Rating: 
Summary: There Was Potential...
Review: At best, Time Machine was a worthwhile Saturday watch. The effects were top rate and very convincing worthy of even George Lucas' ILM stamp of approval (althought the f/x were done by another company).As a previous viewer commented, it was painful to watch Guy Pearce's performance in some scenes. He either displayed "wooden emotions" or he tried a bit too hard. Also, his appearance looked gaunt and very tired in the first 30 to 40 minutes of the film. The ending or fading out of the film had a sort of Titanic feel with overlapping the past and future together in one particular melancholy scene. Despite the advances in special effects over the past 40 years since the original, the 1960 version will always be the best and is definitely a classic. In addition, the 1960 release produced some very grotesque and terrifying images with regards to the underground dwellers (the Morlocks; who can forget their yellow glowing eyes and savage growls)! However, what was admirable in the new version was the introduction of actor Jeremy Irons' intellectually sinister character role ! To hear him say his lines was like hearing his voice all over again from The Lion King playing the evil Scar. Showing that although the human future race was near extinction the existence of a multi-ethnic population was still possible (unlike the original). What I kept yearning for was more adventuresome exploring by the time traveller before he would finally advance to 800,000 years into the future. Also, it would have been fascinating if the writers or director would have gone the H.G. Wells route where supposedly the time traveller goes so far into the future that the entire planet is near total destruction (possibly leaving the traveler lingering in outerspace). This was the room for potential I was talking about!
Rating: 
Summary: Don't wast your time
Review: Like the previous (& superior film starring Rod Taylor -also an Australian), this film only partly follows the excellent H G Wells book. Only in this film a large chunk is devoted to a pre-story trying to explain why Guy Pearce invents the time machine in the first place.This film has many stupid plot twists - why would a cannibalistic Morlock let Guy Pearce walk away (instead of eating him perhaps)? Even the star, Guy Pearce said that this film is terrible.
Rating: 
Summary: mediocre script, great effects, fine acting, nice dvd extras
Review: I guess I'm in the camp of people who don't think this film really needed to be made, even by H.G. Wells's great-grandson, though I'm not a huge fan of the George Pal-Rod Taylor version either. The effects are fantastic and the designs are great -- the morlock predators are truly frightening, Jeremy Irons looks fantastically creepy, the time machine itself is beautiful and the digital rendition of landscapes changing over time is breathtaking. Still, I didn't feel the script had anything important to say and left H.G.'s debate about utopia and free will totally out of it -- which seems to be a disservice to the author -- particularly surprising from a descendant considering how important H.G. considered it. Having the Eloi speak English 800,000+ years in the future is pretty jarring, but this and other small problems could be forgiven if the film were just more substantive. There are good dvd edition extras here including: commentary tracks with the director and editor, producer and production designer; behind-the-scenes featurettes about special effects and fight choreography; trailers; a deleted scene; photo gallery; production notes; and bio-/filmographies. The film can be heard in English, Spanish or French, with English or Spanish subtitles.
Rating: 
Summary: My goodness !!!! That couldn't be called a movie !
Review: I couldn't believe that it was the final when the end credits appear on the screen... I never saw a movie so quick and without any screenplay... But it has good begun, until the Time Machine arrive in Eloi it seems me to be a good entertainment, like the Mummy... The scene with the Moon falling on earth or the mirrors are good, and very interesting.
But since Eloi... It is no more script, the bad guys (Morlocks) created by Stan Wiston (who also brought again to life the Dinosaurs of Jurassic Park) are ridiculous, the singer Samanta Mumba has not any reasons to be on this movie, his "son" neither, and the movie is so bad that he even change great actor
Jeremy Irons in a [sorry] mix between Legolas of "Lord of the Rings" and the diva of "The Fifth Element"...
You expected action ? Nothing, the final scene, which is'nt one in a normal movie, is terribly bad. Just one action scene in a entire movie, which is called to be an "entertainment movie"...
The professor Hartdegen, played by Guy Pearce, lost his girl on the beginnig of the movie. You expected he will find her again ? No. The girl is forgotten from the script. But... which script ?
However, this horrible movie give an open door to a new and fantastic composer, Klaus Badelt, who give us a wonderful score, maybe the best for a long time. A beautiful score for a so bad movie... Please, follow my advice : buy the score !!
Everybody who unfortunately saw this movie could have listen the great music, which is not as good as the motion picture of course.
Well... I expected an action and entertainment movie, I saw the worst movie I have ever seen... So, forget this... thing...
