MovieChat Forums > The Time Machine (2002) Discussion > not a remake.. an alternative adaptation

not a remake.. an alternative adaptation

posted 11 years ago by daleshrimp
3 replies | jump to latest

Looking through the posts on here about this movie, I am struck by how many people who compare this , with the original film...
It puzzles me why, because this is an adaptation of the original book.As somebody who has read it many times,i find this version quite frankly awful.

there is no connection to the original tale what so ever.
Don't get me wrong, It is an ok film, and entertaining in its way. But if you are going to compare this with anything, the book is the way to go.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Gojira1963 11 years ago

You are correct. It is another adaptation of the source material...the book.

[–] willywilly 11 years ago

Disagree, its much closer to the 1960 movie than the book, taking on so many of its departures from the book, eg the design of the machine, stopping in the 20thC, a romance with a fully anthropomorphic Weena, talking historians explaining the past, the moorlocks underground lair exploding etc. I can't think of anything the 1960 film changed that the 2002 film changed back to resemble the book. All the 2002 differences are it's own (mostly totally daft) inventions.