Why does he give up after one try? Another random accident happens that kills her and he believes it's impossible to save her. He could have just gone back and done it again and everything would probably be alright.
Also what is "the answer" that Irons gives him at the end? I didn't really understand what he was talking about.
he mutters at one point that no matter what he does he can not save her, it does not show it but he had tried a 1000 times to save her, each time he did something else would kill her.
sharehe says that he went back hundreds of time and no matter what he did he could not save her. The last time he tried was the second time showed in the movie...that is why he had no emotion...
shareI thought he said he could go back a hundred times but there is nothing shown in the movie that says he tried more than that one time.
shareThe second time showed in the movie is actually the first time he goes back to the past. See how amazed he is to see Emma again after 4 years, and how he kisses her as he hasn't in quite a while.
sharehe says that if he saved her the time machine would have never been made so if he saved her then the machine would have never been built in the future thus canceling out him saving her
shareweightlifter9 is spot on here. It's also known as a predestination paradox.
The timemachine is the product of her death - so if she never dies, the time machine will never be built.
Just as weightlifter9 said =)
That's what the UberMorlock tells him - that if she hadn't died then the Time Machine wouldn't have been made. But I thought they should have showed him trying to save Emma more than once even though we assume he has tried many times, or he could have done a quick voice over to say it because it really wasn't really made that clear
----------------------------------------
I don't know what it is, but its weird and pissed off!
The producers made It "looked like" he only went back 1ce.
shareYeah, perhaps they should had shown a hundred deaths of Emma. lol jk
www.myspace.com/RedDawg_53
Maybe they did just like Groundhog Day. You don't know how long he was there for but it had to be a considerably long time because he learned to play the piano like an expert.
I don't speak whatever.
What if he took her in the time machine with him? Would she die the second he stopped it? Would she have a random heart attack? Would they just disappear?
shareshe would die. Because in order for her to be in the time machine the time machine has to be built first. And if she wouldn't die then the time machine would have never been built.
There was nothing he could do to save her, all the possible ways involve the use of a the time machine, which would never have been built if she would survive. Therefore no matter what happens the lady must always die.
I hate timetravel, the paradoxes make me depressed. Besides I fell in love with Emma the second I saw her on screen, but the idiot let her die and then he was unable to bring her back. Damn you hollywood!
In the absence of orders, find something and kill it.
Watch The Langoliers...
It may make you feel better or it won't.
:)
(\ /)
( . .)
c(")(") Too cute for my own good!
It's essentially the theory that you can't have one without the other. The time machine wouldn't exist without her death and strangely her death wouldn't exist without the time machine. No matter what, her death is imminent.
shareIt's essentially the theory that you can't have one without the other. The time machine wouldn't exist without her death and strangely her death wouldn't exist without the time machine. No matter what, her death is imminent.This assumes time is linear and destructive within its own timeline. If you think about it, this is quite unreasonable. If he enters a timeline and steps out into the street and causes even a small change, like his footprint appears where it never should have been within that timeline, then theoretically this would cause anything from a minor time quake in the future (like a species of insect disappears) to total catastrophic destruction of the timeline. This is the paradox you speak of which occurs just as you say, where to stop a major paradox the timeline tried to correct anything that will change the future and prevent time quakes.
Yeah I think she would have had a heartattack or something if he tried to take he rot the time machine, the point was since the machine existed she HAD to die.
Most people see things that are and ask "why?", I dream things that never were and ask, "why not?"
couple things, he didnt travel back hundreds of times he says "I COULD travel back a hundred times" not that he HAD
I think he just realized the coincidence was too unlikely for it to be a fluke
and ya weightlifter answered the paradox question....he made the time machine to save her, he saves her and he has no reason to build the time machine
BUT I disagree with toking65000, she didnt generally have to DIE...he just had to think she was dead so he would build the machine...in theory if he had "faked" her death, took her to the future with him right after he leaves to go back and save her he still would have reason to build the machine and wouldnt know of her survival until after he got back
He built the time machine cause he had a REASON to build it
"faked" her death for whom?
Why would he fake her death? He is the instigator of his own fate. He can't fake her death from himself.
- No, my question. I get to go first. Why in pluperfect hell would you pee on corpse?
