The Time Machine (2002) - Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi

Hohum Score

33

Bearable

Hoping to alter the events of the past, a 19th century inventor instead travels 800,000 years into the future, where he finds humankind divided into two warring races.

IMDB: 6
Director: Simon Wells
Stars: Guy Pearce, Yancey Arias
Length: 96 Minutes
PG Rating: PG-13
Reviews: 134 out of 639 found boring (20.97%)

One-line Reviews (452)

Save the cost of a ticket & popcorn and go rent the DVD when it comes out (soon no doubt), at least you can fast-forward thought the dull parts, just like our time traveler.

this is one of the worst movies i have seen in quite some time...

With the Pearce character, we are dragged along, hoping for an adventure.

The secrets of time travel will have been discovered, indulged in and rejected as boring before I see this spectacular disappointment and colossal waste of...

I thought it was stunning and the musical score is what hit me.

And there are some exciting GCI visual effects that may cause kids to squirm.

Disjointed mess .

the contrast between the "now" (for him) and the "later" are mind blowing.

His worst movie to date is this.

See it if you have bored 10 year old children to entertain.

And instead of seeing a good entertaining Sci-Fi/Fantasy film, I witnessed a complete mess of a movie.

Especially enjoyable are his brief stops in the (for us 21th Century dwellers) near future years of 2030 & 2037 before hightailing it to the year 802,000.

This is an enjoyable remake that doesn't follow the original closely and I'm okay with that.

So what if it isn't Lord of the Rings, or Insomnia or Spiderman.

don't waste your time like I did...

Stunningly unimaginative and stupefyingly dull, this exercise in remake-mania circa 2002 AD is an affront to H.

It was entertaining enough to watch once (maybe on a rainy day) and not nearly as painful as watching Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes.

The story, while familiar to many, was still suspenseful and moved at a good pace.

The time change sequences were believable and exciting.

I enjoyed Guy Pearce's intense portrayal of the lovelorn Alex Hartdegan searching for the answer to his plaintive "what if?

Why do I feel so empty.

Overall, the film is a very enjoyable film which is very good as remakes go.

Worst movie of the year.

The script and the acting were so lackluster that I had trouble staying awake.

But still overall it's a good movie, and entertaining.

So basically, I had a rockin' good time ;-) It's exciting, it's fun and, on the whole, quite impressively done.

A few people will get mad that its a re-make of the original, which for some unknown reason is a crime, but it's still worth watching.

Even the Morlocks in the 60's version, with their hokey makeup and grunts and groans were more entertaining than these gophers.

In the original film, there is a slow build up, he slowly travels into the future stopping along the way to view World War One then again to see the nuclear destruction of the planet.

I don't mind so much brain dead, big-budget, Hollywood factory films, as long as they are entertaining, or action packed or funny.

I felt the same disappointment with the two movies - the propaganda was very good - but I left the cinema feeling empty.

This remake was far better than the Planet of the Apes remake, much more entertaining and fun to watch.

The whole movie was enjoyable.

This is very very slow to start with.

As the first half hour or so in the start is rather amusing, the ending is rather quick and snappy.

The change I found the most ridiculous was the addition of Jeremy Irons' character, the "telepathic" Morlock which I just found pointless and made him look like some kind of albino drag queen.

The plot was terribly confusing and never made any sense.

Still, this movie tells a good story and IMO is well worth watching.

This was the worst movie of the year (was even worse than Domestic Disturbance, and I didn't think that was possible).

Library "helper" a complete waste of time.

Sure, pieces of it were a bit predictable.

The 'explosion' of the time machine, is so utterly contrived a plot device, simply for an alternative to the old 'blow something big up for the end' trick.

This is a great sci-fi adventure story that was very enjoyable from start to finish.

However, the movie is still very entertaining, with many jokes, I especially liked the last one, and it is quite romantic.

First let me say that I found a lot of theconcepts that this film dealt with to be fascinating - even though theywere executed by a director and screenwriter who should both be firedfor insulting an audience with there film student drop out idea of amov................

(and they gave Gosford Park, a movie which was BO-RING but had an voyeuristic type approach to giving the audience a view of "the basement" and the "main floor" people, but in essence was a very boring movie.

Blowing up the Moon to destroy humanity is pointless -- and doesn't do much for science literacy.

You'll waste your time.

Jeremy Irons' scene where he and Alexander are having a dreary conversation, could have been a bit longer and perhaps a little bit more interesting, as well as the film could have been extended at least a half an hour.

The film clips off many exciting points that the first film didn't, such as World War II, and a volcano eruption.

)Its predictable nature.

I'm not going to ruin the improbable, boring, ending.

Overall, this film is an entertaining adaptation of the 1960 classic and story.

Wells himself, which is what brought interest in me to what would otherwise be a sort of "ho hum, I'm not exactly rushing to the local theatre" affair.

Other than the spot on casting, which is enjoyable and fun and really well portrayed, what brings you into this film are the sets and sceneries.

