CityOfAngels

I went to see a preview of this last night, and I must say it was pretty good. Christopher Walken was awesome as usual. I would say this movie is very entertaining to say the best, but it's no Oscar winner. Despite it being purely fiction, there are many inconsistencies in the storyline and how things happen with the remote, which in my overanalytical case, is a big downer.

Spoiler:
The inconsistencies I noticed are:
- When he rewinds, he is in "A Christmas Carol" mode, where he's looking over what had happened in the past. When he fast forwards, his body is put on autopilot and and his life actually fast-forwards, and he's there to live with the consequences. They should've chosen one or the other just to keep it consistent. Also, even though his body was on autopilot, his brain is a part of his body, so he should've had all the memories of what had happened.
- Sometimes when he presses a button on the remote, such as fast-forward, it would only affect one person, or a couple people, or even just him. There was no explanation of this change of effects that the remote had other than maybe "Point and click".
- The ending itself was purely inconsistent, but typical for Hollywood.

Has anyone else seen it yet?

__________________
The words "love" and "life" go together. It is almost as if they are one. You must love to live, and you must live to love, or you have never lived nor loved at all.

xepherys

Uhm, I think this is the wrong section for this, but yeah, I saw it... pretty decent movie. As to your second issue, it IS explained in so much as he's told it's a remote that'll basically do what he "wants" it to do... to some degree or another. So affecting only some things sometimes made sense.