Based on the classic sci-fi novel by H.G. Wells, scientist and inventor, Alexander Hartdegen, is determined to prove that time travel is possible. His determination is turned to desperation by a personal tragedy that now drives him to want to change the past. Testing his theories with a time machine of his own invention, Hartdegen is hurtled 800,000 years into the future, where he discovers that mankind has divided into the hunter - and the hunted.Written by
When Hartdegen starts to travel to the future, he watches three mannequins in a shop window and as their clothes change across the time. In The Time Machine (1960), George watches the change of clothes of a mannequin during his time travel. See more »
While we can only speculate about the imagined physics that allows the time machine to operate, we see that when the time traveller accidentally puts his hand outside the protection of his machine's 'force field' during travel to the future, the fingernails grow by at least five millimetres before he snatches his hand back in pain. This amount of growth indicates that his hand has experienced at least a month while outside the field. Since his blood vessels inside the field would only be supplying a few seconds worth of blood, his hand would be starved of oxygen and therefore dead and well into decomposition by the time he manages to get it back within the field. His only option would be immediate amputation to prevent gangrene in his arm. See more »
I'm glad he's gone. Maybe he's finally found a place where he can be happy.
See more »
How life must have changed for actor Alan Young during forty two years!
THE TIME MACHINE which I first saw at its London premiere in 1960 has long remained a personal favorite of mine. I bought the film 17 years ago and my own children grew up with it during the many times we have watched it since. It had a distinct charm and news of its impending remake was of no interest to me...another un-reworkable film if ever there was going to be one! I had no interest in its existence and even less inclination to see it. Dragged, protesting to the theater recently by my daughter who had already seen it and who, under the insane belief that I would enjoy it, strapped me into the seat! Raving incoherently and fully intending to dislike each and every frame, I watched what I expected to be my greatest nightmare since SPEED 2.
Well girls and guys...I was so wrong! The remake not only captures and enhances the memory and feel of the original in many ways, it is vastly better! Pearce, who improves mightily as the film progresses (his early wimpy appearance telegraphed danger as far as I was concerned!) is just plain excellent as the slightly unhinged designer. The time machine itself (understandably, with today's fx potential) creams Rod Taylor's 1960 mini-umbrella! Mark Addy makes a great "Philby" very much in the style of Alan Young's original characterisation. Nice touch too, having him cameo here as the florist! For him of course, he has experienced his own "time machine" in the 42 intervening years!
"One hit wonder" Samantha Mumba is an acting natural and as the Eloi girl, hits exactly the right note called for in the role. Both she and her younger brother Omero contribute greatly to the film's success. Everything about this film is visually impressive. Wonderfully imaginative sets and masterful cinematography. Jeremy Irons' small but significant role comes off well too!
I read complaints about the Morlock make-up? Hello? any of you ever SEEN a Morlock? No??? well then, kindly refrain from negative comment. These guys looked and moved way better than the little furry 1960 creations! I liked also the intent NOT to have Pearce able to reverse the death of his fiancee - that was heightened awareness on someone's part!
Add to the above a superb musical score and if this doesn't all make for an entertaining and thought provoking film, hey guys, you're hard to please. Certainly this was never intended for THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS set! It is inarguably the best remake I have ever seen and one of only a few have that ever managed to improve on the original!
201 of 261 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this