Rating: 
Summary: Better Than I Expected
Review: Usually before I see a movie, I tend to check what the Great Roger Ebert thinks of it first. Our tastes are similar. I gotta say though, while he disliked it very much I was surprised to find the movie quite entertaining. I have never read H.G. Well's "The Time Machine". I do understand from other reviewers that this movie version is quite different. Maybe that's why I enjoyed it so much. I had nothing to compare it to. Guy Pearce paints a wonderful portrait of a man in love who proposes to the love of his life only to witness her murder moments later. The heartbroken Alex (Pearce) builds his time machine whith the hope that he can jump back to the day of the proposal and save her life. He fails. It seems if it is not a murder, then another tragedy claims her life still. Apparently, we are destined to die at a specific given moment. This infuriates the devoted scientist. He can never go back in time and have his true love again. On an impulse, Alex uses the time machine to travel far into the future for an answer. He searches for a reason or an answer that will alter a past destiny...but can it be done?Alex and his time machine make many fascinating stops in the future. What is really phenomenal is where Alex goes when he travels too far into the future. He finds a beautiful place of dark-skinned people that live in "hives" on the edge of cliffs. The race once known to human kind as one...splits in the future. One race living in the sun on the enchanting cliff-dwellings, the other underground in darkness, who feed feverishly on the people of light. I think this movie excells in excitiment, special effects, and has an interesting plot. Perhaps it doesn't follow the book closely, but I can't really seem to come up with one good reason a family shouldn't watch this movie. I would give the movie 5 stars, but the movie does have a few "huh?" moments...some scenes seem redundant. In all it is a fun film with jaw-dropping special effects.
Rating:
Summary: VERY GOOD & GUY PEARCE WAS EXCELLENT
Review: I agree with most of the hoopla about this film. It delivers exactly what I have been hearing. I wanted to see this film as soon as I saw the first trailer of it. I am a fan of Guy Pearce and enjoy watching him act. He was great in L.A. CONFIDENTIAL and was fantastic in PRISCILLA, QUEEN OF THE DESERT.
The special effects were first rate and they kept true to the story. I thought the photography and cinematography were beautifully done. Jeremy Irons, who only had a very small part, was devilishly good. Samantha Mumba was good at best.
Some low points were the Morlocks. They reminded me of the "goblin" in the the plane scene of TWILIGHT ZONE: THE MOVIE. Except the Morlocks seemed to have a gland problem (LOL).
The idea of trying to go back in time to change the future is always appealing. But you must be mindful of the consequences. The moon exploding and detoriating was extremely frightening. Just the very idea that it might happen someday is scary. Who knows, maybe we will colonize the moon someday and maybe that might happen. Let's hope for the best. One line that stuck in my head was by Jeremy Irons who said (this is not verbatim) "Some might say that I am a direct result of you (Guy Pearce)." I am guessing that he meant because the doctor went into the past to try and change the future, it had a more profound effect on the earth over time.
Overall the film deserves success and I hope it achieves it. If you see this film for any reason, go see it for the special effects.
Rating: 
Summary: The Time Machine
Review: This is one of the best updates of a classic that I have ever seen. I read the originally by H.G. Wells when I was 12. By the time Iwas 15 I'd read everything he'd written. Rod Taylor was in the original Movie, which was excellent, and this one is just as good. It is interesting that some critics didn't like this movie. Well when I was very young my Father, who was a great Science Fiction/Fantasy fan, took me to all of the movies of the mid-1950's, most of which Ray Harryhousen had done the special effects on. Critics, at that time, thought they were not good at all. Now they are all considered Classics. The remake of the Time Machine is an instant classic.
Rating: 
Summary: Better than expected
Review: H.G. Wells' great grandson steps up to the plate to direct the latest adaptation of his great granddad's famous novel. 42 years after the 1960 film, the newest _Time Machine_ is a flawed film to be sure, but on the whole an enjoyable one. The film's greatest strength is without doubt its style-- confident, slick, and beautiful images fill the screen. CGI effects have clearly bolstered the storyline's demands, and Stan Winston does another excellent job in his creature effects, the film's netherworldly Morlocks proving impactful both visually and viscerally. Even the modeling of the time travel machine itself on its 1960's version is intriguing and pleasant-- this novel's genesis is, after all, 19th Century England; how far in advance of shiny, scrolling gold/brass knobs and spiraling whirligigs must we be? The movie's consistent and constantly threatening error is one of plot vagueness. It was Einstein's revolutionary take on relativity theory in physics which raised the perception of time dilation and spatial contraction in the universe, elements which incite and inspire endless speculation on the nature of time and possibility (for the imagination anyway) of its travel; however all we get of this in the film is a mere reference to the relationship of the protagonist to "that German bookkeeper." What a shame, that in the 21st Century, and with the crisis physics currently faces (the clash between relativity and quantum mechanics), nothing substantial is hinted at in this direction. It would have been wonderful, especially in a film rich in literary allusions, to see some semi-lucid attempt at textual or scientific explication. The other major plot flaw is the film's opening, which asks us to care too quickly for the protagonist, who at the outset is an insufferable bore who doesn't deserve the woman who he loses. Thankfully, the character of Alexander Hartdegen does eventually round out, played well by Guy Pearce. Also, look out for the highly amusing Orlando "7-Up Guy" Jones as virtual librarian "Vox"; he adds comedic punch to a film that establishes its sense of humor early. Despite these flaws, _The Time Machine_ is an able remake with a few decent twists on its multiple pedigrees and a solid, fun flick for sci-fi buffs.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining
Review: As a fan of the original, I am perhaps a bit biased. But I went with 3 other people, and the consensus was that this was entertaining. Not a blockbuster, and does have its plot holes. But it's worth watching and takes a very interesting view of the future. Fans of the original movie should know that there are several new plot additions and twists making this worth seeing.
