his final insight into the nature of his life, the message changes to, 'you can make a difference, you just have to sacrifice.' he gives up on the 'perfect' life with Kayleigh to save her and her brother, and becomes comfortable with the life he was already headed for. granted, the script has some bad points. how was a little kid supposed to scare the crap out of an adult and keep him from being a pedophile? what's the deal with Evan's note in the doctor's office? it makes a interesting 'tie' to the begining of the film, but doesn't make much sense. other than little quibbles like this, though, it was an interesting film, well-executed if not perfectly nailed.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2004 02:38
|
|
|
despite its near limitless plot holes, i thought that at least this movie was entertaining in watching ashton's character trying to set things right and how his actions in the past would effect his future. It was sort of like a real time Back to the Future movie where we get to see the consequences of everything he changes in the past. I admit that the movie is much racier and edgier than it needed to be and probably lost a lot of viewers on just how strong some of the content of the movie was. But other than that not a bad flick at all, you just have to take it a face value and not try to read any more in to it than it is offering. 3/5
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2004 09:46
|
|
|
There are countless other films in this genre that were awful, but this movie isn't nearly as bad as everyone makes it out to be. When dealing with time travel, hollywood can be extremely loose in keeping things plausible. But Butterfly Effect does a good job of keeping the effects of each incident believable. I'm sure if you really sit down and try to pick each bit apart you'll end up dissapointed, but why would you? The way the script ties the blackouts with the flashbacks keeps it interesting. For a genre piece I was pleasantly suprised. I guess it probably helped that I went in expecting it to be the biggest train wreck of the century. Maybe it needed more ominous ghosts in burnt bunny outfits. 3/5
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2004 23:58
|
|
|
Could have easily been a different actor than Aston. The early parts of the movie were TOO intense; I could hardly take it. Like the dog being burned to death in a bag or when they blow up the baby . It wasn't that great. Good idea, but probably could have been done better. 2/5
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2004 05:32
|
|
|
When I first saw this movie I liked it, but once you go back and think about it, it's really not that great. All the points Nadzilla brought up are quite valid and very true. Another thing that sort of bugged me was how Kutcher's character got bombarded with memories whenever he altered something but yet he still seemed unable to remember anything. Also the premise of him living out his life as someone and then suddenly becoming the character before he starting loving with his own past seemed weird (for instance living his life as an rear end in a top hat fratboy and then suddenly becoming a smart guy again), but I guess that's one of the side effects of time travel movies. Kutcher was good in his role, though nobody else was too great except perhaps his father (who only has a couple lines and one scene). I'll give it a 2.5, though I'm not sure why.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2004 08:33
|
|
|
I actually liked this movie, showed that Ashton Kutcher is capable of playing non-retarded roles. And I didn't think his acting job was all that bad, he was very well suited for this movie. Interesting concept overall but the only downer is that the flashbacks did get very old, could have ended it a bit more abrupt, rather than play out all the various scenarios
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2004 13:56
|
|
|
I thought this movie was way above the usual crap Hollywood turns out. I wasn't really impressed with any of the players, but they didn't make me laugh either. The story was pretty good. I really enjoyed when he met his father. What I really really liked though was that the ending wasn't really happy. I'm a sucker for not so perfect endings. 4/5
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2004 06:59
|
|
|
loving horrible movie. I especially liked the part where things are finally getting back together and the fat kid stabs his friend in the back with a glass shard, not much reasoning in that. Ugh and the worst part, my roomate loved it 0/5
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2004 21:42
|
|
|
i love this movie. i see all the plot holes and the occaisional really cheesy line ("exactly your age now that I come to think about it"), but I dont care. The movie was interesting, fun, had some message, and you cant tell me the cokehead chick from magnolia wasnt good as kutchers mother. 5/5
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2004 21:27
|
|
|
This movie was depressing. Almost every alternate Kutscher went to was one long, depressing screw-up. I almost walked out during the prison segment. I had almost given up hope until they pulled it together in the last 10 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2004 21:20
|
|
|
