Prisonniers du temps

I've read the book more than once, and completely understand Michael Crichton's objections to this film adaptation. I also understand why so many who enjoyed the book feel the same way. But, a film adaptation is a film first and an adaptation second. As an adventure epic with a science fiction foundation, it's not that bad. The pacing is adequate, the character development sufficient to engender interest in the various players' fates and the overall cinematography journeyman proficient. If you have a few hours on a rainy day, and haven't read the book, have at it, and enjoy!

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 is true in so many cases, the book, Timeline, is way better than the movie. But that doesn't mean the movie isn't fun though. It is based on the Michael Crichton's novel by the same name. Crichton is responsible for many great books, but is most known for Jurassic Park, which was famously adapted by Spielberg. With this being said you can definitely expect a story with a great premise.

Timeline follows a group of archaeologists who are digging a site at Castleguard, France. They are funded by a technology company, ITC, and have been receiving hints about their site to the point where the boss, Professor Johnston (Billy Connolly), becomes suspicious. He goes to find out what the back story is and the next day his crew discovers a new room at the site which has a note left by the professor from 14th century France.

The professor's son, Chris (Paul Walker), and the crew led by Kate Ericson (Frances O'Connor) and Andre Marek (Gerard Butler) go to ITC to find out what is going on. They learn that the company built a 3d fax machine that tapped into a wormhole sending its packages, or in this case humans, back to 14th century Castleguard, France. The group then heads back in time to go save the professor, who was sent back there to figure out the connection of the wormhole and their site.

While the film has a great premise it probably would have been a lot better if it was made ten years later with a bigger budget. The story starts off strong, but then proceeds to tail off into B-movie territory. It has some performances by actors you will know, but the script doesn't help them, and it certainly doesn't reach the highs of the book. By no means is this a success, but it does well to keep you entertained if you're just looking for a movie that will be a time killer.

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.

Sorry, the book had so much potential to be turned into an awesome film. But this low-budget crap with pathetic screenplay, well, kinda dishonored Crichton. All the book-to-film changes (Yes, all!) slowly destroyed the film. Paul walker looks fine like Chris but he cannot act; and Frances O'Connor is a fine actress but the role of Kate isn't for her. Gerard Butler on the other hand might be one good thing in the whole film. The multiverse-travel scene is a total disaster. The character development of the lead people, and also Doniger, is left behind which took away much taste from the story.

Reading the book is more recommended.