This Planet of the Apes wannabe/ripoff took the original concept, removed anything of value, and replaced it with a cliched & predictable pseudo-love story, cheap CGI, and a dramatically repetitive soundtrack.

He is much better in tough-guy and suspenseful roles (L.

Welcome to another pointless Hollywood remake .

All over, I guess you could call it slightly entertaining.

It was very entertaining; I don't want to spoil the movie.

This was a feel good movie in a time (our time) of confusion, fear, and war.

It was also made to make you feel like you should say wow after the movie is over but I felt empty.

After seeing the original I found it to be both extremely lame and somewhat slow and drowsy, so, After watching the original I wondered how well the remake could keep in the same story line(previding that mankind didn't destroy itself with nuclear war during the 60's as the old film suggested).

Still gave it a 7 because I did stay awake the whole time, even when Irons wasn't onscreen.

"The Time Machine" may be the most moving, evocative and finely crafted piece that H.

Some parts were a bit confusing and unnecessary (such as the blue guy) and the plot could've been better.

But because the storyline became confusing, it lost some of its appeal.

We have major turning points in the film which last for seconds, while minor scenes are dragged out.

Wells and what a shallow and boring movie.

This movie was so disjointed and had so many story ideas running through it that you had to have a road map to find your way around.

It's entertaining and worth the effort to see it.

Very Entertaining .

Confusing Snooz-fest ** Spoilers** .

His travels take him to VOX, a computer version of Orlando Jones who is extremely intelligent and has a snappy attitude, and the crash landing of the moon.

Please don't waste you money on this one.

The talented Guy Pearce is one of the few saving graces thatkeeps this movie from being painfully unwatchable at times.

The movie is fast paced and intelligent.

Wells exciting and wonderful story.

Worth watching for these and,of course,Samantha Mumba who makes the most of a grossly underwritten and underdeveloped part.

My goodness was I bored.

I know that mostly everyone has forgotten this spiritless and pointless failure of a movie that was obviously intended to leave bad impression of H.

However the rest of the movie was really boring.

Once he has arrived at his final destination, things become frankly quite boring and soporific, and the whole set looks like some kind of prehistoric adventure film - you almost forget that it was a time-travel film in the first place and time travel doesn't even enter into the script.

In either case and for what it's worth, The Time Machine is a sad ,pointless waste of film IMHO.

It used a corny contrived idea, that of the fiancee (who isn't in the novel) who gets killed as an impetus for Alex to create the machine.

When Alexander decides to jump ahead again (originally, he decides to jump another hundred years), an explosion nearly throws him from his chair and forces him to slow down and stop in 2037, where the mining operation has more or less made the moon start to disintegrate as a result of the failed operation.

The subplots that are added here and there (most particularly how the moon was destroyed) are fascinating, each one capable of making another film entirely out of such ideas.

Don't waste your money.

Stodgy direction and editing although it contains some very nice set pieces eg. when the Morloks attack the village and Vox the hologram encyclopaedia(played by the excellent Orlando Jones)are well conceived and executed.

The special effects during the time travel of the cities and climate changes were entertaining, and the art direction of the world of the future was creative, though, gee, some folks manage to still speak good English.

waste of time and money .

Otherwise, please, don't waste our time.

A pointless, flat, and useless reimagining....

Oh my god was this a waste of my precious time.

The special effects of time travel were visually stunning, one of the best parts of the movie.

I was impressed and enjoyed it thoroughly.

But this version spent too much time with the unimportant dialogue, and too little time with the whole aspect of evolution, which was the most intriguing part of the novel.

But it was a wonderfully entertaining piece of science fiction, without a lot of blood and guts, killing, vaporizing, etc. Go see this film and be prepared for a most enjoyable visit into the fantasy that is H.

) to avoid the unnamed, unexplained, and unexpected deux ex machina temporal explosion, light show, special effects bonanza he just created - which wipes out all signs of badness without touching any of the good guys.

It is unsatisfying and a waste of time.

Wells) picked the wrong man to play Alexander, who seems like a dull and boring professor who is played by a dull and boring actor.

The special effects are breathtaking and extremely creative.

I walked out of the theater with so many unanswered questions, the primary one being, "If H.

He's given what I guess are philosophical points to make in his brief appearance but I must be slow because I didn't get them.

Badly made and cliché-laden in every aspect, Time Machine is a waste of DreamWorks', and our, time and money.

Totally predictable, laughable, and so many plot holes I couldn't keep up with them.

The movie isn't bad, it's actually entertaining and I am not so bothered by the time traveler having made the time machine to save his love.

Actually, it has no more "first time making a film" errors than, say, Barbra Streisand's enjoyable "Yentl", which also had some of the same errors we see here in terms of some flat deliveries here and there and the like (and even in some of Walt Disney's earliest live action flicks as well).

Very entertaining.

On the plus side the movie is visually stunning, the machine, the travel sequences and the photonic librarian are all good.

Despite the thin plot, what I found most enjoyable (apart from the special effects) were the clever touches here and there, far too numerous to mention.

A Very Enjoyable Remake .