I really liked it, not because of its science fiction (which I admit was poor) or the actors ability to act, but because its an easy movie to watch, it doesn't take rocket science to understand, and is a very good movie for general family viewing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2004 23:46
|
|
|
It was a lot better than I was expecting, but I was expecting poo poo. The movie had major plot holes and was really loving predictable, but I thought it was a lot creepier than I was expecting and because of that it kind of drew me in. I don't think the characters/actors did much for me but the mood and tone were pretty absorbing. Anyway I walked out of it satisfied. 3.5-4, somewhere around those lines. P.S. The best part is in prison where the guy goes "Blood on my knife, or poo poo on my dick!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2004 06:37
|
|
|
quote:dj_clawson came out of the closet to say: Agreed except for the prison segment. Carlos flipping out and praising Jesus was the highlight of the movie. Also, did this movie make any feel mad while watching it? I brought that up to my co-worker and she said the same thing. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2004 08:45
|
|
|
I saw the director's cut, and do not know if it differs greatly from the theatrical version. I don't have much to say, just felt like clarifying that my vote may not reflect the theatrical version. 5.0/5.0
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2004 05:20
|
|
|
quote:Keshik came out of the closet to say: The theatrical version mainly differs in the ending. Kutcher's character merely does something else to set things "right." In either case, everything gets tied up (perhaps not perfectly, but still under 2 hours). I just saw the movie again tonight. I greatly enjoyed it, though if you're familiar with the concept or like to pick apart plot holes you might not like it too much. I can't decide which version I like better, however. Voted 4/5 because a)I thought it was loving great but b)I really don't think it made it into my top 5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2004 05:42
|
|
|
Not that bad of a movie, just don't go in expecting a whole lot. Don't think about it too much either. I like that the movie doesn't really bother to explain how he's able to go back in time, because any explanation would have been complete BS. It'll be best if you don't think about it too much either. It's predictable, but still fun to watch even though you've guessed how something is going to turn out after he changes something. Kutcher does a pretty good job, I like seeing actors break out from traditional roles (loved seeing Jim Carrey in his serious stuff, too bad it didn't really work out for him). Most of his supporting cast is pretty good too. All the kids played their roles well. The ending is a total copout, it should have ended with either the 2nd to last scenario, or the one before that. I personally think the best ending would have been the 2nd to last, if he'd ended up like his dad in the nuthouse. I'd been interested to see the director's cut, but apparently its not too different from the regular version, so I probably won't bother. 3.5 I expected very little, but was pleasantly suprised.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2004 07:16
|
|
|
quote:natashafatale came out of the closet to say: Yes, he did...but he did it TERRIBLY. I can't believe he wasn't fired off this set for being such a terrible actor, it amazes me that this got made with him in this role. Script seemed solid, but the acting just took it down so many notches it's unbelievable. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2004 08:34
|
|
|
quote:Omicr0n came out of the closet to say: I thought this movie was really well done, and it depressed me quite a bit after seeing it. I thought the acting was just fine. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2004 05:57
|
|
|
A friend of mine saw it and thought it was absolutely amazing. He wanted to see it again, so I went with him a few nights later to see it. I thought it was a pretty good movie, but nothing really amazing. Their are some plot holes and some times where the characters do stuff that makes you wonder "Where the hell did THAT come from??", like Evan kills Tommy, his childhood friend, or the little fat kid stabbing tommy in back when he was told to "cut the rope" . Also, I thought the ending wasn't that great. Even with the bad points, there are lots of plot twists and times where I was wondering what the hell what would happen next. I seriously thought the movie was going to end when Evan tried to drown himself. Overall, I give it a 3/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2004 20:15
|
|
|
Just saw it and was very happy with it. It did enough things right to cover up some of the things it didn't do too well and it was a pretty innovative plot considering the amount of drek in drama films we have been given recently. I'd say a 4 out of 5 is just about right
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2004 07:34
|
|
|
