THE TIME MACHINE: I have a GOOD FEELING George Pal's version will beat the new one.

[Chris K.]

I have recently read the plot summaries and what some of those felt at the screenings, and it definately looks like the new flick THE TIME MACHINE is not going to be good. For example, the story takes place in New York rather than London, the character name has a different name (which escapes me at the moment), and also contians new items that the original novel does not contains. Sorry, I just CAN NOT turn down a George Pal movie, or Rod Taylor for that matter. And the Projects Unlimited effects are better in Pal's version.

Not many films go by original novel's, but George Pal at least stuck with H.G. Wells' original with only little additions THAT ACTUALLY WORK. That and I liked that little connection of the character George and H.G. Wells in the movie (George looks at the cover of his time screen and it says "Manufactured by Herbert George Wells"-the real name of H.G. Wells).

[Scott]

yea, i think the old version will hold out as the better. The only way the new one can overtake it is with some new philosophical angles to the concept of time travel. Then it might work, but they should use the title TIME MACHINE  to do that. Rather make their own story.

[Scott]

Oppps. I mean they shouldn't use the title THE TIME MACHINE to put some new angles about time travel. I do like the original very much.

[Flangepart]

Our local film critic noted a point with this film. The Idea of time travel was one of the strong attractions of the Pal Movie. A "Sense of wonder" shall we say. Not so this flick. Seems the Time Machine was used just a device to tell a standard action/adventure story. Jeremy Irons character is described as "Jonny Winters on a bad hair day". No, the Pal flick had a sense of wonder at the concept of time travel. This thing.......He invents it to go back in time to save his girl friend from "Joe Chill", and she ends up, as the reviewer put it, "Giveing the viewer a Homer Simpson"D'OH!" kind of laugh  when she gets...." well.....say no more! Yep...great effects, but no heart. Give me Alan Young and his Scotts accent anyday, Laddie.

[BoyScoutKevin]

I am going to see this film tomorrow. I might have more to say about it, after I see it.
One good thing may come of it. It may get more people interested in seeing the George Pal version. Enjoy!

[Lee]

I will probably go and see it. But, it might be a bit much to expect the same movie as the original(which is qute awesome). However I think it could make a good movie. Remeber "Time After Time", that movie put a cool twist on the story.

[BoyScoutKevin]

I saw it. Not as bad as some people make it out to be. It was okay. Of course, not as good as the original. For example, the deaths of the Morlocks in this one was not as horrifying as the death of the Morlock in the earlier version (IMHO)
I think it has something to do with the fact that modern filmmakers have forgotten an important rule of filmmaking. Which is best illustrated by the two time machines.
This one was more compicated, but it wasn't better. In other words, if one is going to make a film, then keep it as simple as possible.
On the plus side, this film raised a number of interesting questions. For example, can one actually have a dream of the future that really exiists?
on the negative side, the film also raised a number of contradictions that cannot be explained away. For example, how come people speak a language that cannot be understood, only to such time that they need to be understood, then they speak perfect English?
Note that all the authors mentioned in the film existed prior to the 21st century.
And as a side note, did anybody recognize the florist in the film?
Enjoy!

[Flangepart]

Hummm....how many films have ever uesd the need to communicate with some one who dosen't speak the heros language, as a Non -Daes Ex Machina (sorry bout the spelling) plot point? "Robinson Caruso on Mars" is the only one springs to mind. I'd think the gradual dawning of comprehension could be a gift to the audience, as the Hero and the other start tradeing understanding. Humm..."Enemy mine?" Or did the alien know english?

[Gerry]

Have to agree with you BSK.  It's not as bad as it could have been.  I actually had a good time with it.  It was better than most of the schlock Hollywood is turning out these days.  I'm planning to write up a review for my web site in the next couple of days.

[AndyC]

I didn't mind the new twists on the story, and the little quibbles I had with the science aren't really enough to spoil it for me. It didn't blow me away, but it didn't disappoint me either.

Lots of very cool stuff in this movie, beginning with the machine itself. The breaking up of the moon was really well done. I could almost handle seeing that as a disaster movie on its own.

The dead girlfriend bit wasn't a bad addition to the story, although the hero was a little bit quick to give up after only one attempt at saving her. Twice would have at least confirmed it. Maybe a few more times to be sure.

My sick, twisted imagination has been going over the possibilities. Dozens of Alexanders running around the park trying to save the girl without interfering with each other (only the latest one knows where they all are), and the confusion every time the girlfriend runs into a different one.

Or, we could see her getting comically bumped off in a dozen different ways, a la Groundhog Day. This thing could turn into a regular Roadrunner cartoon, depending on how persistent old Alex wants to be.

Next, he could start dragging her into the future, looking for safer times in which to live. First, he takes her to May 1937, and decides that the safest place to be is New Jersey. After that, it's off to July 1945. The war seems far enough away, but there's still a lot of traffic in New York. So they go to the New Mexico desert. Oops. Better go a little farther into the future, after the war, and live on a quiet little island in the South Pacific.

And on it goes....

[Nathan]

Or maybe (dare I dream) the novel, which beats all cinematic versions to pulp?

Nathan

[AndyC]

Never compare a book to a movie. Two different animals.

[AndyC]

Well, maybe 'never' is too strong a word. Some things can be compared, and a few things will inevitably be compared, but I'd still call it apples and oranges. I'm much happier judging each on its own merits, in its own medium. Still, reading the book often spoils a movie for me, and vice-versa.

[Gerry]

My review of THE TIME MACHINE is now available on my site if anyone is interested.  Go here:

http://www.scifilm.org/reviews2/timemachine02.html">http://www.scifilm.org/reviews2/timemachine02.html

[john]

Good review, but shouldn't it be "instilled with confidence" rather than "inspired"?