Rating: 
Summary: Bad bad bad...
Review: I had such a high expectation going into this film from the good reviews I read online. Boy, was I disappointed. Not only was the acting mediocre, but the plot itself made you scratch your head and wonder why did they bother making a film out of it. Basically, Guy Pearce travels back in time trying to change the past. But fails. So he travels to the future to see how things turn out. The future, as envisioned by the writers, is composed of two separate races. The race that lives above ground is tribal. Whereas the race that lives underground is savage and prey on the above-grounders. It was just dumb! I'm not usually this negative about a movie, but this takes the cake.
Rating: 
Summary: Being different is not necessarily bad
Review: I saw the movie opening night and loved it! It is entirely different from the short story, giving me another story to love. It was visually stunning, and the music was incredible. I would certainly recommend this movie.
Rating:
Summary: A bit disappointing . . .
Review: As a huge fan of the original "Time Machine" movie from 1960, I was eagerly awaiting this "re-make." However, while I thought some of the special effects were interesting, I was rather disappointed with the movie itself.There was very little chartacter development, the Eloi were completely different from the original movie - both in appearance and lifestyle. And exactly who was the albino (Jeremy Irons), and exactly what was the point of the brief appearance of the character? One positive comment: I did think the elecronic NY library character was an interesting addition to the story line. Simply put: some classics are best left untouched. See the new "Time Machine" if you must, but the original is much more creative and interesting. You'll see.
Rating: 
Summary: A Compromise At Best...
Review: I had high hopes for this remake of George Pal's 1960 classic. In the inevitable comparison with the original, it comes up lacking. I was disappointed in some areas, impressed in others; thus, my middle-of-the-road rating. Guy Pearce is an actor I've been impressed with in other films ("L.A. Confidential", "Memento"), and he was passable here, but something was missing. He doesn't have Rod Taylor's command of the role. The other characters had little depth to them, and this detracted from the story. In general, the screenplay follows the H.G. Wells book, but there are gaps, which I felt required a considerable leap of faith to ignore (Pearce's character travels 800,000 years into the future, but the residents speak perfect English - well, that was true of the 1960 film, too). He only stops once along the way on his time travel journey and then very briefly. On the positive side, the effects were very good, portraying events such as the erosion of major land formations in very realistic fashion. Future residents have a multiethnic look, a big improvement over Pal's film, which assumed everyone would be blonde, with blue eyes (guess nonwhites just sort of disappeared). The Morlocks are presented as brutish, sort of extreme Neanderthal-looking beasts. Overall, I felt the film did not carry the weight of the original movie in terms of storyline and character development, but was superior in it's visuals and action quotient. I still feel the original is the better film in the final analysis.
Rating:
Summary: The original 1960 Time Machine was much better
Review: This most recent film interpretation of Director Simon Wells doesn't begin to favorably compare with George Pal's original version of some 42 years ago. The latter may not have been personally related to the very controversial H.G. Wells, but he seemed to better understand the author of this 1895 adventure classic. Genetics is not a guarantee of talent. Alas, even a direct descendent may not truly grasp the genius of his own great grandfather. I kept getting the distinct impression that the script was constantly being revised during the shooting. Did the makers of this modern attempt even have a substantial idea about the story line before beginning the project? Guy Pearce was utterly fantastic in last year's Momento (he should have received an Academy Award nomination), but appears uncomfortable as Alexander Hartdegan, the avant garde scientist who dares to go where no man has gone before. Alexander is working on a time travel invention that is kept secret from even his closest friends. The fiancé of this New York city academic has been murdered, and our protagonist hopes to travel backwards and reverse the course of history. Soon, though, the professor opts to travel into the distant future to hopefully unravel some of life's most challenging existential mysteries. Along the way, he bumps into Vox #NY-114, a public library guide, splendidly portrayed by Orlando Jones. Remember "HAL" in Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey?" Vox #NY-114 is a HAl with some sort of computerized physical presence, a sense of humor, and possessing more information than any human being might put to use in a single lifetime. Alexander eventually stops the machine in an era where the stronger humanoids truly devour the weaker ones. Jeremy Irons is cast as the leader of these hideous half man, half Lizard looking creatures. Unfortunately, Irons is on and off the screen within a very short time. Irons may have been able to save this movie had he been granted a larger role. The special effects are admittedly awesome, but cannot make up for a very weak script. Few will enjoy this movie. It earns only three stars. Instead, I strongly urge you to obtain a copy of the earlier Time Machine. Rod Taylor and Yvette Mimieux were brilliant together, and that one easily earns five stars. I dare guess that H.G. Wells would also have liked it better.