A boring ending to what was an intriguing picture.

It's a listless, plodding, mumble of a film that gets so bogged down in special effects that it never comes close to capturing the adventurous spirit of the classic H.

There's about fifty more continuity problems in here, I'm sure, but it would take way too long to list them.

Boring.

Dragged, protesting to the theater recently by my daughter who had already seen it and who, under the insane belief that I would enjoy it, strapped me into the seat!

The time-travel scene in which the camera panned out into space was stunning!

However, Jeremy Irons, as the representative of the `intelligentsia' branch of the Morlock race comes in way too late in the story to register effectively, and the climax of the film is both confusing and inexplicable to put it politely.

So entertaining .

But still, it is quite an entertaining movie and I would score it an easy 7.5/10

I'd recommend seeing it if you're in the mood for a suspenseful, visual effects-heavy film.

Highly entertaining in spite of plotholes .

Yawn.

This movie makes one want to leave the theater.

Certainly the hunting scenes in the forest were better than the similar scenes in Tim Burton's `Planet Of The Apes' and much more exciting.

All things considered, a fairly entertaining graft of current outlook onto a Victorian concept.

There was chemistry, we came to like the characters, and the late 19th century scene was engaging.

This version of "The Time Machine" was quite enjoyable with spectacular effects and wonderful performances by the cast, although I wish Jeremy Irons had had more screen time.

THE TIME MACHINE never takes itself seriously, and in its beginning sequences it's a pleasure to drink in the laid-back, predictable storytelling, completely tongue-in-cheek style, and popping your eyes out at the marvelous special effects showing Alexander traveling through time to the year 2030.

Orlando Jones (Evolution) is an entertaining if totallyunrealistic diversion who thankfully isn't as annoying as Chris tucker in the Fifth Element.

I just want to say this 2002 version features a story that is very true to the book, the cinematography is gorgeous, the acting perfect, the special effects breathtaking, and the score wonderful.

However, like movie popcorn when it's over it does leave you feeling empty, unsatisfied and in search of something a bit more fulfilling.

even on video it's a terrible waste of time.

Pointless and silly remake.

The movie started off slow, focusing more upon the love between Alexander and his girlfriend (the character's name currently evades me and I cannot tell by looking at the cast list).

This movie was so disjointed and had so many story ideas running through it that you had to have a road map to find your way around.

Spoiler time, so only read on if you've seen it - or don't plan to, which is a fine idea, since this film is now 12 years old and the intervening years have spawned a number of other bombs on which you could waste an hour and a half of your life.

Unexpected events upset Alex's plans and set him to work creating a time machine… and after four or five self-denying years of intensive labor, he succeeds.

If you loved the early-60's version of "The Time Machine", don't waste your time; as with last year's "The Planet of the Apes", this has been "reimagined", and not for the better.

I felt that the new Planet of the Apes movie was quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen.

When I left the theater,I thought to myself how a more different setup where the film explains more about Alexander's obsession with time travel rather than the events that happened to his fiance would have been more appropriate.

The remake's story was ho-hum, the CGI Morlocks were lame, the Eloi were rastafarian to mimic today's fads (no I did not think the chick was hot at all), the re-killing of the hero's modern girlfriend was somewhat cruel, overall just a sad, bad remake.

I'm sorry, someone told me this was based on HG Wells Time Machine but they must have been confused because this was a hokey, bland piece of crap.

Flawed, but Definitely Entertaining .

The tiresome good guy vs bad guy plot even makes the word cliche seems so overused and old.

Wells had a time machine, would he travel to 2002 and boycott this empty adaptation?

Worth Watching, Could Have Been Better .

Please stop to make films only for special effects it is so boring.

A boring, predictable, cliché-ridden piece of junk.

I found it a little hard to believe that so many New York City artifacts survived all those centuries (the Eloi use them to teach their children English), but I was willing to let it all slide because the movie was otherwise enjoyable.

His transition in the movie from a slightly odd but charming Victorian New Yorker, curious about every new machine or idea, into a man singularly driven to find the answer to his question was believable and entertaining.

The movie storyline was boring, stupid and predictable.

Don't waste your time (machine) or money .

It's an empty rush - great visual effects, poor character development .

What really bugged me is the esoterical soundtrack and one of the most boring fight-scenes I EVER saw in cinema (not the boss-fight, that is...

" Any movie that is entertaining enough to finish (which I did), I figure is a 5 or 6.

Compared to the book and 1960 version, this movie seems rather bland though.

Wells' original story had an excellent set up, a good, eccentric main character, a suspenseful storyline, and a poignant and still applicable social commentary.

Don't waste your time paying to watch this movie.

other than that it was pretty boring!

Don't waste your time reading the so called reviews of miserable idiots, why do people have to judge a new film made of an existing story by an older film of the story, time wasters😠

Entertaining...

The idea that the time traveler is motivated by the desire to change the past and trapped in a time paradox is an old sci-fi cliché.

It is much more mind-boggling and exciting.

I give credit to whomever designed his makeup and wardrobe it is technically beautiful and visually stunning.

