Rating: 
Summary: Rent the original, it's much better!
Review: The new Time Machine is a major disappointment, and not even close to the wonderful Rod Taylor classic. Guy Pearce is a good actor but he is stuck in an endless series of bad matte shots of futuristic scenery. There are a couple of good special effects (such as an aerial shot of a rapidly growing modern city), but these are few and far between. Because this is a "dark" science fiction thriller, it lacks the humor and subtleties of the original. Most of the action takes place in underground caves (like the Aliens sequal we never want to see again). Gone are the clever bits of the original, such as the miniature time machine prototype and our hero meeting people in the future who mistake him for his father (remember?). Plot points that were critical to the original movie, such as the time machine being dragged to a new location by the Warlocks, are absent. The new version recreates the classic rapidly changing seasons, scenery and store window mannequins but without the humor and voice-over narration that made the original so good.
One potentially good improvement over the original is a compelling reason for the inventor to go back in time, however, this story angle is immediately discarded in favor of an accidental and unrelated trip to the future. Too bad, because our hero's love interest is such a likable character. Saving her would have saved this movie. Other characters are introduced and discarded, too, such as the woman our hero first encounters in the future. The woman talks with him, says she likes his suit and that his time machine looks like a cappuccino maker, but then rides off on her bicycle, never to be seen again. What's the point? The Time Machine itself is a real mismatch to the Victorian setting of the story. It looks like one of those projectors you see in a planetarium, with light beams shooting out in all directions. Can you believe: Feet that lift off the ground like the Delorean in Back to the Future? How about an 8,000,000 year trip into the future on a few old batteries? Or better yet, leaving the time machine unattended in downtown New York without someone stealing the hub caps? Yikes, gimme a break! This version makes me want to rent the original.
Rating: 
Summary: Nice film in it's own right
Review: If you watch this film to compare it to the George Pal version or to the book, you will be disappointed. To literally tranlate Wells onto film won't work. he's too dated And to Pal fans it is heresy to say someone can do as well. I, personally, never thought much of the Pal version. Okay for it's time but not all that spectacular.
But this is a film only based on Well's story. Not limited to it. Just like the movie War of the Worlds was only based on Wells
This film has charm all it's own. The musical score is interesting enough to buy the cd. And the CGI effects are understated so they don't overwhelm the story. I would have fleshed out the story more. Perhaps a half hour more. If there is a valid complaint , it might be that Well's social commentary doesn't come through very well. But by creating the charactor of the "uberMorlock" (played interestingly enough by Jeremy Irons) the director gets to slip a bit of his own social commentary about the world changing and how we deal with it. Watch for the typical American reaction to change. That which offends us, we blow up. I will have to say that Samantha Mumba makes a refreshing change from Yvette Minieux who I have never liked in any part. Guy Pierce also plays the Time Traveler not as a ruff & tumble he-man (ala Rod Taylor)but as a frustrated academic.
A nice film if you leave your comparisons and prejudices aside.
Rating:
Summary: What a Movie!
Review: This is a great movie i reccomend everyone to see it. Especiall when the eloi are the little rich ones is what the time traveler thinks. But the morlocks are the scary ones watch out for them they will eat the eloi and the weena jumps in the fire because she doesnt know what it is...man she is a dork,they have no tecknology because what is tecknology with out fire.
Rating: 
Summary: The Time Machine-A decent Sci-fi Adventure
Review: H.G. Well's classic adventure: The Time Machine, is obvioiusly a lot better than the new 2002 version, but this film is not the worst movie that I have seen. The movie is mainly more about special and visual effects which were truly terrific. Guy Pearce gives a fine performance as Alexander Hartdegan, the scientist who is destined to find out why he cannot change the past. He creates a machine with amazing powers to reconfigure or reconstruct the events which took place earlier when his wife was killed by a thief. But, when he goes back in time, she still gets killed. So, he can't exactly fix the past to satisfy himself. Of course from there, he travels on to the year 801,702, and finds himself in a different world. He learns that there are terrifying creatures called "morlocks" that hunt the people of the village and the Uber-Morlock played by excellent Jeremy Irons is their leader. Samantha Mumba, plays Mara, who helps Alexander. She tells him of the village and the people of the land, she has a younger brother as well. Soon, Alexander must face Iron's character in the end to save the village and the people. From here we see some thrilling action sequences and spectacular visual and special effects. The film's director Simon Wells even has a relation with the writer of of the book, H.G. Wells. He is H.G. Wells great, great grand-son. This was Director Simon Wells debut as a film director, but he didn't do a horrible job while making this film.
I liked Guy Pearce's character and I loved Jeremy Irons, but think before buying this film. You might want to rent it first. So if you haven't seen The Time Machine rent it today!...
Rating: 
Summary: A truly wonderful movie
Review: This is a movie which everyone must see... I recently saw this (April 2004) and realized that this movie was released in 2002. The special effects are stunning and Jeremy Irons brings about an intensity and brings life the uberMorlock character. Guy is excellent and his traumatic look at the lost of his loved one is well-expressed and his desire to bring his love back by travelling back in time and his failure to rescue her makes him look inconsolable...
Tragedy, combined with comedy, visual effects make this movie a truly memorable one!
