The Tomorrow War (2021) Amazon Original *Possible spoilers*

[Andreas Lilja]

Anyone else watched it? Pretty much a must if you're into invasion sci-fi. 

 

Was pleasantly surprised at the premise and the execution. Maybe my standards are low because of the immense disappointment that was Independence Day 2?

 

 

[Chris Pratt]

14 minutes ago, Andreas Lilja said:

Maybe my standards are low because of the immense disappointment that was Independence Day 2?

I guess so. It was pretty bad. I'll try to avoid spoilers as much as possible, but let's just say that the movie reached a natural conclusion when he gets back from the future. I paused it and realized there was still like 45 minutes left to the movie. It was downhill from there.

[GuiltySpark_]

I'm going to watch it this weekend for sure but man, the reviews are bad. 

 

[WhitetailAni]

Sounds like a fun movie. Perhaps I'll watch it this weekend? I enjoy sci-fi.

Though I still need to work through my movie stack. Avengers is top priority, then Star Wars I, II, III (no, I have not seen them yet), I think after that Oceans Eleven, after that some Disney classics (I haven't seen most of them, the first time I saw the OG Lion King was in science class in May), and I think there's a few more movies somewhere in there that I forgot about that my mom and grandpa will remember.

 

[Chris Pratt]

3 minutes ago, rickeo said:

I'm going to watch it this weekend for sure but man, the reviews are bad. 

 

You can turn it into a drinking game where you take a shot every time there's a stupid or illogical plot device. You'll be smashed by the end.

[GuiltySpark_]

Just now, Chris Pratt said:

You can turn it into a drinking game where you take a shot every time there's a stupid or illogical plot device. You'll be smashed by the end.

By the end or in the first 30 minutes?

[Chris Pratt]

Just now, rickeo said:

By the end or in the first 30 minutes?

Well, you'll be well on your way by the first 30 minutes. I guess it depends on your tolerance.

[GuiltySpark_]

1 minute ago, Chris Pratt said:

Well, you'll be well on your way by the first 30 minutes. I guess it depends on your tolerance.

I appreciate the candid take, you know, with your livelihood on the line and all. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Andreas Lilja]

10 minutes ago, rickeo said:

I'm going to watch it this weekend for sure but man, the reviews are bad. 

 

6.9 on IMDB, which is top-tier for what it is, a popcorn movie.

 

Not a critic person. 

[Chris Pratt]

1 minute ago, rickeo said:

I appreciate the candid take, you know, with your livelihood on the line and all. 

 

 

 

 

 

ROFL. I honestly wasn't even thinking about the irony of us sharing a name and me being down on it. Frankly, he hasn't done much of worth since Parks and Rec, though. Guardians was okay, but that's because it leans more towards comedy. Serious roles just aren't his bag.

[shaz2sxy]

Its watchable

 

The story is predictable but also doesn't make much sense(don't want to go into spoilers), Chris Pratt as a serious actor... I'm not sold on him yet. 

 

and should have ended 45mins earlier as Chris Pratt said above.

[BetteBalterZen]

I just saw it on my new TV, and the new TV experience probably made me love the movie more than I should but I was entertained all the way through and as already said, if you're into alien invasion movies, this movie is a good watch. Probably not one the best but it's an alright movie. I'd give it 6.5/10. 

[tikker]

It was a suprisingly enjoyable movie. I wasn't expecting much to be honest, first thinking Pratt would be the only thing making it worth watching, but he fit the role and I enjoyed it. It's just one of those don't think too much about it movies. Pacing was good for me, didn't feel like it was trying to needlessly drag it out or pretend there was this amazing deep story.

 

It's a popcorn movie that you watch to scratch that future war with aliens scratch ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ not everything needs the deep lore or grand overarching in-depth storyline and I'm fine with that.

[bondoao1]

Both my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed it. 

[CerealExperimentsLain]

It's fine, it's not hard sci fi or anything, but it was a fun sci fi action flick.  The only thing is the theme changed a lot in the later part.  It feels more I watched one movie, and then it's sequel, crunched together into 2h20m.

[Spotty]

3 hours ago, CerealExperimentsLain said:

It's fine, it's not hard sci fi or anything, but it was a fun sci fi action flick.  The only thing is the theme changed a lot in the later part.  It feels more I watched one movie, and then it's sequel, crunched together into 2h20m.

If they make a sequel they better call it "The Day After Tomorrow War"

 

I might give this a watch tonight if I have some spare time. 2hr20m run time seems a little off putting, from the trailers I saw I was expecting more in the region of 1hr45m.

[Spotty]

Just watched it. I think Chris Pratt was decent in the role. The movie definitely should have ended about 45 minutes earlier. Felt like it had two endings.

 

Also annoyed me that the weapons had seemingly endless supply of ammunition without needing to reload. 

[Radium_Angel]

I turned it off after the hour mark. Holy cats was that movie stupid.

Let's send people into the future to fight unstoppable aliens, with automatic weapons and no training. What could possibly go wrong? 

