Rescate en el tiempo

I really enjoyed Richard Donner's Timeline, despite some bad reviews and an awful reputation. It's based on a book by the great Michael Crichton, and centers around what is one of the most fascinating and enjoyable premises out there: time travel. There's nothing like a time travel flick, in any way, shape or form. I'm a sucker for them. This one starts off with an archaeological dig somewhere in England, leading to the abrupt discovery of forces that allow a wormhole in time to be used, sending people back to the middle ages. Paul Walker discovers that his researcher father (Billy Connolly) has made the leap back in time, and may be in trouble. Along with his sort of girlfriend (Frances O Connor) and his father's friend (Gerard Butler) they venture back to find him, and of course everything goes wrong. They land smack in the middle of a skirmish between a poncy English lord (Michael Sheen) and the leader of the French faction (Lambert Wilson), with no identities, nothing to defend themselves with and not a clue what to do. Back home in our time (or, rather, 2003. Time flies, don't it?), the head of the program responsible for harnessing the wormhole's power (a slimy David Thewlis) is a greedy prick who can't really be trusted with the technology, prompting the suspicion of his assistant (Matt Craven). Walker, Butler and company are now faced with a full on castle siege that's quite the dandy set piece, forced to take up arms and fight for their lives as well as a way home. Walker is amusingly out of place in a medieval setting but it works considering the plot. Butler is terrific, bringing his old world style to a character arc that is lovely to see play out. Connolly, although not in the film that much, lights up the screen with his genial kindness and likability that he brings to every film. Neal McDonough, Anna Friel and Marton Csokas also costar. It's simply an adventure piece that doesn't think logistics too much, and in turn doesn't require you to do so either. Underrated stuff.

As some of you might have noticed, the big crux of this film is the Michael Crichton novel it was based on. The book "Timeline" (or "Tijdlijn" in Dutch) is a very entertaining novel about the concept of traveling through time and a large company known as ITC trying to make money out of it. It packs a lot of action and tries to explain the issues surrounding time travel well enough. So anyone who read the book and liked it... SHOULD STAY THE HECK AWAY from this movie, because there's a big chance it turns out as a big disappointment.

Why? Because the movie tries to simplify the plot and put a big emphasis on action. Away with the part about ITC working on a way ter commercialize time travel. Let's just say they erm... discovered it by accident! Also throw out that part about speaking Old English and Aquitanian language in the 14th Century. Let's just say they all speak fluently English and/or French. In the book the only persons who could literally understand the people in 1357 were Marek and Edward Jones. The others had to use a special earpiece with a translator inside. But that's too difficult, so let's throw in someone else who DOES speak French. Oh and that storyline surrounding Lady Claire is much too complicated. Let's cut out Guy de Malagant (who tries to marry her in the book) and just make her Arnaut's sister. And whatever you do, don't let Chris get too close to her (in the book it was Chris who met Lady Claire first and falls in love with her, but she liked Marek more)

Then the characters: the talents of Billy Connolly (Edward Jones), David Thewlis (Robert Doniger) and Frances O'Connor (Kate Ericson) are totally wasted. And I refuse ter comment on Paul "2 Fast 2 Bloody Furious" Walker as Chris Johnston. Nondedju, what a bloody plank of an actor he is! I'm more satisfied with Gerard Butler as André Marek, although I didn't like the fact his nationality was changed (Marek was a Dutchman in the book). Also doing a good job more or less were Marton Csokas and Anna Friel. Friel is looking very good as Lady Claire and Csokas has far too less screen time to properly portray Robert De Kere (or Rob Deckard as called in the book).

Simplifying the plot of the book ter make it look good on screen actually made this film look bad. It might offer some entertainment if you never heard of the book, but if you read the book, then don't go see this movie!

Rating: 2/10 (It was pretty terrible)

--------------------------------------------

The Path chosen is never a trampled Road

I rented this movie knowing that is it based on a Michael Crichton book. The Movie was somewhat entertaining if you could get past the acting. The sets and the costumes were done well and the battle scenes were plausible. However if you read the book there is so much more to explore with the characters and the action. This book was written so it could be a movie. Ten years down the road this should be remade for justice sake. A mini series on could be in order because of the additional scenes that would be needed. And no I am not naive, I know that in any adaptation sacrifices must be made but I feel that because they got a big name to play Chris the centered the movie around him when it is clearly better balanced in the book. I am not a book snob but I saw so much potential in this concept that I felt that the movie was unfinished. That is why I read the book. Judge for your self.

There's a reason why time travel has remained a staple of science-fiction for more than a century - human beings will always be curious about the past as well as the future. To be able to fix past mistakes with the advantage of hindsight or to know what to expect in the years to come are basic human desires common to everyone.

