The Time Machine - remake

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Peter McM, Jan 2, 2002.

  1. Peter McM

    Peter McM Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 1999
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    Real Name:
    Peter
    First time I heard of this was yesterday; saw the ad on TV. Looks great! Anybody else looking forward to?
     
  2. Inspector Hammer!

    Inspector Hammer! Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 1999
    Messages:
    11,061
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Real Name:
    John Williamson
    Absolutly! I first saw the teaser trailer way back when I went to see 'Jurassic Park III', and I saw the full length trailer before 'Lord of the Rings'. I'm a big fan of H.G. Wells, and the original film, and I got real excited to hear that Simon Wells, who is related to the writer in some manner, either his son or grandson, can't remember which, is going to direct the remake.
    I also love Guy Pierce, he's the perfect choice to play the lead. If he does even half a good a job as he did in 'Memento', it's gonna be great I think.
     
  3. Frank Anderson

    Frank Anderson Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 1999
    Messages:
    2,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had heard about it for some time. About 3 days ago I saw the trailer. Looks better than I would have guessed. I probably will go see it when it comes out.
     
  4. Craig S

    Craig S Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2000
    Messages:
    5,726
    Likes Received:
    197
    Location:
    League City, Texas
    Real Name:
    Craig Seanor
    There's been some negative buzz on this one, based on the script. The Orlando Jones virtual tour guide scares me a bit. But the new trailer does look good, and the presence of Guy Pierce is a definite plus.
    However, it once again begs the question - why remake a GOOD movie (I consider the George Pal original to be a minor classic)? Hopefully it won't turn out to be another Planet of the Apes.
     
  5. Mitty

    Mitty Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 1999
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    5
     
  6. Jack Briggs

    Jack Briggs Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    16,738
    Likes Received:
    129
    It should be noted that this new film is not really a "remake" per se--much as that other Lolita is not a remake of the Kubrick masterpiece. Why? Because the films are based on a literary source--in this case, the H.G. Wells novella.

    The Pal film is marvelous; I would go further and call it a bonafide classic, without qualifying it with the word "minor."

    But I must say that the trailers I've seen for this new film disturb me a bit. I fear yet another CGI-driven indulgence in special effects, with little in the way of the contemplativeness that characterized the 1960 film.

    I hope I'm wrong, though.
     
  7. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,585
    Likes Received:
    0
    My reaction to the first trailer was a very positive one. I'm very excited.
    I agree with Jack regarding the "remake" status. When an original book is a source it isn't a remake. Classic literature gets reused all the time (just think Romeo and Juliet or Dracula for example).
    I think O Jones is hilarious and talented so I don't fear his presence. He makes even bad parts seem almost good (IMHO), he was a shining light in both Evolution and Say It Isn't So. Both were scripts and directorial efforts that were lacking to say the least, yet he still brought what little life/depth to the characters that he could.
    And then on to Pearce. A great casting I think and a superior actor. If the weight of the film falls on his shoulders I doubt it will fail.
    It seems to be staying true to the book and I think the CGI is being used to enhance the story rather than to be the story. But time (ha ha) will tell. [​IMG]
     
  8. John Torrez

    John Torrez Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2000
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder if they really took out that sequence with the moon rocks falling to earth and hitting NYC?
     
  9. Rob Willey

    Rob Willey Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2000
    Messages:
    1,317
    Likes Received:
    60
    Real Name:
    Rob
    I agree with Jack's assessment of the original and had the same reaction to the trailer for the new one. I thought "H.G. Wells meets CGI -- ugh!" We'll see....

    Edit to clarify: I think CGI could be very effective for simulating the pasage of time. My aversion to the trailer was the Morelocks. They don't seem like the kind of thing that would evolve under ground over the course of 800 milennia. It seems like a shameless attempt to leverage the kind of baddies seen in flicks like The Mummy Returns.

