I had read some bad reviews before actually seeing this film so I was prepared for the worst. I have to say that the film was way better than I had expected it to be. Mind you, it is no masterpiece, but 'The Time Machine' is highly entertaining and benefits from its relatively short running time. Most blockbusters nowadays suffer from overlong running times, often dragging on, whereas they could easily have done with 20 minutes less.
I have always liked the story by H.G. Wells, but this film is by no means a faithful adaption of this book, however, it is a sometimes inventive Hollywood take on the book. I haven't seen the 1960 adaption but most people in this review section seem to perceive this film as a remake of the 1960 film, but I see it more as a second movie adaption (Tim Burton will probably say Simon Wells 're-invented' the story :-) ).
As I have said, the film is better than the bad reviews would suggest, but still you would have expected more of it just judging from the trailer and the multi-million dollar budget. So although I had a good time watching this film I can point out many weaknesses, e.g. the numerous plotholes.
*** SPOILER!!! ***
One reviewer mentioned what he regarded as a plothole: in the beginning Hartdegen is unable to change the past (the killing of his lover) and later on he is planning to change the future (i.e. the Eloi's past). The fact that he was unable to prevent the killing of his girl, was not due to some mysterious cosmic law saying that you cannot cheat fate/destiny. His girlfriend had to be killed because otherwise he would not have invented the time machine and could not have been in the past. His wife's dead led him to lock himself in his lab and work day and night on the time machine for four years. I'm not sure whether this is how time travelling would really work, but I'm afraid that time travel films always lead to this type of discussions. I can think of only one film, 'Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me', where there was no discussion possible because of a 'disclaimer' uttered by Basil in the film (paraphrase): 'don't worry about any details, just enjoy yourself'. And I guess that goes for 'The Time Machine' as well.
I have always liked the story by H.G. Wells, but this film is by no means a faithful adaption of this book, however, it is a sometimes inventive Hollywood take on the book. I haven't seen the 1960 adaption but most people in this review section seem to perceive this film as a remake of the 1960 film, but I see it more as a second movie adaption (Tim Burton will probably say Simon Wells 're-invented' the story :-) ).
As I have said, the film is better than the bad reviews would suggest, but still you would have expected more of it just judging from the trailer and the multi-million dollar budget. So although I had a good time watching this film I can point out many weaknesses, e.g. the numerous plotholes.
*** SPOILER!!! ***
One reviewer mentioned what he regarded as a plothole: in the beginning Hartdegen is unable to change the past (the killing of his lover) and later on he is planning to change the future (i.e. the Eloi's past). The fact that he was unable to prevent the killing of his girl, was not due to some mysterious cosmic law saying that you cannot cheat fate/destiny. His girlfriend had to be killed because otherwise he would not have invented the time machine and could not have been in the past. His wife's dead led him to lock himself in his lab and work day and night on the time machine for four years. I'm not sure whether this is how time travelling would really work, but I'm afraid that time travel films always lead to this type of discussions. I can think of only one film, 'Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me', where there was no discussion possible because of a 'disclaimer' uttered by Basil in the film (paraphrase): 'don't worry about any details, just enjoy yourself'. And I guess that goes for 'The Time Machine' as well.