PDA

View Full Version : That horrible horrible 'Timeline' Movie.



Mio
July 31st, 2004, 09:45 AM
Up till now, I didn't think it was even remotely possible to take such an excellent and well thought out book, and turn it into that horrible POS movie.

I mean, come on, It took a good 100 pages of the book just to set everything up, and within the first 5 minutes of the movie it was like:

"We can send you back in time."

"Ok."

And they knocked like 31 hours off the mission, and they cut out the green chapel, and they moved the monestary...and....and....

What was the point in adding that French guy? I mean, did they really need to add a character just to kill him off 5 minutes in?

It's only been out for about a year, and I already demand that they redo it! Poor Michael Crichton....

Elwe Singollo
July 31st, 2004, 10:08 AM
I haven't read the book, but i thoought it was horrible... i share ur thoughts on how it wasn't good, but thanks for sharing the comparisons of what changed and stuff :D

Anthro Girl
July 31st, 2004, 10:29 AM
Agreed. I really liked the book. I generally like Crichton, but most of the movies made from his stuff have been pale comparisons (exceptions being the Jurassic Park stuff and Coma). There was little reason for Timeline to suck so bad, but I think they started with a weak adaptation script and then picked an action/adventure director who is better known for directing "star vehicles". I think the studio was hoping it was going to be a breakthrough for Paul Walker...who I think was miscast in the first place. :(

I just hate it when Hollywood ruins a perfectly good book. :o

Mio
July 31st, 2004, 11:25 AM
I just hate it when Hollywood ruins a perfectly good book. :o
Timeline would HAVE to be a 3 hour movie. If done properly, it would be long, but it would rock.

Erin
July 31st, 2004, 01:05 PM
Man, I loved TIMELINE! I thought it was creative and exciting. Who cares if it's not all perfect, I still loved it and it's now one of my favorite movies.

Mio
July 31st, 2004, 02:19 PM
Man, I loved TIMELINE! I thought it was creative and exciting. Who cares if it's not all perfect, I still loved it and it's now one of my favorite movies.
Then don't ever read the book, or you'll hate the movie so much.....

TechnoBoY
July 31st, 2004, 02:59 PM
I read the book and liked it. The movie sucked. I am not even comparing it to the book. It was just a bad movie.

Mio
July 31st, 2004, 03:08 PM
You have no idea how excited I was a few years ago when I heard that there was gonna be a Timeline movie.....I felt nausious in the movie theatre because it was so bad....

I mean, they changed the physics of it all...what the hell was this 'accidental' wormhole? In the book, they could go anywhere they wanted. It made the ending of the book better than the movie, IMHO.




Allthough i do forgive them for losing the water shields....that would have been expensive.



Also, Donager wasn't enough of a jerk in the movie.

aAnubiSs
July 31st, 2004, 03:23 PM
Guess I'll have to download it and see what the fuzz is all about.

Larry
July 31st, 2004, 03:26 PM
I wonder if Crichton could have done what Clive Cussler is doing now, suing to try and stop the film. Cussler's Sahara is being turned into piece of crap like Crichton's Timeline was, and Cussler is trying to do something about it.

Daniel Jackson
July 31st, 2004, 04:14 PM
Up till now, I didn't think it was even remotely possible to take such an excellent and well thought out book, and turn it into that horrible POS movie.

I mean, come on, It took a good 100 pages of the book just to set everything up, and within the first 5 minutes of the movie it was like:

"We can send you back in time."

"Ok."

And they knocked like 31 hours off the mission, and they cut out the green chapel, and they moved the monestary...and....and....

What was the point in adding that French guy? I mean, did they really need to add a character just to kill him off 5 minutes in?

It's only been out for about a year, and I already demand that they redo it! Poor Michael Crichton....
Didn't anyone tell you that book-based movies are never like the book? :p

aschen
July 31st, 2004, 04:30 PM
Well, that's Hollywood for you.

Mio
July 31st, 2004, 05:00 PM
Didn't anyone tell you that book-based movies are never like the book? :p

They usually aren't THAT bad!

Anthro Girl
July 31st, 2004, 05:41 PM
Didn't anyone tell you that book-based movies are never like the book? :p
Well, of course not. They never can be. But they don't have to be complete butcher jobs, either. There have been some brilliant and wonderful film adaptations of great (and even mediocre) books. Timeline just wasn't one of them. :cool: I can see how, if you didn't read the book, it would be less stupid. ;)

Mio
July 31st, 2004, 06:33 PM
I can see how, if you didn't read the book, it would be less stupid. ;)
I can't. :P

Anthro Girl
July 31st, 2004, 06:44 PM
I can't. :P
Less stupid...not "not stupid". ;)

Actually, if I hadn't read the book, it would have been just another silly movie with some cool costumes, a little scifi and some stuff blowin' up. There is a place in this world for that. :D

Elwe Singollo
July 31st, 2004, 07:37 PM
Didn't anyone tell you that book-based movies are never like the book? :p I think there are a few book-movie adaptions are almost identical, such as Holes and although they were changes in LotR Trilogy, it was still close to the book.

morjana
August 1st, 2004, 12:10 AM
On the other hand, Michael Chrichton's book "Eaters of the Dead" was absolutely terrible...and the movie based on that novel, "The 13th Warrior" is a wonderful, terrific flick (oh hey -- ANOTHER movie that was scored by Jerry Goldsmith [sniff[]).