I thought it turned out pretty drat good for the director's first major attempt at a movie. I thought it was really intense and it had me biting my nails a few times. I also enjoyed some of the tie ins they managed to weave together, although some parts involving Evan really pissed me off. (Hay guys lets take the blockbuster that's been in your dad's thermos for 6 years and use it to threaten a big adult whilest spouting obsenities. Surely I won't accidentally ignite the dynamite and accidentally fling it in the direction of my soon to be girlfriend!) The alternate ending works a hell of a lot better, but it was way too much of a downer to be used in the theatrical version, mighta caused a few bloodied wrists after the audience members realize that no matter what they do, they're always going to have to deal with poo poo they can't control, and they can't really change anything. Oh, and for all you people who disliked the ending, check out the two that the studio wanted them to choose. (The happy sappy ending and the stalker ending.) I liked it, will recommend to friends on lonely nights. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2004 09:19
|
|
|
Gave it a 3. Saw this in the theater (good date, so maybe I was biased towards it) and was pleasantly surprised. I agree with the problems, but the moment in the movie where I knew I liked it was the one I'm spoilering: Evan spends the whole film saying he's doing all this to make Kayleigh happy. When he finally succeeds, he's an amputee. He is miserable enough to attempt suicide, but as soon as he finds one person (his mom) who isn't better off in this scenario, he totally changes it, despite having succeeded in finally making Kayleigh happy! That part just made me like it, because it felt genuine and real to me, and made it clear that Evan wasn't a saint, but a normal guy who wants to the do the right thing, but not at such a terrible personal cost. Now I have to rent the DVD for the alternate endings. Thanks for the tip.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2004 21:46
|
|
|
I enjoyed it for what it was, and didn't go too much into it. Some of the scenes were pretty intense like the Dog Bag, and Pedo Film but it was pretty decent. I was entertained by it, and it was fun seeing a non-linear hollywood movie for once, however the theatrical ending seem forced and cheesy. If anyone could tell me the alternate DVD ending I would be thankful. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2004 05:21
|
|
|
The director's cut ending is Evan is told that everything was just a delusion and there were never any journals, but then he watches some home movies his mom brought to the mental hospital for him and is able to go back to when his mom was in the hospital about to give birth and strangle himself with his umbilical cord. This is why the psychic said that he had no lifeline and wasn't meant to be. Because he never existed, Kayleigh and Tommy didn't have a reason to stick around with their pedo dad and moved in with their mom and ended up happy. Lenny ended up with Kayleigh again. I just watched it tonight expecting it to be really mediocre. Apart from the terrible child actors (especially Tommy), I was able to enjoy it quite a bit. [old]3.5[/old] Hell, I'm feeling generous: 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2004 10:06
|
|
|
just watched the director's cut (finally). i had no idea the ending was that different. this movie has a few problems. there are some plot holes. the acting falls down occasionally, but now that i see what was supposed to happen, i have exactly one poo poo-load more respect for the writer and director. if they'd let the original ending air in theatres, i think this movie would have made way more of an impact. i also suspect that kutcher and/or his agent chose the movie partly for that ending, to show that he had a serious side. i don't know if i believe it, but still, could have worked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2004 07:47
|
|
|
time to get flamed:: I enjoyed the movie, simple as that. It definatly entertained me, i wasnt expecting some superstar blockbuster. There were a few plot holes, but poo poo happens. The directors cut explains a few things (the note at the begining ect). I thought ashton did a pretty drat good job, cant say much for amy smart other than she plays a good cracked out hooker.. Amy smart's younger self really didnt fit the role either but.. whatever. Despite that, due to the entertainment factor, i give it a 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2004 17:58
|
|
|
the plot was very simple, the ending blunt. Very little depth. So it loses one star. It loses another star because of my complete moral objection to Ashton Kutcher as a person. Boy, do I hate him. It loses another half a star for having no loving point. 2.5/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2004 09:15
|
|
|
My Netflix copy did not contain the theatrical version. The director's cut made my wife cry and I am sure had a similar affect on a lot of people. How did the theatrical version end? Here are the differences from the director's cut (ripped from hirex's BTB post) SPOILERS!!! (duh) quote:The Canadian version of the movie contains scenes of nudity. pollo fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jul 19, 2004 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2004 17:12
|
|
|
This movie was just sick and twisted enough to make one of the girls watching cover her eyes. Yes, a few corny lines but I was entertained the entire way through. 4.5
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2004 21:06
|
|
|
