57 Seconds (2023) User Reviews

How significant can 57 seconds be...?

[paulclaassen · 4/10 · 25 October 2023]

How significant can 57 seconds be? Watch the movie and find out.

Franklin Fox (Josh Hutcherson) lost his sister a few years ago when she overdosed on medication pills. Since then, he started a blog to warn people about the effects of the drug she used - and similar ones - and wants to bring the man responsible for manufacturing the pills to justice.

Anton Burrell (Morgan Freeman) invented the Tri-Band, which monitors a person's well-being. Franklin takes on a job just so he can meet Burrell at the presentation of his next generation Tri-Band Five. Burrell refuses Franklin an interview for his blog, but when Franklin saves Burrell's life during an assassination attempt at the presentation, Burrell grants him his wish.

After the assassination attempt, Franklin finds Burrell's ring, and discovers its powers whereby he can turn back time by 57 seconds when he touches the ring. And so Franklin uses the ring to his own advantage - financially, and romantically. He starts a relationship with Jala (Lovie Simone), and boy, do they move fast!

Franklin pursues his quest to avenge his sister's death and bring Sig Thorenson (Greg Germann) to justice. Despite some good moments, I had several issues with the film. With a runtime of only 99 minutes, the film felt rushed and unpolished. The love story between Franklin and Jala felt so forced and unromantic, it became almost annoying. I also found all the characters immature, as if the script was written by a teenager with his perspective on adults. In fact, many of the characters are childish. They are shallow and one-dimensional.

The film lacks suspense, intrigue and overall motivation. Morgan Freeman was by far the best actor here, but his character took a back seat for most of the movie when I actually thought he was supposed to be the lead. Look, its not a bad movie so go ahead and give it a go.

A twist on Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

[fallonmassey · 4/10 · 2 October 2023]

This movie is alright, but derivative.

If you like the concept, but want to see a much better movie, check out "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, 2010".

The acting is much better, but I don't want to totally dismiss this film.

The concept is top drawer! Combining AI with a time device, would be a total game changer.

The AI would detect danger at a speed humans aren't capable of, then throw you back 57 seconds to avoid the danger, either manually or by the AI.

It's a genius concept, used a lot in the film, less the AI, he does everything manually.

I would recommend this film on the concept alone, however, it's a waste of Morgan Freeman's talent.

But hey, everybody can use an extra paycheck, LOL!

One and done

[rws_20 · 5/10 · 10 October 2023]

One of those films that's not a bad watch if you can't find anything else.

Yeah, it has a bit of a stupid plot, but if you just look at it from the point of view of a bit of innocent sci-fi fun, then it's an OK watch to pass the time.

The script could have been more solid, it definitely felt rushed and like it could have used another draft or two.

Isn't really any rewatch value there for me, it's a one and done type film.

Just don't go into it expecting an avant-garde sci-fi masterpiece and take it for what it is. People are judging way too seriously in these reviews. It's not trying to be Oscar-worthy, it's just a breezy sci-fi thriller.

"Your eyes are bigger than your stomach"

[rafaews · 3/10 · 1 October 2023]

Wow. I'm mind-blown.

Do you know when you are watching a science fiction movie or any movie really and you have those moments of amazement thinking "Wow! I feel like I'm getting smarter after every scene!", "This is so well written!" "This is so ingenious!"? Well, unfortunately, the complete opposite just happened...

It's remarkable how the decision makers involved in this project were able to set up this big scope involving as characters apparently two of the worlds most influential beings, the tech genius entrepreneur! And the pharmaceutical giant!, with the MIT graduate 'chosen one'!, and the movie be so ridden by basically idiotic/childish decisions and set ups. Everything just feels relentlessly cheap. How contradictory.

How to suspend your disbelief when the movie is set within such a wealthy and high-stakes scenario but you have everything surrounding your production (except Morgan Freeman) being not up to par? It just makes no sense.

Next time just tune/humble the whole thing down so that you don't have to simplify every plot point because you don't have the budget or the technical team/energy to make it.