Oh I know the answer to this:

EVERYTHING!

 

It was like Starship Troopers (the movie) only *dumber*

I've seen better films from The Asylum...

[CerealExperimentsLain]

1 hour ago, Radium_Angel said:

I turned it off after the hour mark. Holy cats was that movie stupid.

Let's send people into the future to fight unstoppable aliens, with automatic weapons and no training. What could possibly go wrong? 

Oh I know the answer to this:

EVERYTHING!

 

It was like Starship Troopers (the movie) only *dumber*

I've seen better films from The Asylum...

You def don't watch that movie for intrigue.

 

"So we're conscripting soldiers which are usually the worst soldiers you can get."

"Well, we ran out of volunteer soldiers and desperation and all that."

"Okay, okay, makes sense.  So their training, you train them to kill the enemy?"

"We don't even tell them what the enemy looks like.  We just teach them to pull a trigger."
"Uhh wow... How about tactics to fight a non-human enemy, as even their most basic ideas derived from TV and video games, where you fight humans, would not apply?"

"Nope."

"The aliens have a lot of armor, I trust we're sending troops out with large caliber weapons?"

"5.56mm! :D"

"God damn... GOOD LUCK, FUTURE DEAD PEOPLE."

[Andreas Lilja]

3 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

I turned it off after the hour mark. Holy cats was that movie stupid.

Let's send people into the future to fight unstoppable aliens, with automatic weapons and no training. What could possibly go wrong? 

Oh I know the answer to this:

EVERYTHING!

 

It was like Starship Troopers (the movie) only *dumber*

I've seen better films from The Asylum...

Starship Troopers is a sci fi classic, I don't even. 

[Radium_Angel]

7 minutes ago, Andreas Lilja said:

Starship Troopers is a sci fi classic, I don't even. 

Did you even read the novel?

Because the film only shares the name with the book. Verhoven himself said he never even read the book.

Classic only in schlock perhaps.

[Gale]

14 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

I turned it off after the hour mark. Holy cats was that movie stupid.

Let's send people into the future to fight unstoppable aliens, with automatic weapons and no training. What could possibly go wrong? 

Oh I know the answer to this:

EVERYTHING!

 

It was like Starship Troopers (the movie) only *dumber*

I've seen better films from The Asylum...

I liked the movie, but yeah, I did think it was kinda stupid.

 

Why would you send people into the future? People who barely have any training at all. Even if they were 'scheduled' to die relatively soon, you're potentially changing the timeline for the worse, potentially accelerating the apocalyptic events.

 

For example:

Spoiler

Chris Pratt is sent into the future and dies fighting the aliens. His daughter grows up depressed, and commits suicide long before she graduates college or joins the military. This could potentially result in the anti-alien poison never being developed.

 

[Spotty]

30 minutes ago, Gale said:

Why would you send people into the future? People who barely have any training at all. Even if they were 'scheduled' to die relatively soon, you're potentially changing the timeline for the worse, potentially accelerating the apocalyptic events.

 

For example:

  Hide contents

Chris Pratt is sent into the future and dies fighting the aliens. His daughter grows up depressed, and commits suicide long before she graduates college or joins the military. This could potentially result in the anti-alien poison never being developed.

I don't think so...

Spoiler

The future they visit seems to be pretty set in concrete, the actions of the past (present) do not affect it. Or else merely sending everyone back in time to warn them about the aliens would have changed the future timeline.
They made it pretty clear that the future they travel to is a completely independent timeline where the events of the past have already happened. That's the whole point around sending the poison back in time how it wouldn't save his daughter, but it meant his version of his daughter (and the rest of the world) would survive.

TLDR; in this movies interpretation of time travel the actions of the past do not affect the future timeline. By going back in time they create a new independent timeline.

 

But the movie has some other pretty big plot holes

Spoiler

The reason they can't send the military forward in time, and why they need to draft civilians, is theorised by the protaganists to be because you cannot exist in the timeline where your own self is still alive and present. That's why the people sent back to warn/train them are so young (not born yet) and why all the civilians being sent forward in time are older, people with terminal illnesses, or people who are known to have died in accidents (people who would be dead in the future).
... But, with 99% of the worlds population wiped out by the aliens and only half a million people left alive with humanity on the brink of extinction, surely there would be many more people who could travel forward in time and they wouldn't need to draft in people who are dying.
Though you could argue that after the attacks take place they no longer were able to keep records of who was alive and who was dead, so they wouldn't be able to know if the people they were sending forward in time were still alive or not. It's only people they have death records of prior to the alien invasion that they can safely send forward.... Still stupid though.

Would it have been a different movie if Chris Pratt as a former solder just re-enlisted as a selfless act to protect his child's future? You probably wouldn't have had the comedic interactions between some of the civilians not knowing how to use a gun but I don't think it would have changed all that much about the story.

 

Spoiler

Also did anyone else find it weird that they repeatedly say that the aliens take every 6th day off to rest, but then it never really plays in to the movie at all and there's no reasoning explained for why the aliens take the day off?