57 Seconds

Audience Reviews

View More

Par H @Parhwy Feb 26 Rewatch? Absolutely not. I regret watching it. Should you watch it? Absolutely not. Why? 57 Seconds’ run time is 01:28:45 duration and it is 01:27:48 too long (the first minute is production house cards). I cannot recommend this film for any reason except to not watch it. Let’s start with a big issue. Let’s say you and a lady go home for sex, she changes her mind, and you use your magic time-ring to rewind time to get a yes from her, is that SA? No means no always, yeh? That happens early on in the film. I have enjoyed many, many films featuring Morgan Freeman as a sagacious know-man. Lucy. Seven. Bruce Almighty. This film feels like pro-bono work for an expunged crime. Casting. Lord. Greg Germann as this level of bad guy? Aiyaiyai. Plot? Story? See more Mika K @MaxMustermann Jan 24 I made an account just to rate this movie. 57 Seconds is a mess: badly written, poorly thought out, and full of logic errors. The story keeps breaking its own rules and only works because characters act stupid. It tries to be clever, but it’s just frustrating and sloppy. Honestly, a complete waste of time. Just like the movies Script, this review was created in 5min with the use of AI. See more Farah R. @Farah Jan 5 57 Seconds benefits from an intriguing original story and a good cast, but it crumbles under the lack of proper funding required for it to fulfill its potential. Despite its shortcomings, it’s worth watching. See more Maximilian P @Magemax3 Dec 7 I think many people missed the point of this movie. You can see the drug use background in the plot, however people are focusing too much on the time travel aspect of it, to me it feels like the time travel is a simple metaphor for drug use in real life. It's a movie that shows how addiction changes you as a person and it conveys that to the viewer quite well. Yes the plot is a bit loose and they may not have written it properly but the underlying message is there and it's quite clear to me. So seeing as it really is a movie about addiction and not time travel, I definitely recommend giving it a watch but keep an open mind and look at it deeper than just the surface level time travel movie it seems to be at the very first glance. See more Marco L @decatur555 Nov 23 (CASTELLANO) A 57 Seconds se le ve la idea desde lejos: un artefacto que rebobina menos de un minuto y un protagonista tentado a usarlo para arreglar la vida a base de intentos. Como punto de partida funciona: es sencillo, directo, casi juguetón. El problema es que la película se queda ahí, en el truco, sin exprimirlo del todo ni tomar riesgos. Josh Hutcherson aporta nervio y cierta torpeza entrañable; Morgan Freeman cumple con esa autoridad tranquila que te compra cualquier exposición. La química está, la puesta en escena es limpia y el ritmo no decae, pero todo avanza sobre raíles conocidos. Cuando amaga con ponerse incómoda —ética, poder, responsabilidad—, levanta el pie. El dispositivo de los "57 segundos" da para momentos curiosos y algún chispazo de ingenio. Aun así, la película prefiere el camino fácil: repetir, corregir y seguir. Falta esa sensación de consecuencia real, de "cada decisión pesa", que convierte un high-concept en algo memorable. Aquí todo es disfrutable… y olvidable a la misma velocidad. Se agradece que no se enrede con tecnicismos y vaya al grano. También que tenga un pulso de serie B sin complejos: entra, entretiene y no molesta. Pero cuando asoma el discurso contra los gigantes farmacéuticos o la tentación de reescribir la propia vida, la película se queda en titular. Al final, 57 Seconds es eso que pones una noche y no te enfada: ligera, simpática por momentos, un poco lista de más en otros. Si vas con el modo "pasar el rato", cumple. Si buscas algo que retuerza el cerebro o el corazón, te sabrá a poco. (ENGLISH) 57 Seconds has a hook you get right away: a gadget that rewinds just under a minute and a lead tempted to use it to "fix" life by trial and error. As a starting point, it works—simple, direct, almost playful. The issue is it mostly stays there, relying on the trick without really pushing it. Josh Hutcherson brings jittery charm; Morgan Freeman delivers that calm authority that sells any exposition. The pace is fine, the staging clean, but the movie walks familiar tracks. When it teases tougher ground—ethics, power, responsibility—it backs off. The 57-second reset yields a few neat beats, but the film favors the easy route: repeat, correct, move on. It’s missing that sense of consequence—the feeling that choices actually cost—that turns a high concept into something memorable. Enjoyable, yes; forgettable, almost as quickly. I like that it avoids tech babble and gets to the point. The B-movie vibe isn’t a bug; it’s the pitch. Still, when it flirts with Big Pharma takedowns or the fantasy of rewriting your path, it stays at headline level. In the end, 57 Seconds is a perfectly okay late-night watch: light, occasionally clever, sometimes too pleased with itself. If you’re in the mood to pass the time, it works. If you want your brain—or your heart—twisted, it won’t do. See more Kristy F @RT90169892 Nov 1 I feel like it had a lot of potential. I liked the general idea and loved the cast. I feel like the lead actor was made out to be a chosen one of sorts- but there wasn't really enough lead in to suggest that. It felt like an average Joe was considered to be 'very special' without having earnt the title. Also the ending felt abrupt and more like he was being stubborn and reactive in his desire to refuse the offer, rather than logical. Maybe it just needed to be a bit longer to get the storyline a bit more cohesive. See more Read all reviews

57 Seconds

My Rating

Read More Read Less WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW POST RATING