Get our free weekly email with the latest cinema news from our film critic Clarisse Loughrey

Get our The Life Cinematic email for free

Get our The Life Cinematic email for free

Viewers of the new Netflix film Waste of time have expressed their anger with a significant twist.

The film that plays the main role Outer BanksMadison Bailey, a teenager traveling back in time to 2003, was released on the streaming service last week.

Spoilers for the end of follow Waste of time…You have been warned!

In the film, Lucy (Bailey) travels back to 2003, a time shortly before her older sister Summer (Antonia Gentry) was murdered by a masked killer.

By the end of the film, Lucy has discovered that the killer was actually an alternate timeline version of her friend Quinn (Griffin Gluck), who traveled back from the future to carry out an assassination attempt.

However, she can prevent her sister’s death by bringing the murderer back to the future and killing him.

At the very end of the film, it is revealed that this change means that Lucy herself was never born and therefore travels back to 2003 to live her life in the past.

Viewers were unhappy with the latest plot twist and many shared their thoughts on social media.

“Waste of time “Netflix is ​​so stupid oh my god she gave up technology and her parents to live in 2003 this is ridiculous,” one X/Twitter user wrote.

Another remarked: “The end of the movie Waste of time was actually crazy because why did she have to come to the conclusion that her parents didn’t love her so she decides to stay in the past as her sister’s friend???? Like whatttt”

Someone else commented: “Waste of time on Netflix was such an interesting movie until the last 10 minutes… I’m so angry.”

A fourth viewer wrote: “I know they tried to give #TimeCut an upbeat/positive ending but when you really think about it it’s actually pretty depressing.” Everyone seems happy in the end but what the fuck .”

This is not the only point of contention between them Waste of time Viewers. Millennials, who were teenagers during the time period depicted, criticized the film for its inaccurate portrayal of 2003.

“This doesn’t look like 2003, I don’t know how to explain it, but it looks like 2024 pretending to be 2003,” one wrote.

“The lights are off here,” commented another. “It’s too clear and too bright. We wore colors, but the saturation of those colors and the lighting overall seemed too current.”

Waste of time is now available to stream on Netflix.