Ask any baby and they’ll tell you, nothing beats a good formula. When you’ve got a recipe for success, it makes sense to keep replicating it. At least until it stops working.
Which brings me to screenwriter Michael Kennedy, whose last three scripts have been slasher movies with an elevator-friendly pitch, combining the familiar tropes of a popular horror genre with the familiar tropes of a popular movie. The rightly acclaimed “Freaky,” co-written by Christopher Landon, took the plot of “Freaky Friday” and asked “What if it was a slasher?” The unfairly overlooked “It’s a Wonderful Knife” took the plot of “It’s a Wonderful Life” and asked “What if it was a slasher?”
It’s a fun approach to both the horror genre and family friendly movies alike, and setting those stories in the present day allows for clever new twists and characters whose tales were ignored in the past, especially queer characters, whose life experiences and perspectives bring new depth to these nostalgic cinematic canons. Kennedy’s script for “Time Cut” — co-written by director Hannah Macpherson (“Into the Dark: Pure”) — applies the same formula to “Back to the Future” but it has two big problems. First, there’s no clever title. “Hack to the Future” was right there, darn it. Secondly, and probably more importantly, it just doesn’t work.
“Time Cut” stars Madison Bailey (“Outer Banks”) as Lucy, a teenager in 2024 whose sister Summer (Antonia Gentry, “Ginny & Georgia”) was murdered by a serial killer 20 years ago. The killer disappeared, the town fell apart in the wake of the tragedy, and Lucy’s family never recovered either. (This is basically the same set-up as ‘It’s a Wonderful Knife,’ by the way.) Sad and lonely, Lucy goes to her sister’s memorial site and wouldn’t you know it, there’s a time machine there. As one might expect.
Lucy travels back to 2003, and oh God we are all so very, very old now. Movies about traveling back to nostalgic eras tend to depict what young people assume that history was like. Usually it means distinct visual references to dated trends and brands and historical events that somehow survived the filtration process and linger in our collective memory.
“Time Cut” portrays 2003 as an embarrassing era of fashion, which to be fair it was. Lucy stares in wide-eyed horror at, and be warned because nothing can prepare you for this… UGGs. Oh God, those awful UGGs. It was also an era when midriffs ran rampant, before we finally got their numbers down to safe, sustainable levels. And remember Discmans? If you’re from a younger generation and you’re rolling your eyes at all the nostalgic fetishization of superficial fads and outdated technology, know that this will happen to you. The trendy haircut you love today will embarrass your kids when they see your photos 20 years from now.
Anyway, Lucy befriends Quinn (Griffin Gluck, “Locke & Key”), a local nerd who helps her understand time travel, which is really more of a “Peggy Sue Got Married” reference than a “Back to the Future” riff. Lucy also befriends her sister, who died before Lucy was born, which makes her ethical dilemma all the more complicated. Does she have a responsibility to preserve the future by letting her sister die, or is it more important to do the right thing now and deal with the long-term ramifications later?
Movies have a difficult time with short-sighted moral decisions. Given the opportunity to save the whole universe or just their girlfriend, literal superheroes tend to choose the latter. They’ll figure the universe thing out later. Lucy will try to change the past because, unlike “Back to the Future,” she didn’t break the past so she doesn’t have to fix it. If that means she’ll never be born, well damn, that’s an “Outer Limits” conundrum for you, and it briefly makes “Time Cut” a little complicated.
Unfortunately, “Time Cut” weasels its way out of the big questions it raises at nearly every turn. Time travel rules are important until the movie finds them inconvenient. The killer’s plans and motivations are wonkier than a chocolate factory. The time travel stuff is mined for funny jokes for a few minutes and then the film shows zero interest in all the worms it’s uncanned. It’s a whole lot of “what ifs” and not a lot of “then whats.”
This would be a minor gripe if “Time Cut” was such a good slasher that the sci-fi didn’t feel important, but the slashings are few and far between. Worse, they’re not scary. Many horror movies aim for a PG-13, which isn’t always the right call but is very understandable. “Time Cut” appears to have been made with a “PG” in mind, and not the cool “PG” from the 1980s when you could rip a guy’s face off or yank out someone’s bloody, still-beating heart. This disappointing modern “PG” where violence is more of a vague concept than a reality. “Time Cut” didn’t have to be gory to be entertaining, of course, but it feels like it’s pulling all of its punches, so it never makes any impact.
It’s also worth noting that a distracting amount of dialogue in “Time Cut” happens off-camera, with the characters either just out of frame or facing off-screen. Either there was a problem with the sound equipment — and judging from the tinny audio in an early high school hallway scene, that could be the case — or they realized far too late how much exposition they actually needed to make this plot work and had to ADR it in later. Possibly a bit of both. “Time Cut” wouldn’t be the first slasher movie to feel taped together, but it definitely isn’t the best.
It would be nice to report that “Time Cut” completes a satisfying trifecta, but it’s not clever enough or tragic enough to compare with “Freaky” or “It’s a Wonderful Knife.” It’s part of a cycle of playful knockoffs, which is why we’re here and all part of the fun. It plays out like a knockoff of a knockoff, which isn’t much fun at all. Shabby, awkward, and missing out on all the good stuff, that describes a lot of us 20 years ago (yes, and also now — I have no delusions of grandeur). And it describes “Time Cut” now.
“Time Cut” is now streaming on Netflix.