A 12 year old would have more sense than this protagonist

[ThatDoesntMatter · 3 October 2023]

I'm 54 minutes in and more annoyed than bored.

Plotholes and silliness irk me, and there is nothing to outweigh it.

1 Movie starts with a monotone voice-over on speed. I already dislike that choice. That voice dies not make me root for the 'hero'.

2 Silly runaround to get backstage access. Meets cute girl, asks for date, he's still not likeable.

3 Friend giving him the wristband is the first nice character 4 Tech guru chauffeur man escaped from Stargate is left unexplained 5 Assassin shoots in the air first? Yeah right.

6 Missing ring isn't detected (and tracked)? Yeah right. (if this is explained later, I still don't care)

7 Now for the silliest bit of the movie: betting at the same casino table again and again. Is he the stupidest guy on the planet? Has he never watched a movie? Really, that is an insult to anyone watching. And he keeps doing it, not being smart and losing once and again (or not using the ring in his new boss's friend's casino later on). Annoying, NOT fun, not cute, just childish.

8 Starts working for pharma boss whose product killed his sister, and a voice-over says why although he just had a conversation where it could be explained.

9 Proposes to one night stand girl.

10 WEARS the ring instead of keeping it in his pocket. Fiancée not interested in it apparently.

10 annoyances means I'm out.

Cringily bad, is it supposed to be a comedy? Then it's still bad but at least the villain is ace then (if not he is just over-the-top bad).

I totally do not blame any of it on the top billing stars, it's not the acting's fault.

Enjoyable

[shiny1278 · 7/10 · 12 November 2023]

Let's get this out of the way, this is not a blockbuster movie and there is nothing wrong with that.

If you are looking to watch an enjoyable film about time travel you'll be pleased.

The time travel element is actually perfectly done to avoid any typical cinema time travel complications. While a paradox does exist, you can easily ignore it and still enjoy the movie; if you even noticed it to begin with.

Morgan Freeman didn't need to be in the movie and is there to draw an audience (He was probably on screen for around 20 minutes, maybe). The character could have been played by anyone. The people that would watch this movie because Freeman is in it are probably not the audience who would enjoy the movie.

The runtime is short enough so it isn't a major commitment and there is enough suspense to keep you engaged.

I rated this a 7/10 because it is the minimum I would score a movie that I enjoyed watching even if I wouldn't watch it again.

The best part about the movie is that it has a beginning setup, a story, and an ending. The cherry on top was that they didn't leave it on a cliffhanger or a cut to black screen to keep you wondering (which I can't stand).

Please note that I am not overly critical of movies and my only requirement is that the movie is entertaining. In this regard, the film succeeded.

How to get Morgan Freeman and still fail badly

[rorrr · 3/10 · 3 October 2023]

I don't know how the team that made the movie managed to land Morgan Freeman on their lap. Whoever made that happen is the only genius on the team.

Everything else is absolutely dumb and/or low quality about this movie.

The main characters make the dumbest decisions possible. Their reasoning makes no sense.

From the cinematography perspective, it's just awful. Most outdoor scenes are way too contrasty with blown shadows. It's like they hired a team of first year art school students and put them in charge of lighting and the camera.

Audio is awful too. Many indoor scenes echo like crazy.

Zero attention to details.

Do not recommend.

3/10.

Could have done better

[BankyGee · 6/10 · 5 October 2023]

While 57 Seconds had its fun moments, some cliche ideas let the movie down. It is not the best movie out there, but it is entertaining in it's own way and had the potential to have been better than what was released. Morgan Freeman is still a great actor that can make a bad movie look good with his topnotch acting. Josh Hutcherson did a great job too and I'll definitely love to see him in big budget movies. Nonetheless, 57 Seconds is a movie that contains a good dose of entertainment, a few laughing moment here and there and some solid acting. The story should have just been able to give us more.

If only it was 57 seconds long.