Rating: 
Summary: Time Machine (2002)
Review: This remake is the best. It's closer to the book then the original flick. The acting/filming and speical effects are all done to perfection. The film is a fun excape, action packed and extremely etertaining. I shall be looking to pruchase the DVD of this movie for my collection. It's a must see!
Rating:
Summary: DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE! PLEASE!
Review: Wow! I can not believe that this movie was so utterly BAD!!! I thought it was going to be a fun action movie (there was some action but not much). This movie not only is boring, it's kind of gory too. It's about this guy named alex who makes a time machine that travels into the future, where humans are still living after the moon broke apart, and underground there lives cannibals who eat humans. Good, huh? THIS MOVIE STINKS! do not go to see it unless there is no other movie out to see and you want to see a lot of blood. Have Fun!
Rating:
Summary: CC
Review: Outstanding movie. Well worth seeing. Contains many subtle and interesting undercurrents for the alert viewer. Will be a class Si-Fi work in years to come.
Rating:
Summary: Poor rendition of original
Review: Just saw this movie. I was very disappointed in the way it had been changed from the original book and movie. Typical Hollywood changes that arn't needed. VERY little of this movie was from the original which I think took a lot away from my enjoyment of it.
Rating:
Summary: Good........strange at times, but good.
Review: Rather than the trailers and the movie poster suggests, this is a mix of adventure, fantasy, and drama, instead of just pure action. It doesn't have a whole lot to do with the H.G. Wells book (which is also excellent), except for the main plot line, about a man who invents a Time Machine and travels 800,000 years (or somewhere around there) into the future and discovers a race of peaceful beings called the Eloi, who are terrorized by the brutal, cannabalistic mutant-like race the Morlocks. But it wasn't the director's (Simon Wells, the great-grandson of H.G. Wells himself) intention to go directly by the book. And this new version adds some very fresh (and very pleasing) plot twists; for instance, it actually gives the scientist a practical, and very moving, reason to build the Time Machine in the first place. The movie also gives us some very well-hidden morals/warnings of human arrogance and our ever-growing thirst for knowledge and power, and that it may infact destroy us in the end; and also, that love and life comes first, not science, a lesson Guy Pierce learns the hard way in the end. Guy Pierce does an excellent job, by the way, as the scientist. And so does Orlando Jones as the looney computer library database who utters the hillarious words " 'The Time Machine' was written by H.G. Wells, turned into a motion picture in 1960, and later became a musical. Would you like to hear a selection of the soundtrack?", and then starts singing "There's A Place Called Tomorrow". (That's the joke, by the way; it was never even thought of being made into a musical!) Jeremy Irons' role as the Morlock leader feels somewhat waisted, however, even though he's trying his sinister best. The special-effects and backgrounds are a plus, too. And an A++++ for Klaus Badelt for providing the excellent music; I must get the soundtrack. I might see it again, actually, maybe with my dad who hasn't seen it yet. The only reason I didn't give it 5 stars was, as it said in the title: it can get really strange at times, especially near the end; all my friends say that Jeremy Irons is simply the leader of the Morlocks and let Guy Pierce go just because he was being nice (!), but I just know that there's a bigger, more complex relationship between the two. Maybe my dad will understand when he sees it. I can't believe all the critics bombed this (the "GO" gave it 1-1/2 stars, those morons). "The Time Machine" is a must see for any science-fiction fan. You might want to go rent the original 1960 movie, too.....just for fun.
|