But the movie was exciting as all get-out.

This exciting movie mingles noisy adventures , franctic action , a love story , drama , breathtaking special effects and it results to be very amusing .

Now we are 800,000 years in the future, where the peaceful Eloi are being hunted by very dull puppet creatures.

All of his imaginative and thought-provoking concepts were jettisoned in the name of a bog-standard hero-saves-hapless-'maiden', romance-against-adversity tale as crass as 'Pearl Harbour' and as predictable as 'Titanic'.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Enjoyed it so much more than the BORING, cheesy 1960 Pal version which film geeks consider so wonderful and I don't.

Predictable and Blah ending .

Theyare way too intense and I can only imagine how my 6-year old nephew will react to it.

It just feels utterly contrived, and tacked on for the sake of a wham-bam Hollywood finale.

Hate me if you must, but not only did I not hate this movie, I enjoyed it and would recommend it.

While nothing earth shattering or special, the film is fairly entertaining with Guy Pearce as a scientist who invents a time machine in an attempt to save his murdered fiancee.

He keeps the pace of the film quick and exciting, despite the somewhat lazy script he's following.

ENTERTAINING AND FAST PACED .

Don't waste your time.

Simon Well's has inherited his great grandfathers genious and updated it in a movie with breathtaking visuals, supurb acting, adn a message that is really great to think about.

All in all, entertaining enough, and definitely good-looking, so if that's what you're up for, hey, go for it.

For the rest, the performances are poor, the music is unmemorable, there are too many unnecessary characters and the action scenes are dull.

I went to the Matinee so I only paid $5.75. Save your money and rent the old one.

With so many films nowadays going over 2 hours--often way over--bringing in a coherent, exciting and satisfying story at 93 minutes is a commendable achievement in itself.

As I watched this movie I thought it was so boring.

`The Time Machine' is definitely entertaining if you don't take it too seriously.

I was sort of forced to watch it, but in the end I really actually enjoyed it.

It was a very entertaining film.

My dreams are more exciting than The Time Machine, and they are usually a repeat of my workday.

The dictionary has a picture of this movie beside the definition of slow.

It's slow, pedantic, over-acted and drowned by an overly loud and pervasive score that tries to substitute music for emotion and excitement.

If that sounds dull to you, worry not, because this is not a careful adaptation, it's Hollywood.

)All in all, this is an empty, lifeless, dull, sterile and confused affair: didn't they ALREADY REMAKE "Planet of the Apes"???

I thought Time Machine was a very entertaining film.

Intriguing update of HG Wells' sci-fi classic novel with Pearce as a turn-of-the-century New York inventor/scientist whose eon skipping vehicle serves as the ultimate in What If scenarios as he tries to determine predestination and inevitable time frames limitations of the human spirit.

But it was compelling and dramatic.

Also Mark Addy's last scene was great..Overall, movie loses most from having a overused storyline and confusing the audience.. What were those things?

Timetravelling is the most fascinating theme.

The story by the way is very good, but I was thinking, that there were some contradictions with the simple logic, so it seemed to be unpredictable.

The beginning was intriguing, the middle seemed sterile and the end felt rushed.

A snowy 1900 night; friends invited for dinner; clocks ticking in a warm house; whimsical background music; this start of an engrossing adventure was the art of film making at its best.

A couple of people walked out of the cinema 'cause they got bored, I suppose.

* There is a duel between the good character and the evil one, obviously the good wins (so predictable).

Some of the effects are good and the plot did have potential but the script and design never let this come out, seemingly more interested in visual bang-for-buck than they were about producing an effective and engaging story.

This was a stunning visual achievement.

The effects here are truly stunning in many respects - the time machine itself is a marvel (the DVD has a feature on the making of the machine), and the time transformation scenes are very inspiring, up to and including the zoom-away shot from the machine into the air all the way to the city on the moon.

I came to the IMDb to see if anyone else understood the plot but from the reviews I've read here it seems that other viewers were either too bored to bother trying to check the plot or so easily pleased that a consistent plot wasn't of any concern to them!

The one thing that makes THE TIME MACHINE worth watching at all is the quality of the special effects.

Other than trying to keep my head from hitting my chest is boredom.

This is a shame because his character is by far the most intriguing out of the entire film.

But don't waste your time or money on this movie.

overall you should take a look at this one it is entertaining.

Nice and entertaining fantasy flick.

It had real potential, and despite its flaws, is an enjoyable enough romp.

The scenes where he stopped his Time Machine inside his old boarded up house seventeen years into the future are, regretably, gone - too slow for today's audience, as perceived by the producers.

The visual effects are outstanding, the locations are great, the plot is really "mind blowing" (tell me about it, I've seen this movie like 30 times and there are some things that i still don't understand).

4) The leading lady in the 1960 version (Yvette Mimieux) played a part typically contrived and uninteresting.

An enjoyable little bit of escapism that will keep the kiddies in all of us amused for around 90 minutes with no ill effects.

