enjoy it...

Rating: Null/10 (20 August 2004)

I liked this movie for various reasons, but mostly because it was engaging. I wanted to know what was going happen - I was interested in seeing how the main conflict would be resolved. It wasn't too hard to suspend disbelief long enough to get through the story, possible plot holes or not. There's even enough twists, riddles, and the like to make you think about the issues and themes presented in the movie.
I admit that this movie could have been done better by a different director and perhaps a different cast (though I liked the cast). For example, starting the movie where they did added little to enhance film. It even takes away from the suspense because now you now the character will at least make it to the scene in question. Also, the possessed versions of young Treborn could be more convincing. While I appreciated that their wasn't TOO MUCH explanation of what was going on (There's no scene where Evan spells out everything to "the viewers"), some might find it confusing.
I think the Directors Cut and the Theatrical version, while presenting almost the same picture, have two different themes. The theatrical version seems to be about the power of regret (not love). The director's cut dealt more with punishment (for messing with the timeline). I can see why it didn't make the theaters....WAY too controversial (especially the ending). Of the two, I preferred the Theatrical Version. It was not as harsh (I don't consider it being "realistic") but was not ridiculously lighthearted either.
I saw Scream 2 in the theaters and, when Sarah Michelle Gellar's character was attacked, I could not help but think "C'mon Buffy, you can beat this guy!" More to the point, several other people I heard other people after the movie saying the same thing. Actors/Actresses get typecast as character types and sometimes we - the viewers - have difficulty getting around this fact. This is what I think happened to Ashton Kutcher in many of the reviews of "The Butterfly Effect."
I think he did a good job portraying the character, Evan Treborn, and managed not to go "over the top" any time he had to emote. I believed that he was Evan Treborn, and forget his other lighter roles. If you don't think you can get past his previous portrayals of silly character, this may not be the movie for you.
It is tempting to go about the various plot twists, said plot holes, and so on...but this is not the place for it. The movie is a good "R" rated picture with not too much gore - though various types of violence and cruelty is performed off screen. The movie goes from being a chiller to a sci-fi mystery (with much less "chill").
I do want to point out to the people on this board that suggested that this movie was like a Simpson's Halloween episode that both the episode and this movie can trace their origins to a short story by Ray Bradbury (of which I forget the name, sorry). I think they are making a movie based on it though called "A Sound of Thunder," staring Ben Kingsley, Ed Burns and Catherine McCormack.
That Simpson's episode - where Homer accidentally turns his Toaster into a Time machine - is one of the funniest Halloween eps I've seen.
Also, someone said it didn't make sense that Evan remembered all the other realities he went through. It's an old sci-fi "rule" that the people who change the past remember the original timeline (even in lighter films, like "Back to the Future). In this movie, this is explained by his continual worsening brain hemorrhaging - he is having trouble instantly absorbing a lifetime of memories. It's also a neat plot device to show us what important things changed.