The producers of "Timeline" may have benefited from owning a time machine. If they had taken a ride in Marty McFly's DeLorean they might have been able to prevent the mistakes in casting and scripting and made something that lives up to the idea's potential.

An archeological team led by Professor Edward Johnston (Billy Connolly) is excavating the ruins of Castlegard, site of a medieval battle between the French and the British during the Hundred Year War. Johnston's son Chris (Paul Walker) is visiting, a man not interested in the past but in getting closer to his father's assistant Kate Erikson (Frances O'Connor).

Trouble arises when Professor Johnston goes to his benefactor, the International Technology Corporation, to get more funds and information about why they are so interested in Castlegard. When he does not return Chris, accompanied with Kate, historian and medieval weapons expert Andre Marek (Gerard Butler), physics expert Dave Stern (Ethan Embry) and Francois (Rossif Sutherland) head to the company headquarters to figure out where Johnston has gone.

It seems ITC, lead by Robert Doniger (David Thewlis), has stumbled onto a worm hole that leads back to 1357 while trying to perfect teleportation. Professor Johnston went back to see the era first-hand but got stuck there, and now his students must go back to rescue him. However, there's a catch, the group must collect him in six hours, otherwise they'll be stuck in the 14th century forever.

The movie could have been great had the filmmakers taken more time to examine its premise, but as it stands the plot is just mechanical. Once in the past the group just goes from one incident to another in a single-minded goal of rescuing Johnston.

There is no moment of wonder at the medieval world or any insights that looking into the past might reveal to 21st century travelers throughout the film. The visitors' knowledge of the area and upcoming battle do indeed come in handy, but they use this information only to survive and not to learn anything worthwhile.

The movie certainly looks good, with some fine attention to period details. The clothing and buildings look authentic, though the people inhabiting them are a bit cleaner then they would have been. The siege on the castle is also well filmed with trebuchets and catapults launching flaming bombs at Castlegard.

However, for a movie about survival and battle, everything is handled apathetically. The characters seem to be going through the motions when delivering their lines and there isn't much tension in the fight scenes. It adds up to a boring action movie, and boring is one thing an action movie should never be.

It's also funny to see a film so selective about being authentic, such as making it a point that modern people should not carry modern equipment with them to influence history, but having medieval characters speak modern versions of English and French. It's also a strange that the movie takes sides, portraying the English as evil tyrannts and the French as noble defenders of their home. In reality, both sides were ruthless during that era.

As an actor, Walker comes off as a poor man's Keanu Reeves. You read that right - Walker makes Reeves look like a nuanced performer by comparison. He shouts lines with little conviction and acts like a dork through most of the film.

In fact, with the exception or Butler's Marek, it seems like amateur night in the acting department. A scene where O'Connors' Kate breaks down crying will have people laughing. Even Embry, normally an okay actor, gives an unmoving performance. His character stays behind in the present and comes off as the "self-righteous scientist" who squares off against Thewlis' heartless business man, a typical feature of this movie type.

Director Richard Donner once made great movies like "Superman" and "Lethal Weapon" but can't rescue this mess. It's been five years since he's done a movie, and he seems rusty. The camerawork and set design are both excellent though, and belong in a better movie.

Like most stories by Michael Crichton, "Timeline" makes scientists into noble humanitarians and corporate heads into greedy slime to create artificial drama, and it comes off as exploitive pabulum that detracts from where the attention should be, on the action.

Since the action isn't good, what's left is a story where the heroes cry, complain and act selfishly while the movie tries to convince us that they're intriguing characters we should care about. "Timeline" is a wholly forgettable experience, and memories of the movie will be teleported out of the minds of the audience not long after leaving the theater.

Five out of ten stars. Just stick to the "Lethal Weapon" series Mr. Donner, and Mr. Crichton, please exhibit caution before letting another one of your novels be ruined with a horrible on screen versions (but then, you haven't had a good reputation of doing that).

Based on some of the other comments I was expecting to hate this movie. I didn't, but I see why the reviews seem so negative. There are so many things to pick at, and no real bright spots to talk up.

It really wasn't that bad. It wasn't great, but it's worth a rental. I'm not sure I would have felt I got my money's worth in the theater.

I'm sure it was a tough chore to convert the original story to a 2-hour movie script. They had to take several liberties and condense quite a bit to do so. Unfortunately, that affected the flow and the movie ends up being a little choppy. How and why they go back in time is pretty well cut out of the movie and without any detail the believability is nil. The story boils down to a pretty standard chase and explosion thriller set in the middle ages.

Definitely treat yourself to a read of the book the movie is based on. Like any book, the depth of characterization is so much more rich and interesting than what comes through in the movie. Once you get past the introductory technical jargon to set up the story it is a real page turner.