The Time Machine | | Cast : | Guy Pearce, Yancey Arias | | Director : | Simon Wells | | Studio : | Universal Studios | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen | | Released Date : | March 08, 2002 | | DVD Released Date : | May 31, 2005 | | Language : | French (Dubbed), English (Original Language), Spanish (Original Language), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 11, 2005 | | Summary | Not exactly an accurate adaptation, but a great movie nonetheless. | Content
 | I've recently read the H.G. Wells novel, and have also seen the George Pal film adaptation of the "Time Machine", which, from what I remember at least, was very true to the book in most aspects. However, when I first saw the latest version of "The Time Machine" in 2002, I was completely unfamiliar with the story, as I had not yet read the book, and it was only after I had watched it that, being somewhat displeased by the film's ending (at the time) I was moved to read the book and find out exactly what the film adaptation had altered and changed, for better or for worse. And, I must say that, after finishing the book, I was dissapointed by the somewhat anticlimatic ending, and of course the sad fate of humanity in the distant future that the story portrayed.
Now don't get me wrong; I enjoyed the book and think it is both well-written and a mark of creative genius. My preferences, however, lie more in the area of heroics and happy endings where the guy ends up with the girl and they live happily ever after, which is hardly - in my opponion - what Wells was going for when he wrote "The Time Machine," which is what gives the book its originality.
And so, after reading the book, I was compelled yet again to watch the movie that is currently in discussion, to determine for sure whether or not I truly liked the story, or if it was simply something that could never appeal to me no matter how much I would have liked it to. And, I found, after watching it for the fourth time, that it was my favorite version to date. And, although I must admit I haven't figured out yet what exactly occurs toward the end of the film when Guy Pierce says, "I'm changing the future," (You'd have to see the movie to understand) I still enjoyed the film for its wonderful acting performances, appealing story, and most of all, the fantastic score that, in my opponion, "makes" the movie.
And, as it states in my title, this film is in many ways very different from the book, and therefore, will be, more than likely, a dissapointment to anyone who is a fan of H.G. Wells' novel. However, I, being dissapointed with the book's unredeeming portrayal of humanity's downfall and the complete deterioration of the universe in the far off and distant future, found the movie to be a much "happier" story, and one that suits me better. So, simply, it all boils down to what you like. If anything, it's ninety minutes of pure entertainment. And, If you don't like the movie, I would advise at least in getting the soundtrack.
P.S. "I give the George Pal film five stars as well."
|
| Rating | | | Date | June 24, 2005 | | Summary | Awful | Content
| I was excited about this movie at first. The previews showed great special effects, and of course, you know the story is going to be good. It's from the Time Machine book after all.
Unfortunately, when you go to see it, something's just not right. For the first 30 minutes or so the film seems good, and then it just loses its magic. I guess in the film the future doesn't seem so future-esque. It doesn't paint a picture of being FAR out into the future like the book does. It almost feels like one of the actors could just walk off the set at any moment, and if the camera follows him you'll see New York City in the background.
At this point the film seems mediocre, but unfortunately it doesn't stay that way. When it gets to the end, the hero meets this really cool evil guy in a dark cavern. They get all philosophical and stuff, and it's neat for a while. And then all of a sudden the film starts to fall apart completely. At this point, the presence of the evil guy shows the film has already deviated from the book, so who knows what will happen. Unfortunately, what happens isn't good. I can't even remember what it was. I've blocked it out of my memory. It must have been something that made you say, "Man, I don't buy this." The movie kept looking like it was going to end, but wouldn't, so my friends and I just got up and walked out of the theater.
This movie shouldn't have been bad. It just was. Did the producers try to film the movie chronologically as its script was being written and become pressed for time at the end? I don't know what the deal was. Read the book. Forget this adaptation of it. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 11, 2005 | | Summary | What a waste of Time | Content
| Don't see this movie you'll regret it. Most sci-fi movies are stupid. Nobody cares about some machine plotting people 800,000 years into the future I have to admit the graphics looks good that's about the best they can do in this movie. The orginal movie was made in 1960. |
| Rating | | | Date | May 23, 2005 | | Summary | Ironic in how terrible it is . . . | Content
| This movie utterly fails to capture the message of the H.G. Wells classic novel. Herein lies the irony: The eloi are not depicted as the subservient race that Wells meant them to be. That part is instead played by the audience. It's the audience whom the film has been marketed to who truly end up representing Wells' eloi, and the morlocks are embodied by the film executives responsible for letting this movie see the light of day. It's my hope that Simon Wells isn't a total idiot, and that this movie is just his way of proving his great-grandfather's anxities over the future to be completely justified. Man will eventually devolve into little more than beasts and cattle, and this film is evidence of our race trudging one step closer and being happy as hell about it. |
| Rating | | | Date | May 19, 2005 | | Summary | A Time Machine that wastes it instead of gains. | Content
| Although the writer of Time Machine had a good idea, he failed to follow it through the end. Which left us the audience with one word on our now befuddled minds. Huh?
Yes Huh, for I couldn't make heads or tails of the movie, and boredom that ran through my foggy brain didn't help any. Yes the CGI was good, but does computer enhanced graphics really make up for bad story plots? The answer no, as this movie clearly shows us.
A true rendition of H.G Wells story this is not, and for fans of his works I have to say don't bother with this movie. Wait a few more years until someone gets the right idea on how to follow through with Well's original story. |
|
