Comments on: NYFF Review: Time Travel Rom-Com ‘About Time’ Starring Rachel McAdams & Domnhall Gleeson

By: Santiago Draco

Santiago Draco — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Wow, there's so much hate in the world. A good movie comes along that is, ultimately, about love and caring for one another, and the haters, like Mr. Jonathan there, have to spread their hate like a thick sheen of slime on an otherwise caring piece of work. Let's not mention the equally clueless Mr. Toro.

By: AH.

AH. — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

I don't see what people find to R. McAdams. She's cute with a great smile. But as an actress she's really boring.

By: Alan B

Alan B — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

This ROMANTIC COMEDY is terrible because it isn't a Neil LaBute film and it wastes McAdams' "skill"? Terrific criticism, as always …

By: Alan B

Alan B — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

F*ck, my dick is so sore again. I'm gonna go eat nachos.

By: Sophie

Sophie — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

I thought this article was intelligent until it starting banging on about how the film is supposedly misogynistic. Why the hell does everything have to be about the representation of women? Just because Rachel McAdams wasn't the protagonist in this instance does not make the film anti-feminist. In fact, Tim TRIES to save his sister but doesn't in the end, so what does that say? That men are impotent and unsuccessful in what they try to achieve? No. "How they devise lies in order to create the illusion that all women" ALL women? Sorry, this is just one woman here. Generalisation flaw. Also, it's funny that you insult the men's performances even though they were extraordinary and compliment the women's? And why is McAdam's character a "fool"? Because she gets married, has children and does not prioritise her career above her family? I'm a feminist, but I don't get stupidly carried away. Don't read into it too much, just enjoy the film for what it is.

By: Dizl McAdams

Dizl McAdams — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

What a sad life you lead!

By: Norwegian Blue

Norwegian Blue — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

I wonder, do critics ever consider that some film makers make movies for viewers, and not for critics? This movie is the best of the year, period. I'm genuinely sorry for Mr. Toro that he wasn't equipped to enjoy it. (Oh, and as for his specific criticisms, he clearly misunderstood so many aspects of the movie, it would be easy, but pointless, to address them ad seriatim.)

By: Johnny

Johnny — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

The movie… it started off okay, but then it got too cute for its own good. Also, McAdams… WTF. She's 35 and she's playing opposite someone who looks 23. Horrible miscasting. They could have had any number of proper-age female actresses like Shailene Woodley or Brie Larson. Had to stop watching this movie in the middle because: preposterous. 1.5/5 in my book.

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

"At the end of the night, the space-time physics arenât enough to distract you from the question of whether Mary has given her consent to sex three times over the course of one night in three separate timelines."

Are you serious? Me and my fiance watched this movie, and not a single time was this ever a thought. I found this website through Metacritic, won't be coming back.

By: Cairo

Cairo — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Worst review ever, movie is great and yes, everybody thinks so… but you.

By: Jonathan L

Jonathan L — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

I agree, this film did not have the best view on women. Just a few examples; They called Mary's friend a prostitute, just for being more open with her sexual desire. The character Harry said that Tim could f*ck his daughter because she's already f*cking everyone else, so it doesn't matter (She's practically a prostitute already). Charlotte wasn't meant to be a good character either, and her proposal to f*ck Tim was viewed as slutty.

They are sort of saying, maybe not literary, that the only way to be a good women is to commit to one man. Madonna-wh*re complex all over. I'm not saying this was intentional, but can someone really say that it's totally untrue?

By: Nick

Nick — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

This review is so off base that it makes me question if the reviewer actually watched the movie or failed to and quickly made a crap review.
How about reviewing a movie for what it is and not trying to find shit in everything. Cheers

By: Carl von Maltitz

Carl von Maltitz — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Thanks for this review – watching the film I had only a very blurry notion of why it made me feel slightly sick, even though it had its funny and touching moments. Now I know better.

By: Willis

Willis — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

This review is probably one of the dumbest I've seen so far. While the film concentrates on the love romance between Domnhall gleeson and McAdams and things like enjoying everyday and every moment, the critic here focuses so much on woman's "vulnerability". You're harping on the wrong topic all together. Bad review.

By: Christian

Christian — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Gabe Toro: If I had the ability to clench my fists in a dark room in order to travel back in time, I would travel back 10 minutes so I wouldn't have to read this awful review.

By: Otha

Otha — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Haven't yet seen the movie BUT I love what you write about it and will look forward to seeing it nonetheless. I too find Rachel McAdams to be radiant and the movie preview DO seem to suggest that the movie supports deceptive relationships and men doing and saying absolutely ANYTHING to get into a woman's pants. The fact that he repeatedly goes back in time to learn how to modify his behavior is definitely lying to her by omission. BUT still I'm looking forward to seeing it. THANKS for a great review!

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

I feel sorry for Gabe Toro that he can't see the good in this movie. Tim would go back in time to make things better for Mary, not because he viewed her as an object but because he deeply cared for her and loved her. Somehow Gabe is trying to turn this into a sexist thing which never crossed my mind once before reading this review. If you can tell me for a fact you've never wanted to rewind 10 mins to erase something stupid you did or said, then I'd say you're lying. Just because this character has this ability and uses it doesn't make him sexist. Nor is he trying to build a relationship based on lies. If you've ever told your girlfriend "her butt didn't look big in those jeans", then you are just as much a liar.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

That is not at all what this movie is about and if you honestly think that it's that dull on message, then you're kidding yourself as a critic. Poor show, Gabe. I feel extremely sorry for you that you can't see the sheet excellence in this film. This is a great movie and nothing at all like Gabe has so mistakenly described. This is a must see!

By: Tony

Tony — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

The author of this review deconstructs the movie into pieces that on their own may seem
unethical like Tim going back in time two times to redo their first moment of making love. But
this comedy is about examining real life moments and finding out what a real red blooded male would likely do. Remember he is going back in time to make consenting love to her, where she made the first move, by the way. Thus I do not see him violating her at all. It is obvious the author Gabe is not interested in how life even among good people has minor nuances that can
only be made wrong by examining every second with a microscope. I hope Gabe lives up to what he expects in others. My guess his perspective on the world is off. Or he wears rose colored glasses. This movie had many special moments. I was reluctant to see this as Rachel McAdams has been a bit typecast as the romantic folly in way too many movies. But the story was touching, and the relationship between father and son was beautiful. Imagine being able to go back in time and relive just a few hours with your father when you were a young kid and he
was at the height of his health. I am so tired of time travel movies that are about saving the world. This seems very unrealistic, and overdone. Plus this movie puts a brake on this idea since you were not able for some reason to change world events. Thus we could get on with just a story about a boy, and a girl.

By: Laszlo Toth, Jr.

Laszlo Toth, Jr. — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

"…who apparently only uses his abilities to get laid."

Kinda like soldiers. Or football players. Or musicians. Or scientists. Or artists. Or writers. Or even… {gulp} film critics.

"Hollander, a gifted comedic actor, is stuck playing this character as a skimpy comic strip, bemoaning any and all indignities with a slump of his bathrobe-clad shoulders."

You\’re right. That doesn\’t sound like a playwright at all. Sounds more like a film critic. Unless… It sounds like a film critic who\’s a frustrated playwright?

By: Loic

Loic — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

Totally agree with you Sophie, this movie touched me and I don\’t see any anti-feminism here, just a good way to tell that you should enjoy all your moment with your family and enjoy life while you can. The story with his father is reaching me a lot too, that\’s maybe why I loved this movie.

By: my name

my name — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:58:54 +0000

The author of this article is just lacking sex, that is the reason for all this hate. You need more dick honey, that will put a smile on your spaghetti face. Tada!