Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Cissy Évelyne It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

zif ofoz This flick should have been entitled - "The Cookie Jar, The Hula- Hoop, and The Old Piano".This movie is just plain goofy! Actually the first part with the children at play in the countryside is interesting. You get a good look into each character and their friendship with one another. After the story jumps forward 15 years the plot becomes a partially science fiction comedy thriller thing. As I was watching I could not help laughing each time I saw the instrument for time travel. What a hoot! An old cookie jar, a metal hula hoop thing, and an old upright piano, some electric dryer vent tubing and a collection of wires. I thought, 'really', they expect the viewer to go with this?And then those long scenes of the adult girl and boys working and just being with one another. Completely boring! I actually felt sorry for the actors having to put their 'all' into this goofy story of reality, time travel, greed, and love. And it all comes to a head at that infamous well. Sorry Director U'Ren this one is a no no.

Rabh17 It's a Time Travel Story. And it's listed as Science Fiction, thereby.But Be Advised: It's NOT 'The Time Machine'. Nor is it your standard Hollywood Special Effects wagon-train.No Splashy special Effects. No Journeys to the end of Time. No Monsters. No Weird Paradoxes. No Dinosaurs either.It DOES has an element of Time Travel...but that's all. The rest of the Movie is a distillation of a very nice work of emotional Fiction. It's a Love story about Three Childhood friends in 1920's era England. Once you settle into the measured, dialogue driven pace of the story. I found it elegant, touching and memorable.Totally Girlfriend Friendly, BTW.

Liam Despite the low budget, the cinematography and the score are simply sumptuous. It is certainly enjoyable to watch, even if, in the final analysis, it lacks substance. There is a scene early on, a garden party by the side of a river, where the ribbons in Victoria's hair stand out with shocking luminosity. Combined with the orchestration, it certainly looks a bigger budget film than it is.But it doesn't feel that way. It feels constrained - perhaps by the cost of the props, of the settings, and of the time and resources available. The production company is known as "Sculptures of Dazzling Complexity" - but the story is all too simplistic, and while setting it in Cambridge between the wars allows that simplicity some breathing space, it still lacks the depth of true emotion that might be expected of a simpler time and place. The characters, for me, fail to live up to the film's title - they are rather too 2D. The adults have no more substance than the excellent child actors. Walking in to a Cambridge Physics lecture and asking the (under?) graduates there "Who likes Physics?" is a rather obvious example, but more fundamentally, I fail to feel the driving force behind Stephen's obsession, and I want - NEED to see a more fundamental tension between Conrad and Stephen, even if this is not overt.You might suppose that I might be snobbish about the "Time Machine" itself, but it has a certain charm, reminiscent of something by HG Wells, and being appropriate for something very much the production of a mad professor in a shed at the end of the garden. Yes, there is an element of early Dr Who about an image of biplane's appearing in the smoke filled jar of the device, and yes - it's a pianola, and yes, the gateway DOES rather look like a hula hoop (thus beating the Hudsucker Proxy to the invention!) but hey, it's fun, at least! But the are holes in the plot that are far from fun, and which a bigger, better resourced film might have avoided. Such as what was Robert's motivation for travelling back in time? How long was Victoria in the well, if she had time to scratch out a message? Why the dinner party and ball - did they have some costumes they simply had to use? And if Conrad went first, how did he avoid Robert's fate? Did Stephen and Conrad together waltz their way through the labyrinth between worlds? And quite WHAT is Victoria saying when she says farewell to the Professor? And then there is the multi-verse approach. I don't object to this particularly, but it weakens the film to set it NOT in our version. And for the differences to be so trivial and farcical as calling an apple an orange? Better to leave the whole "99% sure" theory unproven, I'd suggest! So, a brave effort, and not by any means unworthy, but if you want a time-travel Sci-Fi film that actually challenges the viewer to keep up, I'd watch Primer instead.

rosencharlie935 Note: This review contains mild spoilers - but nothing that would affect your enjoyment of the film.I saw Dimensions at the Cambridge Film Festival and ended up going to see it twice. It is a beautiful, thoughtful and interesting piece of work and evidently shot on a micro-budget. At the Q&A afterwards the filmmakers mentioned someone had said it is as if 'Merchant Ivory had made Primer'. I think that is a fair description.The acting is superb throughout, with some extremely emotional scenes and I found myself quickly falling into this strange little world 'Cambridge, 1921 - one of many'.On first viewing, I primarily watched the story unfold without really exploring the concepts that are woven into the film. As the film progresses (mild spoiler alert) it is unveiled that it is set in a parallel universe, that is almost identical to ours, save a few differences. This doesn't change the plot - it is almost as if it is just a bit of background information, another layer. I like that.This is definitely the sort of film that you need to engage with, and the group I was with discussed it in length after the first screening. One of my friends mentioned that (spoiler alert) she thought that the events in the film were all the product of the lead characters imagination. On second viewing, I must admit I think she has a point - but I like that the filmmakers leave it up to the audience to decide!The key is Stephen's (the lead characters) conversation with Dr Schmidt (a University lecturer). Throughout the film the two characters discuss 'reality'. Is it possible that we imagine our own reality, to fit with what surrounds us?I don't want to give the impression that the film is overly philosophical. I think it perfectly possible to ignore all the parallel universe / reality questions and just watch the characters interact and the plot develop in beautiful surroundings. The film is at heart a love story, albeit it one set in a sci-fi environment.Highly recommended.