1979 time travel movieRating: 15/20
Plot: H.G. Wells chases Jack the Ripper, a former friend, to late-70s San Francisco after the latter steals his time machine. He meets Mary Steenburgen, later typecast as a love interest in time travel movies. She helps him acclimate. He tries to keep her safe from the Ripper. They meet Cyndi Lauper who immortalizes their love story in a pop song.
I'm not going to think too deeply about this one because I'm fairly confident thinking about it too deeply would be just like spinning it around really fast while giant chunks of plot fly off and get all over the walls. Not to focus on the negative, but this has the look of a television movie, and the special effects are likely to be the worst I see all year. What's the best way to show that a time machine is actually working and not just sitting there? Sparkly things! It's 1950s Disney special effects, and it's kind of embarrassing. This also has one of my movie pet peeves--bad chess. And there was an unfortunate scene in a discotheque. However, this definitely has more goods than bads. I always like Malcolm McDowell, and here, he's a very good H.G. Wells, not necessarily a historically accurate version of H.G. Wells but a character named H.G. Wells with a very similar biography. I enjoyed hearing him talk about things like vaporizing equalizers, and I really liked how the man-out-of-his-elements motif was used. Watching McDowell confused by escalators, taxis, and toothbrushes was humorous, and I nearly laughed every time he said the word "motor car" or whenever he used a telephone. But I also like what this movie says about modern society, the futile dream of utopia, and about violence ("The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas.". This movie has a dark humor (when the detectives walk into a hotel room where a murder has taken place and there's a severed hand on the floor, that is supposed to be funny, right?) and a fun, although predictable, story.
Recommended by Cory.
4 comments:
Does this blog ever cause you to lose sleep? I just woke up (3:45 a.m.) and was unable to go back to sleep because something about your review just wasn't sitting well with me.
You seemed to like this, but by painting with broad strokes, you have missed noting the many little things that make it great. I'll give you the unimpressive special effects, but in 78-79 the "Star Wars" revolution was just beginning. The effect is serviceable, of it's time, and not a big deal. I think the easy TV movie criticism is not accurate, at all. The general good vs evil outcome might be predictable, but the moment to moment plot was completely unpredictable, containing humor and great tension.
It is all in the characters, the unique plot, and in the hundred little things. I have seen this maybe three times, which is not much for a film I love. That might be because so much of it is burned into my brain. I love the characters. Warner has created a brilliant villian. He is so clearly intelligent and rational, but completely insane. He is a friend who cares about HG, to a point, but knows the monster inside must have its way. The watch shows a deep hurt, and the end shows that he knows he must be detroyed. I love when he is watching TV and when he tells Wells that our violent world is home.
I love the relationship between McDowell and Steenburgen; the scene where he will confess everything if they will please, please send help; her calm voice when she is in the monster's hands; her almost motherly protectiveness for the lost boy. McDowell is terrific in this multilayered role (hard to believe this was in the same decade as "A Clockwork Orange" and "Caligula").
Of course this may strike a cord more in me, but I think "Time After Time" has a unique concept (where the time travel loop is logical), a great love story, a horrifying slasher film and thriller, and it is filled with great moments that have really stuck with me. I could see this not working for everyone, but I think it is a film that could easily be missed, but is really worth seeing. That's the best I can do at five in the morning. A 19. "Them!" can be the replacement with a bit of a **subjective warning** attached.
Now a quick note on the other thing that is keeping me "Up".
Actually, you did appreciate many of the little moments... shit. Now I will focus my angst on story originality, great characters, and as an exciting thriller.
I liked this movie a lot when I saw it in the theater back in some land before time. I still like it a lot......I would probably give it a 16 or so, because even way back when there were parts of the story and acting that just did not ring true, but its a very original plot, with some extremely gifted performers.
Okay, make that a 17.....just a good movie overall.
There's no way I ever would have seen this if not for your recommendation. Well, maybe that's not true. I can see myself saying, "I think I'm going to watch every McDowell movie this summer" or something. But I'd never heard of it, and looking at the cover wouldn't have inspired me to pop it into the dvd player.
And I liked it, easily enough that I need to thank you for the recommendation. It's a nice little sleeper.
Re: the special effects...I'm not sure I meant that as a criticism. Really good special effects don't usually do a lot for me.
I've got 'Them!' taped. I'm pretty sure I saw it a really long time ago, but I had it set to record anyway because I was in the mood for it. That doesn't mean I'll watch it right away. I have hundreds of things taped.
If I lived out west and we got together frequently to watch movies, I'm pretty sure most of them would have to be mutant monster movies. I think less punching and yelling would be involved that way. They definitely wouldn't be cartoons or movies from the 1930s.
Post a Comment