In this follow up to the Time Machine, Filby is still the caretaker of his friend George's house ten years following George's trip to the future. Filby is then surprised to see his old ... See full summary »
On January 5, 1900, a disheveled looking H.G. Wells - George to his friends - arrives late to his own dinner party. He tells his guests of his travels in his time machine, the work about which his friends knew. They were also unbelieving, and skeptical of any practical use if it did indeed work. George knew that his machine was stationary in geographic position, but he did not account for changes in what happens over time to that location. He also learns that the machine is not impervious and he is not immune to those who do not understand him or the machine's purpose. George tells his friends that he did not find the Utopian society he so wished had developed. He mentions specifically a civilization several thousand years into the future which consists of the subterranean morlocks and the surface dwelling eloi, who on first glance lead a carefree life. Despite all these issues, love can still bloom over the spread of millennia. Written by
George Pal had long planned to do a sequel to this film. Several submitted scripts were reportedly rejected by MGM. See more »
As George approaches the year 802701, just as the wall behind him is completed, the background plate is missing for one frame which shows, instead of the wall, some scene number writing (the words "back frame") and the tip of a thumb. This is not visible at normal speed because the scene is 'flashing' to show the rapid passage of day and night, but on the MGM DVD and laser disc, the frame can be isolated. See more »
One of those Sci-Fi films that's made just right to be watched over and over again and never gets old. The special effects were ahead of their time but the film is not bogged down with them and the actors are allowed to ply their trade. Rod Taylor puts in a solid performance as George the time traveler. George Pal did a great job with this picture. A remake would probably be flashier with the FX but would be hard to beat this classic.
43 of 51 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?