Rating:
Summary: Interesting premise
Review: Well it starts out interesting enough when his fiance gets murdered and he builds his time machine to go back in time to change this horrible accident. But then it just goes a little haywire. What I mean is that he goes forward in time to figure out why he can't change the past....sounds good, but he goes WAY forward in time. And this is a place that no movie's ever been to and now I know why. Guy Pearce is good, not great, maybe another actor could have held me through the movie better, but it's just the second half of this movie that's got me in a state of fluster. Best part I must say was Jeremy Irons, though he never ceases to amaze. Still interesting, the concept of time travel is a complete mystery, and this movie won't solve it any time soon.
Rating:
Summary: Glitzier Does Not Mean Better
Review: It may be unfair, but a remake of a hit movie must always be compared to the original. The 1960 original of THE TIME MACHINE was a deserved hit. The 2002 version may be a treat for the eyes, but unfortunately, not for the brain. Part of the problem is that Simon Wells, the great-grandson of H. G. Wells, directed the movie as if he were more entranced with dazzling special effects (and dazzling they are) than with bringing out a believable, fully fleshed series of characters. In 1960, director George Pal wisely kept the focus squarely on the hero's adventures and why he helped the human Eloi. In 2002, Simon Wells clearly loved the image of leaping, loping half-humans that he had seen in previous sci-fi movies. The supporting cast in the age of the time traveler (David Pearce) did not do very much to point out his character. His girlfiend Emma (Sienna Guillory) was in the film only to motivate him to build a time machine to alter the past to avoid her death. One would think that such a clumsy device would not be sufficient by itself to galvanize the time traveller. In the original, Rod Taylor's scientific curiosity with time was quite sufficient a motivation.
The real hero of the movie is the special effects co-ordinator. The images of one day melding into the next are memorable. Further, the appearance of the Morlocks as a cross between man and fish stuns the senses. Jeremy Irons disappoints as the Morlocks leader. As Irons pontificates on the split between Eloi and Morlocks, the viewer can see under the pasty-white makeup and hear the Irons from DIE HARD III lecturing Bruce Willis on similar such claptrap. Further, the ending, which I shall not divulge here, is an incomprehensible mess of weird logic unconnected to resulting effect. What emerges by the end of the film is the growing realization that Simon Wells ought to have paid less attention to being different from his forebear and more attention to a director who knew how to weave a magical spell that would not get lost in the techo wizardry that passes for the cutting edge in computer special effects.
Rating:
Summary: Not Back to the Future but still good fun
Review: The most recent film translation of H.G Well's classic Science Fiction story is strong on visuals, yet lacks something in the character area. Director Simon Wells' take on the story will leave some purists saying "Hey! Where's that thing?" and "Wait, isn't that just added for dramatic effect?" And I myself can join those people, for while the somewhat wayward interpretation of the plot is entertaining, I would prefer a film that's more true to it's origins. There are some breath-taking visuals though, and Guy Pearce is good as the title character. The film's haunting score adds a lot to the most poignant moments, and there are some welcome thoughtful points about altering the past/future. What lets the film down is the aformentioned lack of closeness to the story and a slow mid-section. But it's great Sci Fi if you can look past it's flaws. Not perfect, but good fun.
Rating:
Summary: Terrible!!
Review: The remake of the original Classic, "The Adventures Of The Time Machine" by H.G Wells is an unsuccessful attempt to put the contents of the book into a motion picture. The story starts of well, but as the movie progresses, reality takes a new turn. The monsters or whatever they are called, give an eeire feel to the entire movie. It was then when I realized that this movie is terrible. Okay, some appreceation now. The Computerized graphics are beautiful and so are the sound effetcs. But the movie looses its charm due to its unauthenticity.
Rating:
Summary: Not quite good enough for me to recommend
Review: But its not a complete bomb either. The special effects are brilliant, the character development razor thin. Although I like Guy Pearce, he came off as wooden here. The script was weak. The effects and constant changing of locales kept the film watchable up until he settled in the far future. Then things get real boring. There was a glimmer of hope when we see the ultimate bad guy (played by Jeremy Irons) showdown with Pearce. Irons is magnificent, and everything he says is interesting, but his screen time ends far before I wanted it too. And the "epic showdown" between the 2 characters is reduced to that of a bad, corny action film. I had hoped for this film to be great, but it really falls short of "good" which is disapointing.
Rating: 
Summary: Pure Entertainment
Review: I can't understand the critics. Fortunately, I rarely listen to them anyway. I was thoroughly entertained. In fact, when the movie ended, I wanted more...and that's often the rule by which I determine a success from a flop. The special effects were stunning, and the story was highly entertaining. I can't, however, say that any of the actors gave an outstanding performance. They were as good as they needed to be. While the overall concept is a bit outlandish, The Time Machine never claims to be anything but a fantasy. If asked, I would highly recommend it.
|
