By Buzz Byrne

“Every generation has built-in assumptions that prove, historically, to be false.” That statement of fact is enough to lead us to question most things we take for granted. That premise alone is enough to rile up stuffy academics and portions of the scientific community that have built their industry on the opposite of this idea. This is what this movie is essentially about- questioning reality and then positing a spiritual possibility based on quantum physics. Largely successful on the first part, less so on the spiritual aspects, nonetheless this small movie asks large questions and makes some radical thinking extremely accessible. I found it entertaining, provocative and even inspiring.

And I’m one cynical doofus.

A loose narrative follows the character Amanda (Marlee Matlin) as she deals with her husband’s betrayal. Following her over the course of two days she meets a shaman from the Caribbean in her dreams, a magical boy on a basketball court who explains quantum super position and discovers the work of Masaru Emoto- The Message of Water. As she grapples with the decision to forgive her husband or move on in her life, the filmmakers interview “experts” and “academics” in a documentary style on the relationship with reality and the internal and spiritual workings of the human experience.


This is the meat of what is going on and where the film is interesting and also threatening. While “quantum physics” or “quantum mechanics” is used as blanket terms without a true definition going, there is a lot to digest for someone not familiar with the concept. The discussion and presentation of the physiology of the brain, hypothalamus and how peptides work in our system was fascinating and much more accessible. But then dealing with physical proteins in the human body is easier to define than finding a physical substance of thought. Much of the professional criticism comes from corners that call the movie simplistic, pseudoscience and even one of the interviewees claims to have had his words and concepts distorted by editing. Hard to believe a long-winded academic would bristle at years of work being distilled and edited but there you go. Obviously the “factual presentations” in the movie should be viewed skeptically. But shouldn’t we view most arguments in such a manner?

And along those lines, having J.Z. Knight as one of the expert talking heads as she channels Ramtha stretches credibility. But if you can move past that, if you can sit with these uncomfortable questions, isn’t that worthwhile? At its’ core this movie is questioning organized religion and modern psychology. Maybe some of the criticism should be viewed with some skepticism as those are not two institutions that often invite hecklers.

The movie argues that we take a much more active role in our lives, that we try and shape reality from our insides outward rather than float through life, giving over responsibility to an invisible man in the sky or the reality that we have been conditioned to accept. The movie urges us to be greater than we are and to achieve and think greater things.

Can you really ask more of someone’s creative effort than to entertain you and maybe look at something in a new light? And what if that “something” is life, reality, experience and time- isn’t that worth a try at the video store? I would say it is.