It sees Dr Alexander Hartdegen tormented by a pointless back-story, and driven to find a way of undoing the recent tragedy that only he cares about.

Similarly, the events that destroyed the earth prior to the final 800,000 years journey were changed from the normal global human war, another cliché, to a more realistic man made ecological disaster.

Enjoyable Romp Through Time .

Time's been kind to this story, unlike some of Wells' work, and there was an opportunity to tell a really good tale here whilst still being trendy and engaging...

It's an engrossing story and The Time Machine didn't seem to whisk me away like the book did.

From here on in TTM is too much like the new Planet of the Apes, another movie that bored me.

explains how Man became two races, but the scene is totally confusing, and at this point both Mr. Irons and the plot become superfluous.

Well, that was a waste of time.

Nonetheless, I enjoyed it.

The climax was very exciting, and the resolution was moving.

Still, I thought the movie was entertaining and some moments were rather breathtaking, especially the time travel scenes themselves - seeing the Ice Age crushing in was really a thrill.

I am aware that the sixties version was quite different from the book, but I still think it is a much more enjoyable movie overall.

evil, and all around just so generally safe - which can be read as "mundane.

With all these points, this movie is pointless, just like this review and my life.

Sad, pointless waste of film.

It's unfortunate The Time Machine isn't all it could have been (these days, that seems to apply to most big-budget studio films), but it's nice to see an inspired and spirited sci-fi adventure that's entertaining.

This movie is hands down the worst movie of all time .

When he goes into the future, the landscapes are just breathtaking.

Instead you have a fairly forgettable , bizarely uninteresting mish-mash of a rubbish film.

I forgive the film maker because the movie's so GORGEOUS to look at and the action sequences are very exciting.

It looks good, no argument there, and it does manage to be exciting and entertaining some of the time.

This whole fiasco could and should have been implied because it merely served to fill up the running time with an utterly predictable and clichéd reason for the invention; a reason that is neither plausible nor true to the book.

So the story is somewhat boring, it is the kind of film to watch ONCE and then never again!

It's much different from the original George Pal version, but much more modern and exciting!

*yawn* .

A complete waste of TIME and MONEY.

Hey, I know if you are a purist then you more than likely won't enjoy this movie, but I have to admit, this flick grabbed me by the coat tails and dragged me along for the duration.

I found this move boring and without any charm of the original.

The modernization of the past movie and book makes this movie very enjoyable, especially if you have seen the old version and/or read the book.

It was pretty exciting all the way through, the music was super, the storyline was good enough, the special effects were great and the acting was fine.

Worst movie I've seen in a long time...

It was probably too slow for the multiplex crowd, and too short as well.

I wish the whole journey through time had been more entertaining.

Industrial Light and Magic did some really cool visual effects on this film - watching 800,000 years pass by in 30 seconds is really fascinating - the thing where the vines over the arbor UN-GROW themselves is really strange to watch.

However, the visuals are very hard to appreciate since you are constantly disturbed by the poor acting throughout the film, the truly uninspiring story and third rate dialogue.

I had the oppportunity to see "The Time Machine" last night at a special screening in Arlington, Virginia, and I enjoyed it.

The fears over technology going too far, my favourite background bit (there were many of these, and they were entertaining) must have been the continuity with Lunar Leisure.

The bad thing is that this movie stars very slow, and i mean "very slow", with Alexander and his girl and all that, and it turns really exciting like 1 hour later.

OK, story is a little suspicious.. I admit that I haven't read the book but since the book is a classic, the story was taken apart and manipulated into many other forms so that now when author's grandson tries to make his grandpa's story into a motion picture he is accused of using a banal story.. Ironic.

The effects and visuals are stunning, the acting is ok, and all technical stuff works.

very confusing.

Mind you, it is no masterpiece, but 'The Time Machine' is highly entertaining and benefits from its relatively short running time.

It's no masterpiece, but there are some simply stunning pieces.

Enjoyable!!!.

Wells, and a supposed remake of the 1960's movie, "The Time Machine" is the action packed story of a grief-stricken man, who invents a time machine in hopes of going backwards in time to erase the tragedy that has overtaken his life.

An enjoyable adventure through time.

The Time Machine is flat, useless, and tiresome.

Soundtrack and visual effects are remarkable - too bad they are wasted in service of a banal script.

All in all a fun, enjoyable film to watch, and much better than a lot of movies that have been coming out lately that force the narrative, rather than letting the story unfold.

Clearly, it's a rough mosaic deal, pasted with disjointed cuts and borrowed patches that fail to fit!

The plot went nowhere, floating off into oblivion.

Rating: 7 , entertaining and charming .

A very enjoyable film.

The soppy, predictable romances both in present and future might have been concocted by Disney.

" It has narration, it moves a little slower and it's all about discovery.

But here, everything is reduced to the banal concepts of Hollywood movies.

Okay, The Time Machine is not a *great* film, but it is nonetheless an enjoyable movie experience.