Sure he can. If he fakes her death 5 years in his past than he will still have the motivation to build the time machine. And once he built it and went back in time he would realize that the only way to save her was to trick himself into thinking she's dead.
shareWhy would he have the motivation to build the time machine if he knew he faked her death?
I get your premise (It was a Star Trek Next generation episode) but it is fate that is causing her death, not him. Him trying to change it just makes it occur in different ways.
So he can't cheat fate.
- No, my question. I get to go first. Why in pluperfect hell would you pee on corpse?
Hes not going to know he faked her death. At least not the him in the past. He wont realize this until well after hes built the time machine.
It would be like if I went back in time right now and hit and ran my own car(which actually did happen to me a year ago) The me in the past would have no idea who hit his car. only the me in the future would know after having done it.
ok. But I don't think that would make a very good movie.
Rules have to be fair in time travel or else you wouldn't make an investment in it if anything is possible.
- No, my question. I get to go first. Why in pluperfect hell would you pee on corpse?
Good movie? probably not, but it is possible.
Logically if you can travel into the past you should be able to change the past since the physical act of entering the past would be changing it. The second you breath or step on a blade of grass youve just changed the past.
Therefore with a little creativity on his part he could have saved her.
Actually, I think that whole concept could make a great movie. But it wouldn't be THE TIME MACHINE, which is why they didn't focus on that aspect.
The war is not meant to be won... it is meant to be continuous.
What if he created for himself some other reason for inventing a time machine?
Like a lottery win or something.
If the lottery didn't exist he could go back to 5 years before and invent the lottery. If he doesn't know what the lottery is he could go forward to 1996 and find out, then go back and invent it.
Problem solved :)
Seems he was just really lazy and didn't actually like Emma that much after all
Jedward FTW
That is a brilliant idea!
The thing that puzzled me was that he gave up so easily. If, after three attempts, she had died every time, then it would a logical deduction that he couldn't save her. But he only tried once, at least a few more times would be sensible.
I'm anespeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericumbobulations...
When my son was younger, this was one of his favorite movies and he made me watch it over and over with him. Don't get me wrong, it's a good movie. It's just that we watched it all the time.
What I can tell you for sure is what Alexander says about going back and saving Emma. He says that he DID go back hundreds of times and the result WAS the same. His frustration was because of this frustration. Yes, the director/producer could have shown us more of these but we really only needed to see one to understand what he was talking about here. This leads to his ongoing search for the answer to his question of why he cannot change this with his invention.
After having seen this version so many times, I am not sure what my opinion is on the matter, but I think I would have to agree with the theory that he was driven to invent the machine due to Emma's death. Therefore if she had not died, he likely would have gone on to get married, have those kids and would not have worked so hard, thus would not have discovered/invented the machine.
Sure he can. If he fakes her death 5 years in his past than he will still have the motivation to build the time machine. And once he built it and went back in time he would realize that the only way to save her was to trick himself into thinking she's dead.Then they would never marry anyway, he will have irrecoverably changed his own future (that he wouldn't ask her to marry him) and a time quake would still destroy the original timeline ... paradox theory, once thought of as reasonable, had many flaws which have been resolved by thinking of the Universe as many timelines in space/time each with different outcomes
and ya weightlifter answered the paradox question....he made the time machine to save her, he saves her and he has no reason to build the time machineIf you think about it, the reason for building the time machine and saving her all fit together well. Why does she need to die if he builds the time machine? The fact that he builds it doesn't have to result in her death if he uses it and changes the past - more reasonable to think that he builds the time machine AND saves her. Paradox theory usually breaks down with a little exploration, but the film requires it to be that way, so its OK
How about this; if he left himself a note in the past to build the machine, he would clearly see that it is his own handwriting and that he had already had ideas of it way before her death.
Thus, he builds the machine as a product of himself telling him to and not because of her death, she dies, he saves her, she lives?
Life's tough, it's tougher when you're stupid.
The type of time travel shown in the TIme Machine isn't like the Back to the Future one where there are multiple instances of yourself when you go back.