I really, really, disliked this movie. Never has there been a movie that's tried so hard to be so depressing that wasn't made with a black and white camera on a college campus. The readings on the Angst-o-Meter are throught he roof. The Butterfly Effect takes every cliched, weepy, event that could happen to someone and puts it in a movie. Go ahead and look at the "angst" section on fanfiction.net. It'll match up pretty soundly with Butterfly Effect. This movie includes... 1. Suicide 2. Child Abuse 3. Fat Child abuse 4. Dying Mother 5. Doomed love 6. psychosis 7 Father trying to kill child 8. My friend is crazy! 9. Puppies on fire 10. Broken promises  11. Fatgoth. Speaking of, what was up with fatgoth? Gunther sure was a great fatfriend until you got your original fatfriend back. Then you just kinda forgot about him. It was sad how they were making it out like Ethan Suplee actually had some type of part in this movie. He was really just there to be fat, dressed badly, and to have sex (TWICE). In conclusion, this movie sucks, slit your wrists and watch Ghost World if you really want something to angst you up. Rating: 1.5
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2004 23:04
|
|
|
quote:Aquasol came out of the closet to say: Hahahaha. I'm going to watch that alternate ending before I return the movie because that is loving absurd. I thought it was really decent. Ashton Kutcher wasn't horrible, just serviceable. Especially to the prision inmates am i rite. I can suspend my disbelief that Tommy is not only half the size of Evan but somehow posesses superhuman strength. I can suspend my disbelief to think his character is able to read his journals and travel in time. I can even suspend my disbelief to think in some hosed up alternate universe Kutcher is smarter than me. What I cannot accept is that FAT DISGUSTING GOTH gently caress having sex with any woman remotely attractive that he did not first drug or injur. Every time Kelso woke up and the Revolting Blob was having intercourse, my brain threw up inside my head. The movie itself would have been much more satisfying had it ended with Evan a mental patient. Ranting and raving sounding just like a crazy person. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2004 16:45
|
|
|
what is the theatre ending to this if I may ask?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2004 00:38
|
|
|
This movie could have been worse, much much worse. Aston Kutcher, while he is not made for serious roles, didn't do such a bad job as I had expected. My real complaint is how it dragged on. THere are two places to possibly end, the independent films way, and the hollywood way. Of course, you get a nice little hollywood ending where no one has to think about the movie afterwards...at all. If they had just cut the movie off 20 minutes earlier than they did, I would have enjoyed it much more. Rating: 2.5 Edit: Beaten to the rant about the ending... Garibaldi fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Jul 27, 2004 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2004 03:49
|
|
|
quote:¶1|z came out of the closet to say:
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2004 04:19
|
|
|
After watching the first cut I forgot about the movie a little afterward. Having now watched the Director's cut I found it very moving and I find it popping into my head every now and again. Because I think this difference is so important I'll be reviewing the cuts in comparison to each other instead of just one version. The first cut is terribly inconsistant for technical reasons I won't get into for spoiler's sake, but the biggest was the of the tone. This movie is dark. Dogs are set on fire, children are molested, fathers strangle their sons and babies...well, they're not happy either. Consistantly, parts are removed from the movie that make better use and transition between these scenes, and it made use of an ending that pleases the most people, but at the same time makes the movie entirely forgetable. Not only that, but this ending makes the movie seem a little dumber to me, since it defies several of its own rules and grabs one deus ex machina. Because of this ending the movie is messy, as many subtle themes are left hanging or diminished. When this version ended, I walked out of the theater with my friends thinking about whether we would go to Denny's or the chinese restaraunt. The Director's cut makes full use of these thought-to-be minor scenes to both keep the strings together and to build tension until the abysmally dark ending. When this ended, two people I was watching it with were in tears ( to be honest, when Tommy mentioned sacrifice in the final montage I felt it strongly in my gut, too ) and my mother, who can be quite sensitive, was upset for the rest of the night. I guess that's all I can say that hasn't been posted already. I don't think everyone will like the DC, but if you thought the initial cut was rather mediocre I hope you'll catch the other someday. Original Cut - 2.5 Director's Cut - 4
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2004 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:32 |
|
|
Horrible movie. However, the movie was totally redeemed for me when Ashton Kutcher crushes the puny granola bar with his amazing prosthetic hand. I plead for someone to make an animated gif of this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2004 08:39
|
|