I mean, since no actual time machine exists yet, it is pointless to argue what it can be powered by or how much of what kind of power is necessary, etc. Although the Back to The Future's time machine that required a carefully balanced mix of high speed motion and influx of great number of Gigawatts of electricity made a more convincing (though somewhat humorous) impression of a time-traveling apparatus.

What a waste of time .

Maybe the problem is that so many of us have read the book and seen the mediocre but enjoyable early version of this story.

What it adds is pointless, genetic and makes the film feel rushed and unguided.

The plot was fairly true to Wells in spirit, except for the contrived ending with no scientific or even pseudo-scientific basis for the way jamming the machine produced a convenient time warp that wipes out the Morlocks.

enjoyable difference from original .

Up to said ending sequence, I essentially thought the movie "bad but cool"--an idea completely shattered by the trite and illogical finale.

Some sections of the film were good but as for the rest of the film,it just seemed kind of boring.

This is one of the most pointless, boring, hole-filled, wastes of time that I've ever seen!

The ending manages to be creepy, cool, exciting, and follow the book to a certain degree (the inside of the morlocks' cavern looks just as it should).

Certain critics slandered this film by saying it was pointless.

As soon as the empty zone were discovered, another group from some distance away would simply move in and the original problem would reappear.

flat and uninteresting!

Often silly and rushed, but highly enjoyable nonetheless.

I think it's fascinating to see what someone else thinks the year 800,000 will look like.

As partial compensation for missing this intriguing aspect, the new film does make the Morlocks appear rather more threatening than they did in the Pal version.

The script was immature and contrived and the directing was pretty lousy too.

Save your money, or better still just read the book.

it's so sad, so empty...

It is also disadvantaged by bad pacing, so the film is rather dull too.

Indeed, the slickly done remake sets its sights much higher than the original movie but ascends to pretentious pinnacles without achieving a cathartic effect.

What a lousy, uninspired bland story, with no imagination.

Wells 'The Time Machine' (we saw the actual time machine prop and many design and behind the scenes pics last AUGUST of 2001 at the San Diego ComiCon), and anyone who ignored those ads missed out; this movie was a lot of fun and had some very engaging themes and ideas to boot.

The future world, however, was rather boring and less interesting the farther in the future he went (contrary to my assumptions).

This is a showy and entertaining story about an idea everyone has dreamed of: having power over time.

Maybe lowered expectations played a role, but basically I enjoyed it from start to finish.

All in all, this film is worth watching, especially for those who are fans of the book.

I enjoyed it more then I enjoyed the book, mostly because the book was pretty depressing.

And nothing happens for the entire middle section of the film.

I have just recently seen this movie and enjoyed it very much.

Complete waste of everybody's time .

I found this movie so enchanting and exciting, the special effects ` were mind blowing.

No more time travelling, just stuck in some boring future primitive setting.

For one, the time machine really looks like it would take you through time, the computer graphics are amazing when he's going to 802,701, and the whole Eloi civilization is breathtaking.

The special effects when he dies were probably the most exciting of the movie.

As Alexander, Guy Pearce gives new definition to the `absent minded professor' character, and does it in a way that is unconvincing and with a presentation that is rather pretentious.

Too bad nobody associated with the movie wanted to waste their time with it.

A true waste of time, money and effort.

but after a slow hour begins the senseless butchering and then the movie just ends.

Just a weak Hollywood attempt to sex up a classic for the hope of entertaining the MUMMY-esque fans, I gather!

At the same time as wrenching my mind, the film managed to make the story very entertaining, although the predatory race of humanoids is quite beyond the stretches of believability.

All in all, it is worth watching My score : 6 of 10

Despite these educational shows being a positive influence on my life, I WAS BORED!

Apart from the special effects with the geological changes being the most impressive, what a waste of time the movie was.

Utter waste of Time .

Enjoyable .

I beg of you don't waste the time seeing this movie.

I found the time Machine to be entertaining enough, though it had to squeeze a lot into its "Time" frame.

And what starts out as a horribly, horribly, horribly acted (even by the remarkable Guy Pearce, who is a great actor and has the resume to prove it), shot and executed beginning does become exciting once the hero jumps into the time machine for the first time.

The story was contrived and I never got to the point where I cared about the characters at all.

The film ends on an attempted high-note, but the generic standards of the whole second half leave you uncaring with its predictable resulting character accomplishments and new love interest.

Too short, yet visually stunning...

I enjoyed it for the most part, and find it very clever in many aspects.

Don't waste your Money.

I, for one, enjoyed it very much.

Slow, boring, confusing wreck of a movie.

I rented the old version for my kids and they enjoyed it for its concepts.

); Jeremy Irons and the "heroic" (boring) final fight.

It was just a thrill ride of CG(computer graphics), and exciting instances piled on top of one another.

Guy Pearce continues his tradition of playing smug, arrogant intellectuals tormented by some cliché painful loss.

Good, exciting, all around awesome film.

An entertaining film, with less suspension of belief then some films with time travel (remember Terminator 2?

So to say that this is a total waste of time isn't accurate.

Pointless and boring; goes nowhere.