[jamosmonk · 3/10 · 1 October 2023]

This film is just terrible. The premise is okay but the main character is poorly written. The way he acts and his motivations are that of a 12 year old. This is as bad as that lame Jason Momoa film "sweet girl" where every point they want to portray is so on the nose that it all ends up stinking. Although I couldn't make it beyond 20 minutes of that tripe, I did make it further on this one. This script really needed another 6 or 7 rewrites. Maybe this script was written by ChatGPT? No? Or maybe it needed to be? This could've been so much better if it had been properly script doctored but we will never know.

I was entertained

[missmaddog · 7/10 · 6 October 2023]

Josh Hutcherson and Morgan Freeman were great as always. The movie poster is misleading as Josh Hutcherson's character only holds a gun like one time, he's not a hitman or FBI agent.... Morgan Freeman's sidekick was weird and unexplained. I think they could have lost that character altogether. He seemed unnecessary to the plot and made the movie feel hokey from the beginning. Perhaps the script and editing could have been sharper. It feels like a small budget film that didn't save much for postproduction. All in all I was entertained. The actors are good and carried the movie. And it is always good to be reminded that big pharma is the bad guy. I would watch again.

Juvenile script and forgettable plot

[burgerman93 · 3/10 · 2 October 2023]

Sure you have the legendary Morgan Freeman sandwiched in here at the beginning and end, but even he's a lost cause in this flick. Also all the action scenes are laughable. We've all seen movies with large fireball explosion where characters have to quickly run away, or instances where guns are pointed at someone's head, and times where someone gets knocked out, drugged or kidnapped.

I think the writers missed out on the element of flashback - perhaps show some scenes of Franklin's twin sister, so that we can unravel how close the siblings were and how her passing affected his life. Franklin really is a poor character because we can't tell if his heart is in the right place. He is labeled as heroic, but most of the time he uses the ring for personal gain (to gamble) and not for the greater good.

This film is neither bold nor intrepid, and Josh Hutchinson does the bare minimum here. I don't think he's cut out for an action thriller.

Good Sci-Fi if you're into that

[imdb-392-492467 · 8/10 · 22 November 2023]

The low reviews are admit they didn't finish this movie. Silly.

It seems a lot only watched it because Morgan freeman is on the poster and then we're disappointed it's not Shawshank redemption

This is science fiction first and foremost, if you're not into sci-fi don't bother.

This thing isn't going to hand hold you through to the end explaining how ever nuance of tech details that simply don't matter.

The entire concept is around what one would do and how their life trajectory would shift if they stumble upon some future tech.

Anyone claiming they would have reacted differently is missing the entire point of the movie and likely didn't watch it to the end.

I cringe to think of the boring and mediocre story that would have taken place if the haters had been the ones to find the ring.

Ambitious

[nightringer-76840 · 6/10 · 9 October 2023]

Considering 57 Seconds has limited budget but attracting some good actors, that said a lot. The story has a lot of possiblity and potential, but quite a limited budget.

However, the director played it safe and made the story as enjoyable as possible. Boy met idol; boy got time jump back ring; boy met girl; boy met villains; boy got corrupted; boy broke up with girl; boy destroy villain for revenge; boy got invited to join conglomeracy; boy chose to stay sane and poor.

To submit with Hollywood formula: boy is white; girl is black; Morgan Freeman is the rich angel; villain is white; villain 's sidekicks are multi racial; showcase consumerism to the max with sport cars-private jet-privilege lifestyle.

What can go wrong? Well, it makes 57 Seconds became an average B movie, with better special effects and cool rental vehicles. In short, an average action flick.

WHO WROTE THE THIS SCRIPT???

[publicemaildump · 1/10 · 1 October 2023]

Who wrote this script??? Kissing after one meal? Marriage proposal seemingly in one day (movie failed to provide any cues of any time passage in this so-called relationship)? Roulette landing on same number from roll to roll? I know we have strikes every year, no need to conscript kindergarden students to write scripts. For a girl to roll with such a creep plot is unthinkable. She would have no alarm bells regarding a convertible being purchased by this dude on their 2nd day of relationship??? No explanation provided why she rolled in two hours late to the first date? Technology that overwrites user's brain function is alleged in this poor excuse for filmmaking, yet such plot device is never pursued. Everything is as bad as the "kiss my toes" nonsense. Script writer's wet dream perhaps???

