|
The Time Traveler's Wife |  | Director: Robert Schwentke
Actors: Eric Bana, Rachel McAdams, Ron Livingston, Jane McLean, Arliss Howard
Studio: Warner Bros.
Category: Movie
This item is no longer available
Rating:  117 reviews
Sales Rank: 3534
Genre: Drama
Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: Video On Demand
Running Time: 108 Minutes
ASIN: B0030RZEKG
Theatrical Release Date: August 14, 2009
Release Date: February 9, 2010
| |
| Synopsis:
"The Time Traveler's Wife" is based on the best-selling book about a love that transcends time. Clare (Rachel McAdams) has been in love with Henry (Eric Bana) her entire life. She believes they are destined to be together, even though she never knows when they will be separated: Henry is a time traveler--cursed with a rare genetic anomaly that causes him to live his life on a shifting timeline, skipping back and forth through the years with no control. Despite the fact that Henry's travels force them apart with no warning, and never knowing when they will be reunited, Clare desperately tries to build a life with her one true love. |
| Similar Items:
| |
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 117
 Beautiful Movie July 26, 2010
Lindsay Earthsong
This is a beautiful, thought-provoking story and the movie is very well done and moving. I loved it very much. Heard the books were even better, but I have yet to read them.
 It feels rather empty... July 20, 2010
Andrew Ellington (I'm kind of everywhere)
The novel by which `The Time Traveler's Wife' is adapted is a lengthy one. The film is barely over an hour and a half. This is a problem. The problem is that, with such a uniquely engaging prose, `The Time Traveler's Wife' needed that extra time to develop its characters and their relationships in order for us, the audience, to care. When all was said and done, I simply didn't care enough.
The film tells the story of Henry, a man who has a rare genetic disorder that causes him to time travel without warning. He can't control it, and this causes him to disappear and reappear at different stages of his own life. The film follows his love affair with Clare, a beautiful young woman who falls in love with Henry at the very moment she meets him, when she is only six years old. She grows up fantasizing about him (or so we are told) and when she finally has him all to herself she realizes that she has to share him with his disease, waiting for him to reappear in her life at the `right' moments. They love one another, but there are always strains to those affections.
Like I said, the concept here is rather engaging. I actually LOVE the idea. I have yet to read the novel, but I gather that it is very good and I am intrigued to read it since if the concept is done justice (and given room to develop) then it should prove itself marvelously entertaining. But that is the main root of this film's problems. Some ideas and or stories are not suited for the big-screen. You simply cannot establish in an hour and half the kind of love needed to sustain this film. The script is lazy and clichéd instead of rich and meaningful. The editing is a problem for it leaves much to be desired, giving us scenarios that don't quite finish themselves. We are always waiting for the film to come to life. The dialog becomes stilted; the performances become generalizations as apposed to real, living, breathing people.
This film needed to be something more epic in scope. It becomes hollow because of lack of depth and structure. While it is, at times, beautiful and even haunting visually, the impact of this film wares off very quickly.
Personally I think this film would have been better suited as a mini-series. Forget the time restraints of a motion picture (although some films transcend those restraints by pushing the envelope), give me six weeks of two-hour segments. That will flesh out this story. That will make Henry and Clare real to the viewer. That will prove their love and cause us to fall head over heals for them as well. This film just fails to deliver any emotional relevancy, and because of that it fails; period.
 Better Than Anticipated July 19, 2010
Glenn Gallagher (Sacramento, CA)
After reading Roger Ebert's review which skewered "The Time Traveler's Wife", I was reluctant to watch the film, but I decided to take a chance, and I'm glad I did, it was much better than anticipated. I haven't read the book, which probably worked to my advantage in enjoying the film - I didn't have any preconceived notions on what the film should be about.
The movie is a good old-fashioned romance. The actual time-traveling isn't treated in any depth whatsoever, except to acknowledge that the time traveler has no control over when he travel through time, he's learned to cope with it (mostly), and his clothes are unable to travel with him, so he always arrives naked (which is one of the main challenges of his time travel, he's constantly breaking into places and stealing clothes). Somewhat surprisingly, everyone in his life that he trusts accepts his time travel as just a "condition" (which is what he calls his ability to time travel).
His wife is the most understanding of everyone, she just accepts the fact that sometimes, her husband will just disappear, then come back a few weeks later like nothing happened.
I think the time-traveling is actually a metaphor for marriage. Sometimes, spouses just up and leave without warning. Sometimes they come back, sometimes they don't. And sometimes, people can be there physically, but emotionally, they are far away and in another time (they are "distant").
The Time Traveler's Wife is a very satisfying movie, and it makes a great "date movie". I saw this with my wife, and she enjoyed it as much as I did (let's face it, the movie was made for women, not so much for guys). Big thumbs up.
Time Traveler Fashion Show July 19, 2010
Aaron Merkel (Kutztown, PA USA)
An okay movie, but nothing really deep or emotional ever happened. The timer traveler's child acted pretty smug about being able to control her time traveling. Why can't you change past or future events? Most of the movie was the main character jumping from time period to time period and hunting for clothing. The movie should have been called "The Time Traveler's Fashion Party." Perhaps the book is more in-depth and emotional, but the movie falls short in my opinion.
 boring July 11, 2010
M. Hayward
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
this movie was so slow and boring i fell asleep and didn't care that i missed parts of it,don't waste your time.it was just plain dumb.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 117
|
|
|
CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME.  | |
