 |
Timeline
July 8, 2004
Grade: D
|
Director: Richard Donner
|
|
Released: November 2003
|
|
Writer: Jeff Maguire, from Michael Crichton's novel
|
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13
|
|
Players: Paul Walker, Frances O'Connor, Billy Connolly, Ethan Embry
|
|
Running time: 116 minutes
|
Richard Donner has been at the helm of some great movies (Superman, The Goonies). And some serious clunkers (Lethal Weapon 3, Lethal Weapon 4, Conspiracy Theory), but Timeline takes the cake. I have a long list of things I hate about this picture.
Frances O'Connor sucks in this film. Her acting is really bad. Very bad. Awful.
The time travel dichotomy. In the beginning of the film, Marek explains the story of the death of Lady Claire, and then Marek shows the sarcophagus of the two lovers. This is impossible under the movie's terms. Those two things are mutually exclusive, they can't both exist in the present time. The only way that sarcophagus can exist is if Lady Claire is not killed, and if she is killed, there is no way for the sarcophagus to exist. There is no way that the sarcophagus could be there and the current history of the battle include her death.
The little transport token thingies. How do they work? I have no idea because the movie never explains them. Why is there a time limit on them? How does it maintain the connection to the wormhole? Why do you need a 40 foot clearing? Because they are not explained, all the "rules" for them come off as arbitrary and contrived.
The time limit. It was set for 6 hours. First, why only 6 hours? Second, I'm supposed to believe Marek falls in love and makes the decision to stay in 14th century France in a matter of 6 hours?! Ridiculous! Maybe it's just me, but I'd think making a life-altering decision like that would take longer than 6 hours.
The guy who is from the present, who stayed in the past and became a British general of some sort. This guy is from the future, right? He knows the history of the battle, right? Why in the world would he sign up to be on the losing side of the battle? He signed his own death warrant by deciding to stay in 1357 on the side of the Brits.
Loose ends. The guy who showed up in the desert is shown at the beginning, mentioned in the middle, then never resolved. The faulty molecular reconstruction was mentioned a number of times, but there was no apparent problems resulting from that. Why bother including it in the story if it has no impact?
Skip this and watch Back to the Future again.
- crocoPuffs
Hey! Isn't that Mr. Papageorgio in the role of Josh?!
crocoWife says:
"zzzzzzz. zzzzz."
|
|