Who wrote this script??? Kissing after one meal? Marriage proposal seemingly in one day (movie failed to provide any cues of any time passage in this so-called relationship)? Roulette landing on same number from roll to roll? I know we have strikes every year, no need to conscript kindergarden students to write scripts. For a girl to roll with such a creep plot is unthinkable. She would have no alarm bells regarding a convertible being purchased by this dude on their 2nd day of relationship??? No explanation provided why she rolled in two hours late to the first date? Technology that overwrites user's brain function is alleged in this poor excuse for filmmaking, yet such plot device is never pursued. Everything is as bad as the "kiss my toes" nonsense. Script writer's wet dream perhaps???

Ugh...

[jflor-01018 · 2/10 · 1 October 2023]

I usually like movies like this, but I had my doubts when the rating dropped by the end of the day. A lot of this seems poorly thought out, especially in regards to Josh Hutcherson's character's fast accumulation of wealth. His girlfriend just accepts it with little questioning. I also had issues with how he hid his sisters photos and belongings at first. Aside from making things go more smoothly for him, it seemed unnecessary. The worst part, as a person living with chronic pain, was the pain medication aspect. The main character as an simplistic mindset about it and the whole thing was very black and white. That just ruined the rest of the movie for me.

OK Movie for a sunday afternoon

[supahfly · 6/10 · 2 October 2023]

After seeing all the negative reviews on here, I wanna make a side comment. Don't overthink it. Sometimes a movie can be just plain entertainment without you having to analyze every scene.

OK, the GF should have asked herself where all of the sudden the money came from. OK, the cameras should have picked up that every time he pushed his ring, that was odd. OK, she should have explained why she was 2 hours late in the restaurant ... But to be honest, I only started thinking about that when I started reading the reviews on here. So Sometimes it is just better before a movie, to read the plot, watch the trailer, and if you like it : watch it.

Read the reviews afterwards and then review it yourself!

It reminded me a little of. Limitless, which was also entertaining to watch, so why can't this movie just be?

Give it a try, don't overthink it, probably when you read this before you watch the movie , you will overthink it. But if you just want an entertaining movie, me and my son, we both loved it.

57 Seconds

[C-R-1970 · 3/10 · 1 October 2023]

After watching this movie I have many questions.

1. How much money did they have to pay Morgan Freeman to appear in this?

2. Did Morgan Freeman lose a bet that meant he had to do this movie?

3. Who wrote this & decided 57 seconds was a good amount of time to use as the primary plot device?

Those are just the three that came to mind first.

The lead actor is okay, but not particularly memorable for any reason. The same can be said for just about every other person in this film. The only reason I even considered watching it and continued to watch it past the first 15 minutes was because of Morgan Freeman.

The idea of being able to go back in time is intriguing, but I have seen other movies and television shows exploit the idea better.

In summary, It's always worthwhile and enjoyable to witness Morgan Freeman act, or even just to hear him speak. Sadly not even his level of charisma and acting ability & star power can save this movie.

It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, based on the lower reviews.

[gunn-wrights · 6/10 · 10 December 2023]

Don't get me wrong, it's NOT winning any awards but I found it a fun watch right before going to bed (not too exciting - more on the relaxing side)

First, how can you not love Morgan Freeman? He's the GOAT! The storyline, while a bit slow, was decent. It's very relevant to today's climate with 2 big pharma companies competing for the future of their companies rather than the actual health of their patients (sound familiar?) 1 Company is trying to make life better with pills and the other is trying to do the same with technological gadget - saying he could CURE everything... society would never need pills again.

As you can imagine, these 2 companies were mortal enemies, mutually exclusive - 1 wins and 1 loses!!