"The Time Machine", if taken on its own considerable merits, is a diverting and entertaining film with high production values and laudable attention to craft.

The opening bit, without giving away the story, was compelling.

This is because I found it very intriguing seeing the advancement from how the world was when H.

I don't really recommend this movie to anyone-there's plenty of movies out there right now that'll make you laugh or keep you on the edge of your seat, instead of making you leave in confusion as the movie ends abruptly.

can you say slow.

The old cliché of a scientist dedicated to knowledge and discovery had been done to death and wisely they gave this scientist a personal reason to build a time machine.

The story is at its most intriguing and compelling in the setting up stage and in the scenes depicting the actual time traveling experience (this was the case in the first version and it is the case here as well).

A rather bland attempt at a special effects movie .

Similarly his relationships with his fiancé and friend are empty of feeling and emotion, and unfortunately one couldn't care less what happens to anyone in the film.

The only real successes are the sweeping score by Klaus Badelt, and the often stunning effects by the always-reliable ILM and Digital Domain.

I just think I did a marvelous job of confusing myself.

Predictable, but mildly entertaining...

Having just seen the movie, I will say that it is easliy one of the worst movies that I have ever seen (and as an avid movie buff, that is a lot of movies.

By the way, another confusing part was the way it explained how humans evolved into two separate species caused just by the moon "falling out of the sky" even though the moon isn't in the sky!

This film was entertaining and enjoyable.

Some brilliant moments, as others had noted, The turn of the century New York scenes were stunning, the apocalypse scenes as well as the future New York scenes worked well.

Plus the set-up was way, way too long.

Once in the far future, for instance, watch as a Columbia professor/bookworm becomes an action star fighting Morlocks, scaling walls and rousing the troops ala George C.

Of course he is unable to right the wrong and instead winds up 800,000 years in the future.. Solid visual effects and entertaining action sequences keep things moving and Pearce is fine as the time traveler.. While the ending seems a tad too predictible and pat for my tastes, the ride is still fun along the way.

Real exciting.

I enjoyed the atmosphere throughout the first quarter to half of the movie, and then it went very far-fetched and uninteresting (to me).

The very dynamic character spawned by Rod Taylor's depiction in the 1960 film was more compelling, more admirable, and more heroic.

I don't want to detract from the tremendous imagination he obviously had, what I mean by that is that reading what is really a short story, then adapting that into a feature length movie would be, well, a little boring.

Save your money, save your time.

Still, enjoyable.

Fun and exciting .

It's absolutely fascinating!

I wanted to see more time traveling as well, because the scenery changes throughout the years were very intriguing and borderline eye-candy to a sci-fi fan.

so I think of this as a different twist on the same story, and it turns out to be quite entertaining.

This debacle betrays all thought and soul of the original story, and settles for loud noise and uninspiring visuals.

the time our hero takes to actually reach the year 802701, are quite thrilling what with him trying to thwart the death of his fiancée, visit to a science museum in about the year 2030 and the awesome possibility of a broken-up moon wreaking havoc on earth.

What i got, was an enjoyable adventure through time.

One feels that in this film, the time-travel aspect was just a starting-off point for a banal adventure film depicting conflict between two classes of people, the Eloi and the Morlocks whereas in the original film, these same creatures/beings were part of the film without necessarily dominating it to the same extent, and in the remake there is certainly a lot more unnecessary violence than in the original, presumably to satisfy todays audiences' thirst for this.

While it has all the elements for success – a strong leading man, a compelling story and good special effects – the film cannot seem to make up its mind as to what it wants to be.

In the film's first of many unintentionally comic missteps, he leaves his machine unattended in an improbably empty urban space, where no one interferes with it.

It's not going to be classic, but it's enjoyable .

But ho hum on the battles with the underground enemy, even when led by Jeremy Irons.

It was entertaining and thought provacative.

This movie was entertaining.

Looking past the usual glitz and glamor, the story is somewhat formulaic (so was the original book, even in its day!

This movie is an engaging, plausible (given the premise of time travel) adaptation of the H.

The movie is an abomination of the original text, and an overall waste of time.

Director Simon Wells never takes joy into consideration, so we have a flaccid and just plain boring B-movie.

It also is very intriguing adn has a message just like the original.

This is equally just as bad of an idea as that pretentious hack Gus Van Sant remaking a Hitchcock film.

Very good effects; boring script .

Well, we were hoping for an entertaining movie and for the most part, we got it.

Guy Pearce was terrible, Samantha Mumba was tasty [one redeeming grace] and it got more and more boring as it got more and more silly throughout and the Morlocks appeared.

(******Major Spoilers Contained******) Logically of course, there is the Jeremy Irons pointless villain.

The story is one cliche after another, played as though the writers had never read anything about time travel (it's clear the writers never read Wells -- it's a joke that he's credited).

I totally didn't think it was all that bad, what action it did have was very good and exciting.

I wouldn't waste your time reading it; I found it almost as tiresome as it was pretentious.

So bad, my wife fell asleep within 30 minutes.

