Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

LouHomey From my favorite movies..

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

shannensama When I saw the cover and description on Netflix I thought this was a movie about a man who travels through time and is kind of two timing by having a lady in each time he travels between. A little bit into the movie, after the main character ended up in a coma I realized he wasn't traveling in time but may have been dreaming the past (uncertain, the connection between the two times is never fully established). Is it a past life? The rings are supposed to reunite lovers but don't quite seem to live up to the challenge. Most of the movie is immersed in the past time line, and though there is a lot of cutting back and forth near the end of the film, the future hardly gets any screen time and the only connections between the past and the present are the ring(s) and the main character (or his soul? assuming he doesn't just magically look just like the other guy). I kept watching it waiting for the connection to click and it just doesn't get there. A lot of people commented in their reviews about not finding out who D.E. was, but I figured it was pretty obvious that it was Dolly Egerton (and her shiny metal purse), but there is no explanation as to how she ended up with the ring(s) (and it looks like she never made it to America). I finished the film kind of wondering what happened at the end. Did the ring magically restore the past version of his soul or pull him back to himself or what? How did Tulaja get it there? Why didn't it reunite her with him? It seems like he didn't need to be in the past for it to work or for Tulaja to be there. The movie was interesting, but the end was all jumbled up an nonsensical. Also I was a little disappointed in Tulaja's warrior skills. She started off the movie strong, but then she got drugged. And she spends a lot of time away from her queen while traveling. And she was ambushed in the swamp and screams and flees and gets stabbed. And they tossed her stuff while she was escaping and she didn't notice. And they stole her ring while she was sleeping. And she didn't catch them in time. She went from prancing down the face of a building and trying to fight with an arrow in her shoulder to crashing into a bush during her stealthy sneak attack (assuming stealth must have been the reason she ditched the horse and followed them on foot). She seemed much more capable at the beginning.

Carmen Vazquez First of all this film was beautifully done, it deserves the stars given. The music, the cinematography, and the acting were all done well (aside from a few minor and unnecessary scenes by supporting roles).The main disappointment with the story was the past and present coming together in a more fluid and fulfilling fashion. This is where the entire film seems to fault and lose a good deal of satisfaction. The story involves lovers in the past and lovers in the future. In the past the lovers only share a brief time together amidst much conflict. Their fate seems to be sealed from the beginning by visions of betrayal, death and a unique set of rings that intertwine into one ring. Many issues with the story arise in the transition of past to present and the meaning of the rings. Some questions seem to go unanswered if not viewed carefully. Having read some reviews it seems viewers overlook important details due to rapid scene changes and a constant search for significance. For example, it's easy to completely miss the explanation of how one half of the ring comes to rest at the bottom of the ocean in a metal snap purse with the initials D.E. engraved on it. The answer is actually mid story. The character named Dolly, played by Alice Englert, actually holds the purse in her hands while the camera quickly closes in for a brief closeup. There are the initials and the one hint that gets sadly overlooked because it seems unimportant at the time. But this hint is crucial for understanding how half of the ring is discovered in the future. There is also a bit of confusion regarding the rings. Initially they seem to relate to love that cannot be fulfilled due to the cursed nature of the visions shared by Tulaja, the lover from the past who is played by Bipasha Basu. At first the rings seem to betray the lovers. Later in the story the combined rings seem to bring good fortune due to their mystical powers which are never clearly explained. Granted in the end it seems the rings symbolize the complexity of love, at times difficult, binding and powerful. But the problem for most viewers may not be in the rings themselves or their meaning. The greatest conflict within the story seems to surround the fact that the characters played by Josh Hartnett both in the past and future don't end up loving the same woman. If the lovers were the same people throughout the entire time line the film may have received a better reception. As another reviewer mentioned, The Fountain (starring Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz), also explored a love across time. This story had a sense of closure and satisfaction because the lovers were the same in the past, present and future. The characters in that film came full circle. In The Lovers, they sadly do not reunite the way most wish them to. The female lover from the past appears in the distant future in a recognizable form only to give the other half of the ring to another woman who is in love with the possibly reincarnated version of her past lover. This creates a considerable amount of conflict. It leaves one wondering why one lover finds happiness and the other can't. Will he one day bring half of a ring to her future reincarnation to allow her the same happiness with another? One will never know. It's a very unselfish interpretation of love, which is why most people won't enjoy that outcome. Everyone wants the two lovers from the past to find each other in the end. That apparently wasn't the point. It's not hard to imagine that the writer's intention was to express that love, which can transcend time, will wait its turn. It's just not as satisfying for the general public who are used to two hour films with happy endings. This story bends the rules but it's done lovingly. Although I was left wanting closure I appreciated the attention to quality and wouldn't regard it a bad film because it didn't end the way I wanted it to. It was also nice to see Harnett again.

adrianagliv This review is meant only to emphasize that current rate (4.5) is not at all fair in my opinion, and here are the reasons behind my statement: 1. Very good playing, all actors made me feel like the story was real. 2. Good plot, it may have been presented as rather being sci-fi but time factor in this movie is like the backbone of a living person: not in plain sight but yet it holds the whole body up, too much science would have been altering the story, which is beautiful by appearing as being simple, though not simple at all, the very end proves it. 3. It is, in my humble opinion, one of the most inspired attempts to capture the timeless feature of love. And it's supreme quality of being unconditional. Instead of conclusion, for those in search of a more scientific movie, challenging their minds with riddles and special effects I would suggest to look for something else since this one is about The Lovers (much more suggestive title) seeking to find peace beyond the limits of time. Tip: Watching this movie without expectations is the best way to enjoy it.

formatt2007 I was surprised at the bad review when I started watching the film. A lot of effort went into this production, with good acting, an interesting storyline, time travel, adventure and history. The chase to ave or kidnap the queen kept me glued to the screen. It was a thrilling roller coaster for about three-quarters of the film. The last quarter gave mixed messages, jumbled conclusions and added loose ends. Where was the director, did he fall asleep? the whole story hinges on an underwater discovery of a sunken British ship. What ship? Who was on it? Who drowned? The last time we saw the rings they were in the hands of the two characters in 1778 in a forest in India. How did the rings get on a ship? Not by the dead character in the forest! The last quarter of the film simply sinks the movie.