[Insert Clever Title Here]

What to say about this film: it was whacky. It was a little ugly, but I think that was the budget reasons. The acting was a little odd, the characters eccentric, but perhaps that is part of the charm.
I guess I'll try to tackle the science of it. How in god's name does this bird go back in time? That makes little sense. It's like in comic books when they use science mumbo jumbo - just use some big words, some fagamatazz, some cockamamie theories, and bam - people will suspend disbelief ("The gamma rays are crossing with the photons and making him a superpowerful mutant who's clothes change size with him!". Point is, I'm going to try to make sense of this, because I think it is important; these two women were scientists, and it feels disrespectful to spit on science in trying to pay respects to their characters.

So we have this photo, which for some reason is extremely fast 1860's flash photography, of Ada. A photo is a capturing of a moment in time, imprints that are tracing of a point in the timestream. So we have this photo. Then we have this agent, this Charlene thing, and Charlene exists in the computer. The computer stores data - data that can exist in the future. You could make a (pretty crappy) argument that data exists outside of the timestream. It doesn't change over time, isn't altered - it stays the same forever and ever. Inputting the DNA, which is the coding, the equation for life, and that somehow creates a connection between the photo and the agent - the point in time of the photo and the out of time agent. The agent connects its info to the computer and the person using it, in the timestream. We've now connected two points at different places in the timestream.

So yeah. I think that makes sense. In a stupid way.

And that is why "The Sandlot" is the pinnacle of modern film.