MovieChat Forums > The Time Traveler's Wife (2009) Discussion > Who gave this piece of crap over 7 stars...

Who gave this piece of crap over 7 stars?


I regret many things I did. Seeing this movie was one of them. If I had a time machine I'd go back to yesterday and prevent my past-self from ever seeing such a lame film.

Another thing I regret is looking this movie up and trusting that it would have to be good... since it has 7.2 stars... right? Yeah, my @$$. This movie should have, at most, a 4.5 rating (if that). Some amazing films on IMDB aren't even rated 7.2... and to see this piece of crap have such a rating seriously makes me question the dunces who spend time rating this movie so high. I gave it a 1 star rating.

reply

You gave it 1 star? It was seriously not that bad. The acting was good, and the film had some really good moments in it. Maybe that's why people rated it so high. I thought it was a good movie.

reply

why didn't you like it?

reply

I just watched it. Let me answer. (I did NOT give it over 7 stars, obviously.)

It's Drama for no reason. The time-space of the movie does not make sense, there's no reason for them NOT to fix the utterly pointless deaths of the parents, yet they do not.

They broke the world so much, trying to model this determinism including time travel, and all for what? A totally cheap story-arc. Especially the OH NO MY PARENT DIED repetition with the double gender swap, seriously, were they out of ideas within the same damn movie?

This reminds me of this Benjamin Button movie. Or the pointless massacre that is Elfenlied. Construct something unrealistic but ugly, dwell in how sucky it is, O DRAMA --> plot finished.

This is ignorance toward the sufficient problems we already have. Out of problems? Just invent a non-working non-consistent unexplainable and useless version of time-space, to then use it to *beep* with people's lives in an unlikely way. WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?

Seriously. WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?

reply

The movie doesn't do a great job of explaining it, but the way this works in the book is that the timeline is set and already takes into account what the time-traveling Henry is going to do at various times in the past. So if in 1990 he time travels back to 1988, then in the original 1988 there will have already been a second Henry (from 1990), doing whatever he chooses to do 2 years older. For example in the book, Henry as a child time travels and ends up locked in an empty museum, where he meets a 40 year old man who teaches him lots of survival techniques, for when he appears in random places. Then 30 years later when Henry is 40, he time travels back and ends up in the museum with the younger Henry, so he helps him, just as he'd been helped before.

I personally gave the movie a 6, decent but could have been much better. However I might not have liked it as much if I hadn't read the book first. The book was excellent.

reply

Its an interesting but slighty dubious film, that been henry traveling back to see a young girl though maybe they are in the same timeline ? Now if time travel was possible then as it was stated in the film Henry unlike his daughter couldn't control when he travelled to. That aside it is very well acted and fascinating piece of work. Ultimately its a story about undying love and life after death.

reply

I was the complete opposite. I expected it to be a peice of crap and it turned out to be amazing. I gave it a ten i have only given 2 other movies such a rating.

~Arguing with the uneducated is like arguing with a tree.~

reply

Oh, please, please. I have to know what those two are. LOL

reply

I completely agree. I was very shocked to see it rated so high. It's mediocre at best.

If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it, copy this and make it your signature!

reply

If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it, copy this and make it your signature!


Is it not odd how you rarely see anyone with these signatures?

Less and less the cross carries itself, and more and more mundane humans attempt to hold it up.
lol


-- Do unto others before they do unto you.

reply

Totally agree!

reply

I find it worrying that you can't see or feel the love in this wonderful story.

Yet you find love for a 2,000 year old fable about a charismatic schizophrenic?


''If you are certain of evolution and are a fan of level headed reason and science and are 100% proud of it-copy THIS!''

reply

silicon,
I understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but what I don't understand is why you felt compelled to belittle anyone whose opinion differs from yours. Very immature, narrow-minded, rude and completely unnecessary. I gave it an 8 and I resent being called a dunce by someone of your character (or lack of).

Lord, help me be the person my dog thinks I am.

reply

Word.

"...stranger!"

My Flickr account: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25387035@N05/

reply

If I would have completely understood all the time travel aspects of this movie I might have given it a 10, I ended up giving it an 8. As a general rule, any movie that generates strong emotions (i.e. crying) on multiple occasions deserves a high rating.

reply

Agree... and it is a bit annoying that some people rated a great movie badly just because they couldn't understand it.....I mean.... it's an entertainment....how pity their life would be when they can't even understand what is entertaining about? How would they enjoy a life like that?

I rated this movie a 10. The time traveling timelines are totally understandable. The acting of both main characters is great and convincing. The story is very creative (as adapted from the novel), profound, touching and well told (even with so many scenes changing every few second.) When I watched it the second time I was still pleased and touched by it. It deserves 10 stars alone. And because those people revengefully rated it bad, I wouldn't give it less than 10. ;)

reply

I would rate it low, not because I didn't "understand" it, but because I thought it was a stupid and annoying movie. Rachel McAdam's character, in particular, was so, so very annoying. The guy has a genetic condition which he CAN'T CONTROL and she blames him for not being able to control it. Then the "trick" w. the vasectomy. Selfish bint.

reply

Such a great explanation for such great ridicule.

reply

Rented this the other day and I was unmoved by the love story,and though it was a mixed up mess,and too far fetched to ever be real.

reply

I watched it last night and could hardly wait till it was over. I love romance movies, and expected this one to be good because the book has been praised so highly and so has the movie. But I think this is one of the worse movies I've seen in a while. It is dis-jointed-- just when the story was moving along, zap- he was gone. Then things started again, and he was gone again. It all got tiresome. The best part was when Alba came on the scene. She was one cute kid.

reply

I have it an 8

reply

If you read the book first I think it really makes a huge difference in what you think of the movie. The book was amazing.

reply

Zap, he was gone. He is a time traveler stupid!!

reply

If you haven't read the book, read it. Hopefully you won't be tainted by this drivel crapfest. I was fortunate enough to read the book first, and when they cast Bana as Henry, I knew it would be lame. I was right.

reply

My thoughts exactly. Rating it a 1 just because you're pissy about the current rating it has defeats the entire purpose of rating.

--------------------------
How did you know to get out of a world gone mad?

reply

If you give a movie only 1 star its likely that your vote won't even count because it's deviating too much from the average score. That's how IMDB works...

reply

wtf? it was really good.. u just didnt understand.
of course people have different point of view but 1? really? of course it seemed little boring and not dramatic in climax but acting was good and it was heartaking in my point of view also the time travel made the movie interesting and make u thing to think about it.

reply