3 Stars

Let me count the ways I love this movie. The script is absolutely wonderful. It was Nicholas Meyer’s first film as director and it shows – he’s awkward, frequently has no clue what to do with a shot or where to put the camera, the effects are cheesy as can be, and yet I don’t care – I love it from start to finish. And one of the main reasons is that he gives us characters to love and to hate, but even the villain here has real depth. The leading players are all fantastic – some of the supporting players are not but again I don’t care.

The transfer on the Warner Archive Blu-ray is better than the DVD but it’s not going to win any awards, I’m afraid. It’s downright blurry at times, too soft, and lacking in detail. It’s not the production photography, which was very good and NOT soft. Still, the movie’s the thing and I’m really happy to have it.

Published by

Kevin Collins

administrator

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
12,832
Reaction score
16,612
Points
9,110
Real Name
Robert Harris
Definitely, a fun and thought-provoking film.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tino and Jimbo64

Ken Koc

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
922
Points
1,610
Location
New York
Real Name
Ken Koc
I noticed the blurryness myself...almost out of focus. Weird.
 

GlennF

Second Unit
Premium
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
482
Reaction score
373
Points
110
Location
Toronto, Canada
Real Name
Glenn Frost
It's interesting that the master they use on TCM HD has the same "out of focus/blurry" thing happening -particularly around the edges of the picture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Koc

John Sparks

Producer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Messages
3,144
Reaction score
1,797
Points
4,110
Location
Menifee, CA
Real Name
John Sparks
...and why I decided to stick with my upscaled SD!
 

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Premium
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
20,334
Reaction score
2,062
Points
9,110
Age
55
Location
Gulf Coast
Website
www.facebook.com
Real Name
Tony D.
I watched it on TCM the other day and didn't notice the fuzzy edges or whatever it was that was fuzzy.

Was a fan of this when I was younger but now it doesn't hold up for me.
Watched it and after I just felt nothing.
I love time travel stories but too many questions now that I didn't notice before.
 

Keith Cobby

Cinematographer
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
2,636
Reaction score
1,632
Points
4,110
Location
Kent "The Garden of England", UK
Real Name
Keith Cobby
Watched this today for the first time for many years. The blu-ray presentation is OK but the film was not as good as I remembered. The two male leads were unconvincing time travellers although Mary Steenburgen was wonderful as always.
 

Stephen_J_H

All Things Film Junkie
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
6,277
Reaction score
1,504
Points
9,110
Location
North of the 49th
Real Name
Stephen J. Hill
I have the DVD, which looks fine, but I was looking at screencaps [let the pillorying begin....]. and what I see there is what looks like it could be one of three things: vignetting at the edges [which I assume it is not], that the IP used for the release was curling up on the sides [which should have been caught at the scanning phase], or an improperly made IP with the focus issues baked in. I'm leaning towards #3. Even the estimable WB is not infallible.
 

bigshot

Cinematographer
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
2,912
Reaction score
1,431
Points
4,110
Real Name
Stephen
It was a little fuzzy in theaters too. I think they were trying to hide actors' wrinkles or something.
 

Douglas R

Cinematographer
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
2,414
Reaction score
896
Points
1,610
Location
London, United Kingdom
Real Name
Doug
The film has great memories for me because I saw during my first visit to New York in October 1979 and the audience clearly loved it. I don't remember it looking at all "fuzzy".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tino

Tino

Executive Producer
Premium
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
17,777
Reaction score
9,266
Points
9,110
Age
57
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
Yeah. I saw it multiple times in the theaters during its original run and it definitely wasn’t “fuzzy”.
 

haineshisway

Producer
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
4,600
Reaction score
5,415
Points
4,110
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
It wasn't fuzzy in theaters at all - there were some filters used on some close-ups but that's it - what's at play in this transfer is simply out of focus, not fuzzy.
 

Rick Thompson

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
990
Points
1,610
I really enjoyed it. Time travel movies are not to be taken seriously -- Time Machine (which takes itself v-e-r-y seriously) to the contrary. This one is fun. The only time travel flix I enjoyed more are the original Back to the Future, Star Trek IV and Timeline. (And why isn't that on blu? Oops, I forgot -- it's Paramount!)
 
Last edited:

Keith Cobby

Cinematographer
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
2,636
Reaction score
1,632
Points
4,110
Location
Kent "The Garden of England", UK
Real Name
Keith Cobby
I really enjoyed it. Time travel movies are not to be taken seriously -- Time Machine (which takes itself v-e-r-y seriously) to the contrary. This one is fun. The only time travel flix I enjoyed more are the original Back to the Future, Star Trek IV and Timeline. (And why isn't that on blu? Oops, I forgot -- it's Paramount!)
Another entertaining time travel film is Timestalkers (TV 1987)..
 

Johnny Angell

Played With Dinosaurs Member
Joined
Dec 13, 1998
Messages
12,084
Reaction score
4,045
Points
9,110
Age
74
Location
Central Arkansas
Real Name
Johnny Angell
Let me count the ways I love this movie. The script is absolutely wonderful. It was Nicholas Meyer's first film as director and it shows - he's awkward, frequently has no clue what to do with a shot or where to put the camera, the effects are cheesy as can be, and yet I don't care - I love it from start to finish. And one of the main reasons is that he gives us characters to love and to hate, but even the villain here has real depth. The leading players are all fantastic - some of the supporting players are not but again I don't care.

The transfer on the Warner Archive Blu-ray is better than the DVD but it's not going to win any awards, I'm afraid. It's downright blurry at times, too soft, and lacking in detail. It's not the production photography, which was very good and NOT soft. Still, the movie's the thing and I'm really happy to have it.
I agree totally with your evaluation of the story and characters. Malcom McDowel, David Warner, and Mary Steenburgen are all very good. Hard to believe that Warner also played Bob Cratchet in my favorit Christmas Carol (the TV production with George C. Scott.) I liked that the disbelieving police were portrayed sympathetically.
I really enjoyed it. Time travel movies are not to be taken seriously -- Time Machine (which takes itself v-e-r-y seriously) to the contrary. This one is fun. The only time travel flix I enjoyed more are the original Back to the Future, Star Trek IV and Timeline. (And why isn't that on blu? Oops, I forgot -- it's Paramount!)
Time Machine is very effective. If it takes itself seriously, I don’t mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josh Steinberg

Stephen_J_H

All Things Film Junkie
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
6,277
Reaction score
1,504
Points
9,110
Location
North of the 49th
Real Name
Stephen J. Hill
I thought Timeline the novel was awesome.

I thought Timeline the film was an epic disaster.
And i totally agree with you. Timeline would've made a great premium cable limited series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tino

Tino

Executive Producer
Premium
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
17,777
Reaction score
9,266
Points
9,110
Age
57
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
And i totally agree with you. Timeline would've made a great premium cable limited series.
Yeah. The movie was terrible in every way as I recall. Seriously one of the worst I’ve ever seen.