The Time Traveler’s Wife (2009)
By: Robert Schwentke (director), Bruce Joel Rubin (screenplay), Audrey Niffenegger (novel)
Starring: Eric Bana, Rachel McAdams, Ron Livingston, Michelle Nolden
A romantic drama about a Chicago librarian with a gene that causes him to involuntarily time travel, and the complications it creates for his marriage.
You would think that a movie made about an impromptu time traveler and the effect his condition has on the people closest to him would be interesting. This is as unique a concept as you’re likely to get out of Hollywood anymore, which makes it even more unfortunate that The Time Traveler’s Wife is as unimpressive as it is.
Having not read the novel the film is based on, I can’t say for sure, but I get the distinct impression that this is a story best told in the written word. It is clearly a showcase of the human condition, of the complexity of relationships, and within the confines of the moving picture it seems stifled. I always find it particularly heartbreaking when a movie has potential it can’t or simply doesn’t live up to, and this is a very clear case of that, although it’s not for lack of trying. The action doesn’t actually get remotely engaging until halfway through due to what is presumably a misapplied effort on the filmmakers to weave a more intricate relationship between the two principle characters during the first half.
With a better-paced screenplay and stronger acting, this might actually translate into a genuinely good film. I enjoy Eric Bana as a rule, but it seems like the more I see of Rachel McAdams, the more apathetic I become about her, and while I don’t dislike her or think she’s necessarily bad at acting, I don’t think she’s especially good at it, either. She’s certainly not been memorable in anything I’ve seen her in since Mean Girls, and I would be happy to go on not seeing her in anything else, I think.
The Time Traveler’s Wife shoots for poignant and misses; not by a lot, mind you, but watching it I couldn’t help but feel the movie was just a little off from where it needed to be to be effective. Aside from the premise, very little about it was memorable or particularly moving, which is a big problem for a film that is supposed to be hinged on emotional weight.
After I saw you post this, I was meaning to note–they changed the ending for the film. The book one is really very bleak and sorta implausible imho, though I’ve not read it, this is just secondhand. They may very well have changed a lot more to make it ‘filmable’ and ended up with a mess.