He offers a fun, silly performance that's both enjoyable and unnecessary.

In spite of all this, I found the film engrossing enough to keep my attention and interest for it's entire duration, if only leaving me wanting more.

Overall I enjoyed it.

Overall, a very entertaining, enjoyable watch...

Gripping, superb...

It was far too exciting, visually stimulating and involving to fit that bill.

I didn't enjoy the movie because the whole story was too slow with no plot.

Instead, it was really dumb stuff that happened, along with really slow action.

Also, watching disasters happen to the Moon as a result of our excessive nuclear explosions there is a visually exciting moment.

Boring, lame and pedestrian.

I wish he travelled more and changed some events in the past, or see himself in the past, something more exciting.

Surely, Guy Pierce and Jeremy Iron - two fine actors with compelling performing talents - can't expect these to better their future acting career!

, well, so what - I've seen it done a million times now - and it's getting bloody boring !

Welles ambiance in the original film - the turn of the century NYC scenes are slow and dull, thought this film flies by at 96 minutes.

most unexpected delight great film .

Kind of short in some places like scenes had been cut but the overall effect made it worthwhile-it was simply stunning!

This might be the worst movie I have ever seen.

This movie may not be making any movie history, but it is highly entertaining.

Granted, the special effects are amazing as are the set design and sound effects, and Uber Morlock was intriguing.

Don't waste your time - it is dreadful.

With the humanity and the emotion built into the story, the delivery is quite stiff and dull and I found myself surprised by how little interest I had it the story even when I was far into it.

The strangest thing about this film is that they dragged out the great, great, great grandson (or something) of HG Wells to direct this thing; strange, since it only bears a passing resemblance to the original book.

Best actor/actress-Mark Addy To far out there for me i can buy the time travel but the rest was ridiculous-Jake Hyden I gave this movie a 4 out of 10 Rated-(PG-13) for intense sequences of action violence.

Save your money, do not go see the Time Machine, 2002 version.

While this 'remake' is well produced and reasonably acted, and the special effects and film score make it easily enjoyable, they should have given it a title that distanced itself from Wells' novel.

If you haven't seen this mess yet, don't waste your time.

The Time Machine is a nice 1 1/2 hour diversion from the real world that will be enjoyable as long as you don't expect it to be the next great adventure pic, or the groundbreaking work that the original Time Machine was.

Did it make me feel bored or irritated?

My wife and I found this version of The Time Machine to be entertaining, imaginative, and thought provoking.

While entertaining and well presented, this film bears only a superficial resemblance to the original of 1960.

Instead of an 'armchair with a spinning parasol' from the 1950's movie, we had something that was both mechanical in a 19th century fashion, but with an 'optical-visual' update that made it seem wonderfully contrived.

The special effects are riveting, the Morlocks are truly scary, and the action well-paced.

Horrible movie that I wouldn't even waste my time on if I were you.

Near the climax, the storyline became confusing.

It's not a life changing, Oscar-worthy movie, but it is quite entertaining.

Or did I fall asleep and miss the part where everything is explained???

I have nothing to compare this film to because I haven't seen the original, but this particular film went from great, to somewhat boring.

Also it is a rather poor adaptation of the book, with the story rather jumbled and anything that was so interesting and intriguing is diminished.

Entertaining movie.

It's like being on a most exciting roller-coaster only to have the last minutes of the ride do nothing more than drive you around at a slow pace.

The plot is fairly nonsensical, the story is disjointed, the early scenes are dragged out interminably before anything really interesting happens, a lot of the dialogue is cheesy and inane, and the the Morlocks look like they were designed by a senile makeup artist left over from the original series of Lost In Space.

Taken in and of itself, it is a very enjoyable movie.

Well, the beginning of the film started off slow, and Guy Pearce seemed a little out of place.

But what this movie achieved was making an entertaining and worthy of a watch, story.

The premise is fascinating, and the thought that Alex could have gone to any time is full of possibilities.

Mumba looks pretty and is effective but is just a reason for the hero to go through the heroic numbers in a typical Hollywood action packed light show final.

Compared to a lot of movies made today in terms of science fiction this movie is at least enjoyable and the violence factor was kept to a minimum which is always a pleasant surprise since most adventure movies contain too much violence and not enough content.

On my list of top 10 worst movies .

It got confusing.

The first I want to say is that it is visually stunning!

Costumes and FX were just stunning.

Since the 80s, filmmakers always seem to turn the most mundane objects into souped up science fictional wonders.

No story, rubbish action and direction and the worst monsters since the 50's.

From beginning to end it was predictable.

There are some fascinating shots and set design choices, and Jeremy Irons is fantastic in his all-too-brief villain role.

Not only do they BARELY feature the changing dress-store figures, they make even the time machine itself an anachronistic, gaudy glass-n-chrome bore!

Cue heavy use of CGI and scary creatures that might as well be LOTR orcs (yawn), another bad dude and a big and poorly explained explosion.

As a result, the whole movie seems very disjointed.

Visually amazing, and mind blowing but a little boring...