Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
22 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Filmed In Rural Quebec To Save On Costs?, 29 May 2004
Time travel is an exhausted movie theme. Sometimes it works, but most times it doesn't. Welcome to a time where it doesn't. Michael Crichton's novel gets 'medieval' quality in this poorly executed film. You can read the plot in the description above, but basically, several time travel students go back to 14th Century France to rescue their founder. There are no great special effects and everything looks like a standard (or substandard) movie sound stage. The acting is as wooden as the stage sets with every sincere attempt at emotion is embarrassingly tepid. The medieval castle scenes resemble something Monty Python would assemble and the fighting scenes are cut so poorly that you never know who's hitting whom. But that's being picky. My biggest beef is the time machine. It took years to invent and assemble and gets blown apart in a (really dumb) accident. But, it is repaired within the six hour window needed to bring everyone back. How's that again? Well, this is Hollywood, not literature. No need to discuss the extras other than to say there is no need for three documentaries on "Journey through Time". Next film please.
|
|
|
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
on the middle on this one, 10 April 2006
First off, it plays like a Sci-Fi Channel made-for-telly movie. It doesn't have a big screen feel about it all. As with all Crichton books - the books are better. I loved Congo - dismal movie. Loved Sphere - very dismal movie. Rising Sun was brilliant - the super novel and Connery were totally wasted. This one is not a bad movie, but weak movie from another super Crichton book. Maybe someday they will actually do a movie on the quality of Jurassic Park again!
The premise is intriguing. Point one, toss out the "why factor". Any time you deal with time travel you run up against the reality questions, so if you like this sort of premise, dismiss the questioning process and it back and enjoy. Forget it's a Crichton book and you might actually have fun with this film. The movie little resembles the book, so forget the book. Whoa that is a lot of forgetting to ask of an audience, but och, audiences were smart, they forgot this film quickly!
The movie runs into all sorts of anachronisms - some of the most ridiculous sort. It was hard to imagine these actors stood there uttering the nonsense. While the period feel for the jump back is strong, costumes etc, showed they were trying - the basic plotting and dialogue is the most pitiful drivel.
For a telly movie, this might have been good. For a big-screen adaption, well one can only say this movie is a sum of its errors.
Don't waste money. See it on the dish. Then you won't be so hacked off for spending bucks for such a feeble effort.
|
|
|
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Nothing special, but enjoyable fun, 8 Aug 2004
Having not read the book, my general opinion of this film is certainly higher than many of the other reviews here. I personally found it was very well paced, had very nice and well choreographed action sequences, and had a decent (if simplistic) story. It's based on a book by the same author who wrote Jurassic Park, and in fact the composition of this film seemed to be very similar to that one (substitute dinosaurs for medieval knights, genetic manipulation with time travel, and there you go).
Unfortunately, just like Jurassic Park, the characters are fairly one-dimensional and the plot is very straightforward. One failing of this film that Jurassic Park didn't have is the science (or lack thereof). The word 'wormhole' is mentioned a couple of times, but that's about it. I can understand a director/producer not wanting to confuse the audience with unnecessary jargon, but in this case where the scientific theory underpins the whole focus of the plot (e.g. getting there, and getting back), more time should have been taken explaining the machine and how (and why) it does what it does.
The acting was fairly decent for the most part, with Connolly, O'Connor and Friel giving the best performances (as you might expect). Unfortunately, I thought the main lead (Walker) was less convincing, but this is probably more to do with the weak characterisation than the actor's talent. The 'bad guys' as a whole could have been played considerably more menacing; I think Hollywood has finally past the point where just having an English accent is enough for the audience to tell that a character is supposed to be evil!
One thing missing from the film is a sense of humour. Once the main characters have gone back in time, they spend pretty much all their time hiding or fighting - the odd humorous line or moment would certainly have helped raise the tone of the film, which is strangely rather dark. It's almost as if the film makers pitched the film at the wrong audience, this should clearly have been a family action/adventure film like Jurassic Park or Pirates of the Caribbean.
I actually bought this film because its music is composed by Brian Tyler, who wrote the music for the 'Children of Dune' mini series. Unfortunately, the score to this film isn't nearly as original or atmospheric as that, which was a bit disappointing.
The DVD itself is also rather disappointing. It has no special features at all (not even a trailer or cast bios) and doesn't even have subtitles.
This is a fast paced, medieval action film. If you liked Jurassic Park and like films with knights, catapults and plenty of sword fighting you'll probably like this film. If however you expect a sci-fi film or a tense thriller (which from the trailer, you would have assumed this film was) then you'll be disappointed.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|