Rating:
Summary: A decent film.
Review: I recently went to the theater to see this film. I enjoyed it but must admit that it certainly doesn't hold the charm and wonder of the 1960 film with Rod Taylor. The Moorlocks in this film are very cool looking and the effects are good but the film lacks the greatness that the orig version had. I recommend this film but rather advise that you wait to rent it or buy it when it is released. I give it 3 stars for a decent film but I garantee you will have a better time by watching the orig film instead of this one.
Rating:
Summary: Traveling through time left some holes
Review: For some, it might be enough to be entertained by big budget special effects; for others who look for the continuity of a story, it's time to start looking elsewhere. At the beginning I had high hopes that it would be both visually and mentally stimulating; in many ways it was, but I just couldn't help but notice how everything was hurried along without proper resolution. I think the writers could of come up with something better than a Planet of the Apes knock-off. And the question, the reason for his quest, that got lost until it was answered by the Edgar Winter look alike; if you blinked then you missed the answer. Perhaps everything would of went smoother if the connection of action was a little better, but it came in large chunks which left the audience to make their own assumptions. Smaller things also put me off,like the blow darts that didn't seem to serve a purpose or how artifacts from an ancient New York survived 798,000 years of ice age and erosion. Perhaps I expect too much in the accuracy department, but I think a few date adjustments could of made a world of difference in the believeability department. If you don't mind, or don't look for a cohesive story line then go see this movie, but if you can't stand a poorly written script attached to a few million dollars then go see something else and rent this later. I will say that Guy Pearce did a good potrayal, regardless of how everything else came together.
Rating: 
Summary: H.G Wells would twitch
Review: A mindbogglingly bad adaptation of H.G Wells's famous novel, The Time Machine, starring Guy Pierce and Yancey Arias. The film takes a simplistic view of the incredibly complex issues presented in the novel, and even as a film as a whole falls incredibly short of the mark for being anything worth to go see. Guy Pierce is notoriously boring as the Time Travler, the man that goes foward into the future into an age of strife. The direction is awkward, the story is conviluded, the ending is a pretentious let-down. Jeremy Irons makes a guest appearence as the leader of the bad guys known as the Morlocks, for an entire 10 minutes he is on screen, oh well, so much for having a good actor on the set. The special effects themselves were good, but unfortunatly they are used in way that only makes things seem even more silly and confusing. The Morlocks look like cheap impressions of monkeys, or bamboons, or something, something right out of Planet of The Apes. All in all, don't waste your money.
Rating: 
Summary: Wandering In Time
Review: Too bad the writers couldn't find the handle on this one. The basic elements of the HG Wells novel are there, and the special effects are great, but the pieces don't hang together at all. If I hadn't read the book, I don't think I would have understood the fragments, heaped together with no insight or narration from the main character. I left the theater disappointed but not devastated.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing but still worth seeing
Review: ok, so i saw this a couple days ago and i got pretty much what i expected from it. you can't go into a movie like this expecting too much because the bastardization factor is far too high. as an individual movie it was pretty good i think, but comparing it to the book and the old Rod Taylor movie, it was far from that quality. one thing i noticed was Guy Pearce's acting was WAY better after he time travelled, because in the beginning of the movie he always acted like he had a million things on his mind and he was constantly twitterpated, and that really made his acting quite cheesey. the special effects and time travel sequences are absolutely stunning though. and jeremy irons gave an amazing performance as Uber Morlock, the representation of science going too far. Orlando Jones even did a great job in this movie, and i've always considered him to be somewhat of a no-talent. i honestly liked this movie, but it was very much lacking, clocking in at just over an hour and a half it has barely enough substance to support itself. i think it is certainly worth seeing, especially if you're not familiar with the original story, but don't expect too much.
|