I understood it as the Alex that went back in time replaced the one already on that timeline. So faking Emma's death would be utterly pointless, as there'd be no one to fake the death to. I mean there is no proof of that in the film, though, I don't think, as when Alex goes back in time, he meets up with Emma a little earlier than he would've done, because the steam car wasn't outside. So I suppose hypothetically, the Alex that belonged on that timeline could have been on his way. But no, I'm more inclined to belief the one person theory.
If there was another Alex when he went back though, I don't suppose there's any reason why the faking Emma's death thing couldn't work. It'd work exactly like the Back to the Future thing. He could prevent her death, but then he'd have to find some way of getting the Alex-in-the-past to build the Time Machine, or the Alex-in-the-future wouldn't exist. That would make a rather boring film though. Not to mention a slightly obvious copy of Back to the Future.
The most predictable thing about the bush is that the bush is unpredictable
Haha......theories on him faking her death.....good stuff.
Remember, in this film she gets shot directly in the heart. I didn't realize he faked that?
He only actually attempts to save her once. What he says is "I could come back a thousand times... and see her die a thousand ways"
shareinthe book he probably does itmore than once in thre book anyway its a bitof aparadox and he probably realises thiscause he is prettysmart
shareIn the original book Emma does not exist and the scientist has no name.
At the start of the book he comes BACK from 800,000 AD, and holds a meeting with journalists and scientists, etc, explaining the story from scratch. At the end, he vanishes back into the future in his time machine and leaves only a flower he bought back from 800,000 AD. In his travels he also sees the end of the earth, millions of years into the future.
It is also worth noting that the scientist does all of this only out of scientific curiosity, and not for any other emotional reason in any way. If you havent read the original story by H. G. Wells, do so, it is only about 80 pages long and pretty easy reading.
Indeed, you're quite correct but... We're not talking about the book here, we're talking about the 2002 film. Take each for its own merits rather than just criticizing the film for not being the exact copy of the book.
The most predictable thing about the bush is that the bush is unpredictable
what if he goes back in time and rebuilds the machine in the past...
thats as far as i can get before i confuse myself lol
he finds out that if he saved her he never would have built the machine to save her so there lies the paradox
Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos.
It's Wile-E Coyote logic: If a well-laid plan fails due to chance, don't try the same plan again, do something completely different.
I am not going to look through all the threads but just give my answer. Emma's death was pre-destined. Whatever time, space or occurance Alexander traveled to she would have died a different way each time. He could have gone back years even when she was a little girl but when that fateful day and date came no matter if she was locked away in a room or where ever, she was going to die. I think Alexander realizes this by the end of the movie.
word
"I need more sex, OK? Before I die I wanna taste everyone in the world."
-Angelina HOlie
Thanx Dude!
sharewell he said and I quote "I could go back a thousand times, and watch her die a thousand ways." She was destined to die that night, changing her past wasn't possible. Alexander could only watch.
Don't worry, I saw Lord of the Rings. I'm not going to end this 17 times.
He doesn't try many times to save her. He tries once. The probability that, after saving her from the mugger that she would die from a horse carriage accident was so astronmoical and well beyond coincidence that he realizes that somehow her death is meant to happen and he can't save her, and wants to know why. That's why he goes to the future in the first place.
I DVR'd this movie just today (hadn't seen it in years) and watched it again. Nowhere does he state he went back numerous times to save her. He makes a comment about how he could try 1,000 times to save her only to watch her die 1,000 ways, but nowhere is it stated or even implied that he tried to save her more than once.
Anyone who has ever lost a loved one to death wishes he/she could somehow change the timeline. But some things cannot be changed. This was symbolically reinforced when Alexander was travelling into the future and he accidentally dropped the locket with Emma’s picture, which faded quickly and disappeared. At least, Alexander had the opportunity to kiss her passionately and say the sweet things to her before she was gone forever. I think that repeatedly returning to her death would have been too cruel for him to bear.
"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." - A.E. Van Vogt
I agree with what someone said earlier what if he went back and made another reason to invent the time machine like leave the designs on his desk or something
shareBut when he sees his wife and kids, he put the plans away. The look on his face tells us they are his only interest. The obsession/drive with building the machine is gone.
shareHe doesn't want to watch her die a thousand ways. So he goes into the future looking for answers, so that he can come back and save her.