    Rob
     
  10. Kurt B

    Kurt B Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2000
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    After seeing the teaser on TV yesterday, I agree with Jack. I'm almost afraid CGI will rule the day. I have the Pal version and enjoy it from time to time on LD.

    Here's hoping...
     
  11. SteveGon

    SteveGon Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2000
    Messages:
    12,251
    Likes Received:
    1
     
  12. Jim_C

    Jim_C Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    2,058
    Likes Received:
    13
    I don't know about this one. I didn't see the original and I haven't read the book. Did I see some sort of aliens in the trailer?
     
  13. RobertR

    RobertR Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 1998
    Messages:
    9,707
    Likes Received:
    171
    It's no spoiler to say that there are no aliens in The Time Machine, Jim.
     
  14. Mitty

    Mitty Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 1999
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    5
    What Jim likely saw in the trailer was the current adaptation of what were called Morlocks in the 1960 version (sorry, I've never read the book).

    They might be aliens; I don't think their origin is discussed in the 1960 version, maybe it is in the novel, but I think the assumption is meant to be that they are a species of life on earth in the very, very distant future. I think we're talking about eight hundred thousand A.D. here, so who knows? If they are intended to be aliens, they travelled to earth, earthlings didn't travel to them. The whole premise of the story is about time travel (the 4th dimension), not travel within the 3 dimensions. The whole story takes place within throwing distance of where the scientist's house sits in his own time.

    I highly recomment the 1960 version to those who haven't seen it. It's also available on a quite well done DVD.
     
  15. John Blaze

    John Blaze Auditioning

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Im just a regular joe that's never seen the original, nor knows nothing about the story itself. But after seeing the film right before LOTR, the movie looked like it would suck! The 7UP guy? Christina Millian? Some terrible looking CGI alien-like creatures? Dissappointing first look if it is to be some sort of blockbuster. I was rooting for Spiderman instead - like everyone else.
     
  16. Jon_B

    Jon_B Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2000
    Messages:
    1,025
    Likes Received:
    0
    I also saw the trailer at The Lord of the Rings. I think this could be really great. I am familar with the old school 1960 film and look forward to seeing this new interpretation of the H.G. Wells novel.

    Jon
     
  17. Jay E

    Jay E Cinematographer

    Joined:
    May 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    I saw the trailer and I was a little disappointed after watching it. The CGI effects did not look very realistic to me and I'm afraid the film may lose much of the flavor & atmosphere of it's Victorian era setting & storytelling. I'm still waiting anxiously for it to come out, I'm just a little bit wary now.
     
  18. Jim_C

    Jim_C Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    2,058
    Likes Received:
    13
    Thanks guys. I think I may check out the original.
     
  19. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,585
    Likes Received:
    0
    As I already said, the trailer impressed me and has me very excited to see the film.
    I am truly surprised by the amount of negative reaction to it here. Goes to show what I know.
    I'll let you all know after I see it the first day. Maybe I'll save you $8. [​IMG]
     
  20. Jack Briggs

    Jack Briggs Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    16,738
    Likes Received:
    129
    Seth: Please do post your reactions to the film--movie tickets cost $10 a pop here in LaLa Land. [​IMG]
    I've read the novella, and I think George Pal's film is true to its spirit--though the protagonist in the Wells original is called, simply, the "Time Traveler." No name--no "George" a la Rod Taylor.
    As for the Morlocks, they were Wells's take on the Gilded Age society in which he wrote--a scathing indictment on the British class system. In both the film and the novella, the Morlocks were the evolutionary result of the technological branch of humanity migrating underground in the wake of war, reverting in the process to cannabilism.
    For a novella written late in the 19th century, The Time Machine holds up remarkably well--it's something that would have pleased John W. Campbell and the fans of the so-called "Golden Age of SF" that he helped to usher in. (The final chapters are stunning--taking us, as they do, to the very death throes of planet Earth. Amazing.)
    Consider the book recommended.
     

Share This Page