The Time Traveler's Wife [*Film Review Reaction*]

    Reading the movie review of the film version of The Time Traveler's Wife, I was somewhat surprised at what the author wrote. In the review, the author had stated that. "You could think of it as a crazy story about a stalker who sweet-talks a little girl whom he later seduces when she’s a teenager only to then knock her up and emotionally, psychologically and spiritually knock her down again and again, as he hopscotches naked across the time-space continuum"(Dargis). Just at the start of the review, I already disagreed with the author. Through this quote I thought it was completely wrong. For me, when I read the book and watched the movie, I never thought of Henry being a "stalker", but rather a lost character who can't control his time travelling, especially if it included visiting Clare. He never even knew who she was until the day he went to visit her in the meadow. He also had no intention of "sweet-talking" Clare, because he just didn't want her telling her parents who he was, and she was the one that ended up falling for him the more he visited.
   Something else I disagreed with in the article was when it stated, "It’s another thing entirely to watch the big, strapping, healthy Eric Bana groping the greens. It isn’t his fault. Indeed, watching Mr. Bana frequently strut his seminude stuff, nimbly avoiding the full-frontal reveal even as he flashes some discreet cheek, is one of the few pleasures afforded by this often ridiculous, awkward, unsatisfying and dour melodramatic adaptation"(Dargis). Although the author of the article was referring to the author who played Henry, the ending of this quote was what was disappointing. I do agree with the part in which the movie was "awkward', because the interaction some characters had proved it to be awkward, such as when Henry was talking to Clare's dad when they were about to get married or even talking to his own father. However, I would not go as far as calling the movie "ridiculous, unsatisfying and dour melodramatic" because the film was an adaption of the book, and although the film wasn't an entire portrayal of the book, the article's criticism of the film can also be an insult to the book.
   The rest of the article continued to summarize what the movie was about, and then the author proceeded to compare say how good the movie was to the book. To be more exact, the last part of the article said, "Ms. Niffenegger grasps the melodramatic truism that tears sting the strongest when the audience feels as if it had lost something, which helps explain her sales. By contrast, the filmmakers shroud the movie in foreboding as Henry looks for some clothes, and you search for your smile" (Dargis). Here the author attempts to be humorous, and states in simple words that the book was a way bigger hit than the movie, because the book depicts everything about Henry and Clare, whereas the movie covers all the good and makes it seem "creepy".


  Dargis, Manohla. "So Sorry, I Lost My Clothes Years Ago". New York Times 14 August 2009. Web. 25 February 2011
  <http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/movies/14time.html>.