So it works both ways some times.

Morjana

Matt G
August 1st, 2004, 04:37 AM
Read the book recently, which was pretty cool haven't gotten round to catching the film yet.

Anthro Girl
August 1st, 2004, 09:07 AM
On the other hand, Michael Chrichton's book "Eaters of the Dead" was absolutely terrible...and the movie based on that novel, "The 13th Warrior" is a wonderful, terrific flick
That's true, Morjana. And Congo was stupid book and a stupid movie! :p LOL! Actually, the experience of reading Congo was still better than watching the movie because the act of reading allowed my imagination to concoct the scene...and that's always better than any movie...even the good ones. ;)

Mio
August 1st, 2004, 11:27 AM
Read the book recently, which was pretty cool haven't gotten round to catching the film yet.
Don't.

Indiana
August 1st, 2004, 01:29 PM
Was looking forward to the movie and was dissappointed. I enjoyed it though, but nothing life changing. Not as exciting as the book. The most exciting scene from the book was the Jousting scene, which was not in film. Also, the communication via ear pieces was not in film either :(

I seriously think this could have done well as a big budget mini-series much like Speilberg's Band of Brothers Min series.

Daniel Jackson
August 1st, 2004, 08:12 PM
Well, of course not. They never can be. But they don't have to be complete butcher jobs, either. There have been some brilliant and wonderful film adaptations of great (and even mediocre) books. Timeline just wasn't one of them. :cool: I can see how, if you didn't read the book, it would be less stupid. ;)
Maybe the people who wanted to base the movie on the book decided to base the movie loosely on the book's story, and not the book in it's entirety. If the movie is good in it's own right, who cares if it doesn't match the book exactly?

Torley
August 2nd, 2004, 02:58 AM
Haha... you know what they're doing now with some movies? With I, Robot, the credits say that Asimov's book suggested the movie. I had to laugh at that one. Now, I haven't seen nor read Timeline, but it sounds like a real mixed bag of nuts to me. Well, we've got another time travel movie coming up... A Sound of Thunder, that is.

Ancient 1
August 7th, 2004, 08:06 PM
Well, that's Hollywood for you.
When I first read the title of this thread I thought you were talking about movies in general that dealt with time trave....and there have been some bad ones.
These come to mind:
Time Cop; can't stand Van Damme
Bill & Ted's... bla, bla, bla...pick both!
Time Bandits...to stupid to be funny.
Some of the better ones:
Star Trek: TNG First Contact
The Time Machine (original)

Anthro Girl
August 7th, 2004, 08:15 PM
Awww...c'mon. Bill & Ted's first adventure was a classic. :D

Hohenzollern
August 8th, 2004, 01:38 PM
Agreed, 120%. I must believe that there is a special corner of hell just for the ilk that do such things to well researched and entertaining books. Jeez they did not even get the French uniforms right.


Up till now, I didn't think it was even remotely possible to take such an excellent and well thought out book, and turn it into that horrible POS movie.

I mean, come on, It took a good 100 pages of the book just to set everything up, and within the first 5 minutes of the movie it was like:

"We can send you back in time."

"Ok."

And they knocked like 31 hours off the mission, and they cut out the green chapel, and they moved the monestary...and....and....

What was the point in adding that French guy? I mean, did they really need to add a character just to kill him off 5 minutes in?

It's only been out for about a year, and I already demand that they redo it! Poor Michael Crichton....

Ancient 1
August 9th, 2004, 10:05 PM
Awww...c'mon. Bill & Ted's first adventure was a classic. :D
Well, maybe I'm getting old. I guess I did like it at the time...but the second one was just too much of a mediocre thing.

Supreme Commander Thor
August 9th, 2004, 10:43 PM
and there have been some bad ones.
These come to mind:
Time Cop; can't stand Van Damme
Bill & Ted's... bla, bla, bla...pick both!
Time Bandits...to stupid to be funny.I didn't think Time Bandits was that bad. I have seen a lot worse than that. Plus, Bill and Ted's wasnt too bad. The second one I agree really sucked, butthe first was OK. Time Cop, yeah, i totally agree sucked horribly. You ever notice that lump that is always on Van Damme's head?

Anthro Girl
August 10th, 2004, 12:48 AM
Well, maybe I'm getting old. I guess I did like it at the time...but the second one was just too much of a mediocre thing.
The second one was just crap, but at least George Carlin was still in it. ;)