And a reporter/blogger struggling to figure out which side he belongs on and how to do right by his gf/fiancee.

I'd recommend a watch when you're just looking for something to relax to. Maybe older kids (there are some 'easy' women in the movie several times - but not too much shown).

It just irritated me 57seconds about 57 times.

[jepxxxgamingmain · 3/10 · 5 October 2023]

This movie is in the future while the mindset of the main character is of the past. In their world don't they have movies? They possibly do right? And for sure they could've seen such movies like this. Do you see where I'm going? And with this, the main character seems to have a very low IQ which somehow contradicts with his Profession. I believe this could've been done better. The acting of the characters are good but thinking back of when I watched it still irritates me and i wasn't even past halfway. This really was a blow since I love watching Morgan Freeman. It irritates me for about 57 seconds while writing this review.

Entertaining

[toddo-74809 · 6/10 · 7 October 2023]

This one surprised me! Didn't know if it would deliver, but it's a very cool concept and I'm a big Morgan Freeman fan. Not so much a fan of the Hunger Games kid Josh Hutcherson, but he actually does a pretty good job in this. Actually most of the cast was good. Morgan Freeman is likely not to be around for too much longer, but glad he's still working and showing up in movies. So many people on here bash a move hardcore, I suppose because it's not a big studio pic, but 57 SECONDS is intense in places, entertaining and fun; clearly not a huge budget and also not an Oscar winner, but a good movie.

Nolan-Not

[yueli7 · 2/10 · 7 October 2023]

I love Time Travel movies, they always have room for deep intellectual questions, philosophy, twists and turns. You wonder how the power will be used, whether there is a cost in using it, what are the side-effects? What are the vulnerabilities of this power? What if there's more than one? Are there multiple dimensions? Are there time police? What if everything is not as it seems? Do we trust our timeline, our narrator? What if everything we're assuming about the direction of time itself is wrong?

This movie does none of these things, but it does have the main character gamble in the stupidest way possible, instantly marrying a girl, and then going to work at a drug company.

This could've been Nolan-esque, but instead it's Kafka-esque.

This movie is so bad it's amazing

[brendanmckenzie · 10/10 · 26 February 2024]

I had such a great time with this movie just because it was so ridiculous. You don't normally get a good BAD movie, but this here is one of the few.

Acting is fine, dialogue is atrocious. At times I think some of it was even improvised. So many unintentionally funny moments. One of the most unnatural relationship progressions I've ever seen, and yet I'm also rooting for them because it's just so ridiculous.

I couldn't tell if it was self aware bad, but I don't think it was. Either way I enjoyed this movie for all the reasons it wasn't intended (I think) and you will too. Please go and watch this movie.

Slow start that turns into a decent black mirror sci fi film

[filmtravel101 · 6/10 · 5 February 2024]

This was a nice surprise of a black mirror sci fi film that Freeman has a small role in that is enjoyable but the actor that is magnetic is the love interest girl Lovie Simone. She had great chemistry with the affable lead Josh and for a low budget b film it is solid entertainment and it makes for a fun Sunday flick

The concept of 57 sec is a bit bizarre and never really explained or explored but it's wonderful to finally see a character use it for gambling as that seems the most obvious to make quick cash like Nick Cage film Next which is a more enjoyable film.

A solid 6 even with odd 57 sec Time Machine.

AN ABSOLUTE WASTE OF TIME!!!

[amooei · 1/10 · 5 October 2023]

This so-called movie is a complete time-waster. The ending is utterly ridiculous - picture a hijacked plane ready to take off with police cars at the airport, but instead of stopping it, they just stand there and let it fly away! That's how absurd this film is... The sheer lack of logical coherence and the apparent disregard for basic narrative credibility within this film are astounding, and one cannot help but lament the participation of a distinguished actor of Morgan Freeman's stature in this cinematic debacle!

After watching this movie, I only wish I had the same ring that could take me back to the start of the movie so that I could avoid wasting my time watching this stupid film.