Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Zejay Bonks So many inaccuracies and problems with the layout of this movie. I'm giving it 3 stars because 1) when he first arrives "800,000" years in the future, the Time Machine clearly says well over 9.8 million years. 2) also when he arrives, Mara says that they all learn the old language, yet they act as if they have no idea what he said. 3) why would anyone detonate the moon? Of course, large explosions are going to have an effect, what about scientific study and the scientific method? I feel as if once Alexander left the 2030s any kind of tech is just out the window, for good. With no valid explanation why. Sure you can assume it's because the moon was blown apart, but come on, there'd be enough remaining knowledge documented to rebuild most if not all of what was there. Which brings to my next point. 4) He had to have everything required to make said Time Machine documented as well. And in the end, when it finally shows back to 19th century, they just leave all his stuff there. 5) Given this fact, from the point he built the Tine Machine it would have already existed, they go about through the different time periods like they don't know what he's talking about happened in the past. Sure "he disappeared into the future", but like I said all of his scientific papers with practical application would have been seen and improved on, from that point. With all these points, this movie is pointless, just like this review and my life. Anyways thanks for reading the analysis if you did. *Since this is a semi-nonlinear film, my reasons are also nonlinear. Byte!

Leofwine_draca A curiously hollow remake of the 1960 George Pal classic; although watchable this is a far cry from the original movie which starred Rod Taylor in his finest performance ever. The film does make some unnecessary changes to the book/original film, but also goes out of its way to pay homage to some scenes memorable from the original movie – especially the shot at the end of that film, where we see a Morlock decaying into dust. This shot scared me senseless as a kid, so I was impressed to see it re-done on a bigger budget and with better effects in this version.The tacked-on romantic aspect of the story is deeply unnecessary and only serves to cloud the underlying adventure that the film contains. Another problem is with the far too short running time. An extremely fast pacing means that you never have time to sit back and contemplate what you've seen, as something is always happening or being explained. The end result is that you end up having forgotten most of what you have seen. Finally, the characters are one-dimensional and interchangeable, with a cast seemingly picked for their looks rather than their rightness for the role. Guy Pearce is a great actor but walks through this by barely trying, and Samantha Mumba looks fantastic but doesn't play a character – more of a clothes horse (or not, as the case may be). Jeremy Irons turns up unrecognisably (and with good reason) as the Morlock leader, in fantastic makeup that makes him resemble Emperor Palpatine in RETURN OF THE JEDI. Sadly his screen time is far too short, so he only gets to menace us for a brief while.The one thing that makes THE TIME MACHINE worth watching at all is the quality of the special effects. The first time travel scene pays homage to the original film in a fantastic way and it only gets better from there. The disintegration of the moon is another scene-stopper and the Morlocks are great creations, a mixture of imposing puppets and CGI-enhanced monsters. No qualms there whatsoever. The action sequence which shows them herding up the Eloi is also a great moment in the film. Sadly, the rest is rather mundane filler, but when your film looks this good then you can't complain too much. I'd stick with the original though.

jricodocs The newer version of The Time Machine was interesting, but could have been so much better. Granted a "fleshing out" of the story is mandatory, based on the brief novella by H.G. Wells, by both versions of the movie. Some strange directions the newer version took were the Eloi being darker-skinned people, with many "African themes" throughout, their cliffside homes, and the Morlocks are now a threat both night and day (!) Lead actor Guy Pearce was miscast in my view, and just didn't project as the hero/adventurer in this film as expected. I also didn't understand the physics of the dramatic ending; how the time machine could self-destruct and only destroy the lair of the Morlocks and nothing else (?) There was one memorable scene, very well done, that had me wishing the entire film had been this innovative: at the end where it shows past and present superimposed on each other, Guy Pearce's friend and maid, along with Guy Pearce in his new life role.

mjdarling1117 The summary of the storyline that is listed at the top of the IMDb page for the 2002 movie, "The Time Machine" states, "Hoping to alter the events of the past, a 19th century inventor instead travels 800,000 years into the future, where he finds humankind divided into two warring races."The Eloi are an extraordinarily peaceful people. Their friends and family members disappear, but they don't even try to find out why. The Eloi would never even think of uttering a bad word, never mind warring.Shouldn't the IMDb writers that summarize movie story lines have to actually WATCH the movie before rewriting/summarizing the story lines other writers, who have watched the movies, write...or at least use the same words? The storyline writer watched it, and called the two races the hunters and the hunted, which is accurate.