Rating:
Summary: Not great but certainly not awful
Review: This has to be one of the best looking movies that I have seen in a long time. The effects where they show the passage of time are amazing. It is very impressive seeing the progression of greenery and ice and the evolution of the world. Aside from the great effects, the movie is actually pretty good to watch. It has some interesting things to say about the importance of being individual and of not following the crowd. There is a minor plot point involving the moon that shows the dangers of relying too much on technology. The cast is pretty good. Guy Pearce is good as the Time Traveller and Orlando Jones does a surprisingly good job as a holographic libriarian. His perfomance has nuances that I didn't know he had in him. Aside from some minor plot points and the fact that it does not pay very much reverence to the original (what is an Englishman doing in New York?) the Time Machine is a very decent movie.
Rating:
Summary: So good I give it a 5
Review: I give it a five. For Simon Wells to manage to do this well with a remake of his great grandfather's book with all the people watching his every move is a feat indeed. There's something for everyone is the movie:
Sci fi fans (like me!) Special effects, pretty awesome at times (not always though but more often than not). That shot of the moon breaking up is Oscar-worthy. If you don't gasp at that you are too cynical and need to stop watching movies for awhile. The Time Machine-beautiful and thank goodness they kept the Victorian look of the machine and didn't try to modernize it. Those spinning discs in all their golden glory are a sight to behold. The changes in the earth as the time travelers travels through time is amazing.
Romance is there too. You've got a reason for the poor traveler to brave this new experience-he's trying to undo the tragedy that befell his fiance and as a result opens up a whole new world of promise with someone else when he see it's hopeless.
For those who love eye candy. There's plenty here-from the shots of Victorian era Manhattan in winter to the beautiful Eloi dwellings and the scary Morlock underground it is literally a visual feast.
Last but not least you have the H.G. Wells story itself with a new twist yes, but still they managed to be true to the theme of the book. The end part was true to the book and I was grateful for that. Of course they made some changes to the Eloi personalities but that helped the story IMO.
The acting is above average with Guy Pearce attempting the hero action role and bringing his standard intensity to the role. I thought he was very good and I enjoy watching him develop his character. The man has some of the most INTERESTING mannerisms, keeps you riveted to see what he's going to do next. EVerybody else was good but I'd like to compliment Orlando Jones, he was the one I was a little anxious about but he made this movie-brought humorous exchanges to the somber time traveler at just the right moment to relieve the mood. Quite funny at times.
Rating:
Summary: Visually impressive but disappointing overall
Review: "The Time Machine," directed by Simon Wells, is based on the novel of the same name by legendary sci-fi author H.G. Wells. Like Wells' novel, the film follows an inventor's odyssey through time to humanity's far future. The film has some stunning, even poetic, visual effects. The production values are impressive: the Time Machine itself is a marvelously realized prop. A lovely score well complements the visuals. The performances are also good: Guy Pearce, as Alexander Hartdegen, makes a dashing and likeable hero, and Mark Addy has a good supporting role as the hero's fellow professor. Orlando Jones does fine work as an informative library hologram (a role prominently seen in the film's trailer). But overall, I found the film disappointing. It is ruined primarily by sloppy, illogical screenwriting. For example, it is established that Pearce's character knows of H.G. Wells as a sci-fi writer, and knows of Wells' book "The Time Machine" as a work of fiction; yet Wells' fictional scenario still comes true in the movie! Is Alex just travelling through time, or also through alternate dimensions? Other plot points are equally nonsensical or poorly though out. Furthermore, the future Earth scenario plays lip service to H.G. Wells' concept while essentially ignoring Wells' socioeconomic satire. Thus, Simon Wells' version seems lobotomized in comparison to the original; the director seems more interested in making a profitable action flick than a serious work of science fiction. The filmmakers also seem to overrely on film cliches; many of the scenes felt like ripoffs or retreads of material from other films: the original "Planet of the Apes," "The Mummy" (Brendan Fraser version), the original "Star Wars," even "The Lion King"! Be wary, H.G. Wells fans.
Rating:
Summary: It barely works....
Review: Too much CGI ruined what could have been a great movie. It was pretty well cast and the Stan Winston creature effects shop certainly did their homework to make the Morlocks look good, there is even a romance in the plot that kind of makes it work, but the CGI just does not cut it.
Rating:
Summary: SECOND TIME AROUND
Review: I saw the original TIME MACHINE when I was a wide-eyed, easily terrified nine year old. Rod Taylor and Yvette Mimieux were its stars. Taylor was heroically masculine and Mimieux was beautifully innocent, and the Morlocks were green and had shiny white eyes.
40 some years later, we get Guy Pearce and Samantha Mumba. Pearce, while a fine actor in "Memento" couldn't come anywhere near the brute heroism of Mr. Taylor; Mamba can't touch Mimieux for pure sexy innocence. And the Morlocks, well, I guess I've gotten so used to these excellent new CGI effects that I didn't find them very frightening at all.
I have nothing against remaking classics. Although they don't usually outshine the original, it's interesting to see how these movies are treated now that we have become so FXective.
This version doesn't have the heart and energy of the first; the only scene that really made a strong impression was when the Moon got nuked and was falling out of the sky. If the movie had more bizarrely beautiful scenes like this, it could have been awesome.
The Eloi/Morlock storyline is so similar to the one in "Planet of the Apes," it seems redundant. I wasn't all to sure exactly what happened to the Morlocks, either.
This is probably better than the remake of PLANET OF THE APES (the ending killed that one!), but I find the original with Rod and Yvette the better of the two.
| 
