What defines a sci-fi film? Is it one set in the future? One featuring non-existent technology? One where impossible events occur? Typically, sci-fi is a genre you recognize when you see it, but that’s not always the case. Consider In the Blink of an Eye, the newest film from . Through an unconventional structure, it weaves three distinct narratives into a single overarching theme. Is it science fiction? Perhaps the more relevant question is whether the label matters.
The film’s three segments stretch across millennia. It begins with a Neanderthal family struggling for survival in a cave while still making room for love, grief, and artistic expression. Next, set in 2025, we encounter Claire (Rashida Jones) and Greg (Daveed Diggs), two graduate students who transform a casual relationship into something deeper at the most inconvenient moment, yet somehow make it succeed. Lastly, in a far-off future, pilot Coakley (Kate McKinnon) embarks on a centuries-long voyage to a new planet, joined only by an AI companion with whom she develops a bond reminiscent of Wilson the Volleyball.
The narrative moves between storylines with a delicate balance, yet none emerges as the dominant thread. How was this accomplished? According to screenwriter Colby Day, through meticulous effort. “I wanted a narrative that would feel circular, allowing us to begin at the start and progress through past, present, and future, discovering connections along the way,” he explains to Inverse. “I laid out 500 color-coded note cards on a table and began arranging them, asking myself: does this create a coherent story? Do these elements feel linked? It’s similar to sculpture—you start with a massive marble block and gradually reveal the form hidden within.”
The final product is a complex, interwoven narrative, though viewers will likely feel strongest ties to Claire and Greg’s story simply because it’s the sole segment set in our current time period. “We’re the most non-sci-fi element in this film!” Rashida Jones, a , remarks to Inverse. “[Yet] no matter the era, you’re observing people grappling with life’s most fundamental aspects: falling in love, surviving, determining where and with whom to live. Do you want children? What will those children do with their lives? What are the greatest challenges of existence and protecting your offspring? So the film’s foundation remained consistent throughout.”
However, the links between these narratives extend beyond thematic parallels. Claire works as an anthropology researcher examining a Neanderthal-era skeleton, and though her journey with Greg begins in the present, it doesn’t conclude there—in reality, their partnership evolves into one of humanity’s most pivotal relationships for the future.
This is the type of film often described as “wholesome,” yet its steadfast sincerity is precisely what makes it special. “The true science lies in this magical transformation of human love,” Daveed Diggs shares with Inverse. “It does that quintessentially Andrew Stanton thing where you believe it’s about one specific thing, only to discover it’s actually about everything that makes us human.” The narrative offers an embrace of warmth, tempered with allegorical elements and subtle world-building details that are easy to overlook.
Therefore, whether it qualifies as science fiction is ultimately irrelevant. It’s a quality film that happens to feature some sci-fi elements. “I viewed it as a humanist film,” director Andrew Stanton tells Inverse. “Its core focus is human nature, which remains constant across all eras, binding us together throughout time and space.” He hesitates briefly. “Though I suppose simply stating that does sound rather sci-fi, doesn’t it?”