Prisonniers du temps

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.

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.

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.