The Time Machine (2002 film). What did you think of the movie?
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
Do you mean like three or four episode minseries, or a weekly series that only runs for a season or two?
I saw this movie in theaters and I honestly remember absolutely nothing about it. I watched the trailer a few months back when it came up in another thread here, and I didn't even recognize any of it. That's probably not a good sign.
I have the impression that the '78 TV movie was a backdoor pilot for a Time Machine series. Not sure, though.
I think if you wanted to do a miniseries, it'd be cool if the first episode were based on The Time Machine and the rest were based on The Time Ships, the sequel by Stephen Baxter.
I think if you wanted to do a miniseries, it'd be cool if the first episode were based on The Time Machine and the rest were based on The Time Ships, the sequel by Stephen Baxter.
'The Time Ships' - That wasn't the name of the sequel that George Pal wanted to make was it? I remember reading somewhere that it was supposed to follow the time travellers son as he tried to prevent his parent deaths during the London Blitz. I remember seeing a copy at my local Half Price years ago and I never purchased it. Now I regret that I didn't.
This really isn't a terrible film. It and it's 1960 predecessor are better adaptations of both War of the Worlds films (although the tripods from Spielbergs version are novel-perfect)
I liked that the big disaster that devastates the world was (man caused) ecological rather than the usual nuclear war.
Music was really great. I thought it was Goldsmith when I first heard it.
I liked that the big disaster that devastates the world was (man caused) ecological rather than the usual nuclear war.
Music was really great. I thought it was Goldsmith when I first heard it.
Huh, and here I thought I was one of the few people who actually enjoyed this movie. Usually when the subject comes up, it seems there are only negative comments. Don't get me wrong, I love the George Pal version to pieces, but I've always enjoyed this as an alternate take on the material.
Although I will admit it does fall apart a bit at the end.
I'm not sure I recall hearing this before, and Wikipedia doesn't seem to mention anything about this. Do you have any details on what was changed?
Although I will admit it does fall apart a bit at the end.
I'm not sure I recall hearing this before, and Wikipedia doesn't seem to mention anything about this. Do you have any details on what was changed?
A
Amaris
Guest
I enjoyed the film so much I own it on DVD. The best part of the film occurs up until he travels into the distant future. There it kind of slows down, though the scenes with Orlando Jones later on makes it better, and it does provide a touch of thoughtfulness behind it, with the ever eternal question of "why?". The special effects are still solid, IMO, and the music is just gorgeous.
Plus, the girl on the bike, in the 2030s scene, was just so cute. So, so cute. She was really cute.
Plus, the girl on the bike, in the 2030s scene, was just so cute. So, so cute. She was really cute.
I might be misremembering but I think I read an article in 'Cinefantasique' or a similar publication that said originally the destruction of the moon was going to have been the result of testing a new explosive device and the one's setting it off not realizing how powerful it was. I could be wrong though.
Hold on... Does this movie take place in the same universe as Cowboy Bebop?
(No, wait, that was an experimental hyperdrive that cracked the Moon.)
No. You're thinking of THE TIME MACHINE II. A 1980 novel written by George Pal and another writer whose name escapes me. Surprising, considering that I only read that novel myself back in December.
Yes. The footage showing the World Trade Center twin towers was removed etc. I would like to see the deleted scene on a dvd eventually.
I didn't care for it too much, and do prefer the original but I don't feel like either really captured the book well. Specifically the Eloi in both movies bother me. It feels way too much like they are the humans and the Morlocks are the monsters, when in the original the Eloi were practically animals.
There would've been no way to represent the Eloi accurately using 1960s FX techniques. It also wouldn't have worked well on the big screen to have a sole human character surrounded by creatures he couldn't even have a conversation with. It's not the job of a movie to slavishly copy the source material, especially when aspects of the source just wouldn't work well in a movie. If you tried to literally translate a prose work to the screen, exact in every detail, odds are it would be terrible, because prose and film have fundamentally different needs, advantages, and limitations. And it would be redundant, since the book already exists. The only reason to do an adaptation is to add something new, to change the story in a way that brings a fresh slant to it and is better suited to a different form of storytelling.
Every movie should have an Eloi Samantha Mumba.
This incorporated Alan Young so they could have done anything and I'd have enjoyed it.
Having the library AI teach the kids in the future was cool.
This incorporated Alan Young so they could have done anything and I'd have enjoyed it.
Having the library AI teach the kids in the future was cool.
It's an enjoyable movie. I'd like a movie that's more accurate to the book though, even including some of the weirder bits like when the time traveler going farther into the future and see weird creatures that are implied to future versions of the eloi and morlocks.
