Monday, October 5, 2009

Time Traveller's Wife

Well, last Saturday, finally I could go to enjoy a movie night with my wife after few long months of domestic maid conditions. Anyway, I picked the movie because I know my wife won't be excited with my other choices: Surrogate and District-9. However, I do like the premise of a movie related to time travel. Though, I know that it is a love story, hey as long as it is good and entertaining, I'm fine with that.

Let's get back to the movie. I didn't know much about the story before going to see it, cos it is not like a Transformer or Spiderman movie that get me excited months before it got released. Anyway, all I know that the movie is based on a novel (nothing special about this and after watching the movie, I would guess that the novel got to be much better than the movie), and the lead of the movie is Eric Bana. It is about a man with time travel ability that got married. Well, it is from the movie title that you can pretty much guess that.

The Goods of the movie:
Acting - Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams are fine actor and actress. They do match in the outlook. They are good actors, so they do can deliver on what Henry and Claire suppose to present on the screen.

Scenery - the garden/yard where the young Clarie first met Henry was beautiful and remind me of a place that I used to live for many years. Also, the Chicago suburb mansions are very pretty.

Story - I always like movies about time travel, or about time itself. This movie kinda remind me of 'The Lake House' and 'Curious Case of Benjamin Button'. Of course, the story of this one can stand on its own.

The bads of the movie:
Story - well, I think it can be much better. Perhaps, it suffered the same thing that many novel-adapted movies had --- not enough time to present the details which could be boring, but necessary to build up the flow and climax. That's why I think the book must be better. I just think so many things have been left out. I can certainly ask a lot of 'whys'. However, for the sake of enjoying a movie rather than analyzing a movie, I just let my mind go, don't force it, it is an entertainment after all.

So, the bottomline is that I found this movie enjoyable, would think that it is better to see it on screen than on TV. Cos, lately, I think that for 'emotion' driven movies, you got to have a big screen, dark surrounding, and no remote to captivate your attention, to make your mind 'sink' into the movie. Otherwise, you can't really enjoy it. That's kinda contradict my previous idea that only bid action movies or horror pics should be seen on screen. Anyway, that's my two cents!

No comments: