It’s all wrong. Completely wrong. Now I know why it’s taken so long for The Time Traveler’s Wife to find a release date. Just from the trailer alone, it’s clear that the movie completely clusterfucks the novel’s spirit and tone. It was a romantic book — one of the most romantic I’ve ever read. But there was a heaviness to it. It had some gravity. It may have been mainstream friendly, but it wasn’t this. This light-weight frivolous pablum with a Snow Patrol (?) song playing over it. It wasn’t a bland romantic comedy. It was heartbreaking. Riveting. And a pall of sad inevitability fell over the entire thing.
This is freakin’ Serendipity with a time travel element. I liked Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams for the parts, but this just doesn’t work. It’s all wrong. It’s pear-shaped, people. A sad excuse for a cinematic adaptation. I hope it’s a bad trick played on us by the marketing folks, but I think it’s more likely that director Robert Schwentke (Flightplan) just effed this up horribly.
NO! Listen, I have been really good. I haven't attacked anybody's literary taste in weeks. I have shied away from all threads where I might have to let people know how little they know about subjects in which I am a self-appointed expert. I have been polite and at worst stand-offish. Have I not?
And all I wanted in return was to know that they didn't fuck this one up. This is a dark, dark book. Yes, there's a great love story there, but it's a book full of pain and the desperation of snatching moments of joy from a life that you know is doomed to extreme, wistful, loneliness. How could they do this to it? You're all on notice now. I'm back to full bitch-throttle because of this.
Ok, I will watch this on tv when my hormones are raging. Just saying.
Plus, I feel I'm obligated to watch any movie set in Chicago - I think it's written in the bylaws of the city or something.
That made me cry. Not because it looks great, because it doesn't, but because it reminded me of how much it hurt to read that book. Damn, it was painful, and beautiful.
Posted by: Kolby at June 15, 2009 11:19 AM
Oh, and can't help but think this should have been filmed by a European director - I think they would have hit the tone that Paddydog mentions above.
Please God, let this just be a shitty trailer for an otherwise awesome movie. But yes, the book had a far more powerful depth to it, and I'm not seeing it in the trailer.
I started this book and it bored the shit out of me. Am I missing something?
Posted by: samantha t at June 15, 2009 11:23 AM
Ugh, you're right! This is SO the wrong tone. Which will make it all the more dis-jointed when it has the book's ending (which I'm assured it does). Thus, it will alienate people like my mom who want the sappy/happy ending instead of a Nicholas Sparks sobfest, and people like me who want the depressing/beautiful love story.
Posted by: Jenilane at June 15, 2009 11:28 AM
Why was I under the impression that this movie came out 5 years ago? What am I thinking of?
Posted by: BWeaves at June 15, 2009 11:32 AM
OK, so his clothes and jewelry don't travel with him? That must be embarassing when he arrives at his next destination. How does he find perfectly fitting clothes when he arrives without running around nekkid for a while? I noticed in the trailer he always arrives clothed. RIPOFF! We want to see the nekkid arrivals.
Posted by: BWeaves at June 15, 2009 11:37 AM
I'm just clinging to the hope that it's a crappy trailer to draw in the usual romance movie crowd, and the movie will actually be decent.
Posted by: Gabs at June 15, 2009 11:43 AM
BWeaves:
There are actually some very entertaining parts of the book that deal with his arrivals "au naturel". One of the things that bothered me most about that trailer was the way they dealt with the time shifts: they looked inconsistent from scene to scene and also played for the shock value which wasn't the tone I got from the book at all: a lot less shock and a lot more irritation and embarrassment.
Posted by: PaddyDog at June 15, 2009 11:44 AM
ARGH. I KNOW. TTTW is probably my favorite book by anyone ever. The last time I finished it (earlier in May, second read), I was so devastated that I cried for two hours. My husband also loves this book and we are very emotionally attached to it. I cried watching this trailer, I admit it, but that's only because it made me think of the book. I like McAdams, but I fear that all the wonderful weirdness and darkness attached to the story will be diluted. It really is an extraordinary book and it deserves better than being turned into miscast, overly sappy schlock.
Definitely entertaining, Paddy. Just how he had to learn to fight and steal and keep himself in great shape so he'd survive. And then even going so far as to train a younger version of himself.
I worry that the movie will have far less action.
Posted by: Optimus Rhyme at June 15, 2009 11:53 AM
Bleh, this looks dreadful. On a more nitpicky note, I'll be really mad if they made her a painter or something rather than a papermaker. I was trying to figure out the stuff behind her when they were standing in a studio. I thought I saw canvases. I want paper mache sculptures!
Posted by: HB at June 15, 2009 11:56 AM
I'm still going to see it anyway, because the book is amazing, and I'll just hope that it's at least ok. If I go in with low expectations it can only be good, right?
Apparently no one else is bothered by the fact that Eric Bana is totally wrong for Henry? There's a nerdy softness to that character that is missing here. I mean, he works in a damn library. And hb I hadn't even noticed the lack of papier mache in the studio, but that's a really good point. I just know this movie is doomed to disappoint. I'm not sure it ever COULD work as a film though. There's something stylistic about the book that simply won't translate, particularly the fact that it's gotta jump between the two leads perspectives (which you KNOW is not gonna happen). And does anyone else hate that he sorta fades away?? I always got the impression that he was there and then gone, not that he suddenly started to disappear into the air. Ugh. So unhappy about this.
Posted by: KatSings at June 15, 2009 12:10 PM
KatSings:
The fading away really bothers me. It reminds me of the Invisible Man with David McCallum when he would unwrap the bandages. Not at all how it's supposed to be.
Posted by: PaddyDog at June 15, 2009 12:13 PM
I always got the impression that his time travel was more violent (kind of like the Jumper movie scenes) - the whole fade away crap looks stupid.
I wish Hollywood would learn this one lesson: Some books are not meant to be filmed.
Posted by: PiginSpace at June 15, 2009 12:20 PM
Samantha, you said:
"I started this book and it bored the shit out of me. Am I missing something?"
Well, if you're missing something, Samantha, I'm Really missing something, because I read it all the way through and it Still bored the Shit out of me.
I guess maybe we're not hearing from the other people who found it a yawner, or maybe we're all alone in the universe:)
Posted by: Lynne at June 15, 2009 12:34 PM
This light-weight frivolous pablum with a Snow Patrol (?) song playing over it.
Actually, it's "Broken" by Lifehouse. Snow Patrol may have their lightweight moments, but nothing quite so sappy as that moany little whinefest in the trailer.
And while I haven't read the book, I do sympathise with everyone currently having their literary experiences violated. Honestly, considering how often movie adaptations are truly awful and only manage to taint the book in question, how long will it be before we collectively stop hoping for more? On the other hand:
You're all on notice now. I'm back to full bitch-throttle because of this.
Posted by: PaddyDog at June 15, 2009 11:08 AM
Funsies! Someone should ruin PaddyDog's favourite books every day!
Posted by: Shay at June 15, 2009 12:39 PM
ugh i wanna vomit... looks like theyve ruined a great book. shame cus thats a good cast
Posted by: jim of the lower case at June 15, 2009 12:42 PM
I started this book and it bored the shit out of me. Am I missing something?
I picked it up a couple of times in the bookstore, and each time I try to read a few pages - then put it back. The writer just doesn't grab me.
So, in summary, I don't know.
Posted by: Cindy at June 15, 2009 12:52 PM
"Someone should ruin PaddyDog's favorite books every day"
I thought that was Marra's role on this site.
Posted by: PaddyDog at June 15, 2009 1:07 PM
It's like "The Notebook" and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "The Butterfly Effect" had a movie-baby. And if I know anything, it's that if I don't like any of a kid's three mismatched parents, I'm not going to like that pathetic asshole of a child either.
Posted by: sheshakes at June 15, 2009 1:24 PM
Samantha, I'm still reading the book, and while it's really good, I do think it can take some time to get into. It's definitely not for everyone; the pacing can get tedious and the time travel stuff is confusing. But it's an interesting read; give it another shot.
Posted by: Brie at June 15, 2009 1:44 PM
aww FUCK and I was having such a good day till this.
Oh, fuck me running.....Can't watch the trailer at work, but from reading this....shitschedoodle! Man, I love that book and wanted to see it done RIGHT! I never thought Eric Bana was right for Henry, but Rachel McAdams would seem to be a wonderful Claire....oh, well, another dream ruined...another hope dashed...thanks for fucking up my whole week, Hellywood!
they ruined the movie, its not even that much about the wife its darker and more violent ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH NONONO
bastards, no snow no freezing no funny parts of him running naked, it seems lite and fluffy for non reading audiences the dumb people win yet again
Posted by: MAd at June 15, 2009 2:17 PM
ok. Phew. That wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it'd be. Yes, it doesn't look as dark as the book but...god it looks so very sweet. I love both these actors and they look fantastic together. I think I resigned myself a while ago to the fact that this wouldn't be as good as the book but--how could it? And...this just looks sad and sweet and I hope that the movie's better than the trailer.
But...really, didn't the book say that when he disappeared it was instantaneous and there was a sound of sucking air? It's...ok the disappearance thing is all dumb.
I read this book because of all the love for it here - thank you all, that was a really good book! - and I don't think there's any way to catch what was good about it on the screen. I like Eric Bana just fine for Henry, but the book was about so much more than his magically popping in and out of her life. I cried and cried over this book - I don't dare see the movie in public! But video...maybe...oh, probably not. WOW did that book make me cry! And I ain't no crybaby. *snif* darn book.
I read this book last January when I was supposed to be filing medical charts in the basement of my dad's office. Instead, I hid in the stacks with this.
I was sobbing by page 14. I'm with Kolby-- I'm sad after watching that because I remember how much the book hit me like a ton of bricks.
I'm still going to see it, and I'm still going to cry. But if they leave out the part where she makes that specific sculpture for him after he gets The Injury, I will go berserker in the middle of the goddamn theater, because that was the most tragic and beautiful moment for me.
Posted by: That Girl at June 15, 2009 2:41 PM
Hmmm. The tone in the trailer is lighter than the book, but it certainly doesn't feel like "freakin' Serendipity with a time travel element" to me.
Like so many, I loved this book, and I got choked up watching the trailer because I was remembering how painful and wonderful the book was. But I have no illusions that the movie is going to capture all of that; how could it unless it was being directed by a combination of Darren Aronovsky and Jacques Demy?
This trailer appears to put the movie squarely in 'Truly Madly Deeply' territory, which feels just about right to me.
Maybe it's actually really sad and they made it look all nice and shiny for the trailer for marketing purposes? Because that's really all you fans of the book can hope for.
Posted by: Mick J at June 15, 2009 2:48 PM
It doesn't look *horrible* but it also doesn't look GOOD. The book, to me, was much darker and more tragic than this sun-filled trailer where he gently fades away each time he vanishes. His time travel is traumatic, and hard and sudden! Terrible things happen with their intial efforts to have a child, terrible things happen to henry. The book may be a love story, but it isn't this sappy, schlocky thing the trailer makes it out to be.
Posted by: peachfish at June 15, 2009 2:49 PM
I found the book objectively sad. Like, I read the thing, enjoyed it, finished it, and said "that was sad" without really feeling sad. So I'm not particularly attached to the book, but the movie does seem to whitewash things a bit. Still, I'll give McAdams and Bana a shot. Terrible trailers come along all the time, and this one just seems to be cut from the most boring trailer cloth around in the name of appealing to key demographics.
I hope Clare's not really like that in the movie. She seemed more like a strong, vibrant person than what is depicted in the trailer. Rachel M came across as kind of...well, like most women in a love movie. Kind of emotional and boring, like wide-eyed and stupid. Kind of weak.
Posted by: Biscuit at June 15, 2009 3:26 PM
i am of the camp who generally loved the book (though i hated the ending...). but the book is not the sappy story in this trailer - it's darkness with a few points of light. and eric bana is NOT henry. i always pictured someone more like james mcavoy, who can pull off nerdy and edgy at the same time...
Posted by: aprileee at June 15, 2009 3:36 PM
Brie - it's on my mother-in-law's shelf, so I'll steal it this weekend. I'm not against it for any particular reason, but I just couldn't get into it. I'll give it a try. There are so many books I feel similarly about - that didn't grab me immediately but that I ended up adoring, i.e. Marilynne Robinson's "Gilead". I'd hate to miss out.
Posted by: samantha t at June 15, 2009 3:39 PM
so happy to hear that this is a pile of crap; that trailer certainly seems like crap; i always thought that max tivoli book that came out around the same time was much better but what the hell do i know
Posted by: splinter at June 15, 2009 4:11 PM
Well, fuck.
That's so disappointing. I was just discussing my excitement for this last night.
I agree that McAdams and Bana were good choices, but I think for a movie adaptation of this book, the only way you can guarantee a studio isn't going to fuck it up is to cast unknowns.
Posted by: Kate at June 15, 2009 4:45 PM
My favorite moment that will most likely be left out (with an effort to avoid spoilers): the artwork she makes when she 'can't hear it'. Bawling, my friends. Bawling.
Thank you, Pajiba, for convincing me to read this tragically poignant story of timeless love.
Posted by: Patty O'Green at June 15, 2009 5:06 PM
Lynne, ain't nobody but Mr. Nathaniel Hawthorne qualified to Randomly capitalize Words. Obviously your Literary taste is questionable!
Posted by: Ariel at June 15, 2009 5:37 PM
I'm very worried about this movie. The book was so incredible that the film will, in all likelihood not be as good as I'd like it to be. While some films come very close to being just as powerful(hello Little Children!), the film is not going in the right direction. Yeah, the trailer kind of doesn't suck, but still, it lays on the sappy factor very heavily.
And I've never been a fan of the casting, as good as both McAdams and Bana may be.
I'm pretty sure those aren't canvases in the background, but rather a mesh screen w/ a wooden frame. It's what you make small pieces of homemade paper with, by tearing it up and sifting it through the water. Also, she has stacks of paper beside her and drying in the background. So perhaps they didn't fuck up her medium preference.
Posted by: naive_charm at June 16, 2009 12:50 AM
Awwww hell I'll watch it only because I have a borderline psychotic crush (think standing over her sleeping form and breathing heavily psychotic) on Rachel McAdams and have loved Bana since well since he first appeared on screen
Posted by: Colombo at June 16, 2009 4:01 AM
I am so emotionally invested in this book. The trailer makes it look like a piece of shit. They make the disappearing look all magical, but it wasn't, it was very mundane and ungraceful and real, and that was why the book worked. This is the most romantic, beautiful yet dark book, and it made me bawl more than anything I'd ever read (along with the His Dark Materials trilogy). This trailer makes me want to cry too. But for very different reasons.
I'm about to start TTTW for a second time, this time I'm listening to it on audiobook. I wanted to read it again before my experience of it is forever tainted by the movie.
Posted by: JJ McClay at June 16, 2009 11:26 AM
There is no way that this thing doesn't just suck.
And, there is no way that I don't go and see it, in spite of this foresight, loathing myself the whole time.
Posted by: gforcetwo at June 16, 2009 4:17 PM
OK, so I was giving this the benefit of the doubt until the scene where he hugs Alba (who doesn't even have dark hair in the movie? the hell?) and he gives her a very gentle, precious hug. So so wrong! He is basically DEAD at this stage, hugging his daughter for the very last time. There is no sense of urgency in that hug, no joy mixed with overwhelming grief. Not the book! Not the book at all.
And those of you who couldn't get into the novel, please try again. It is amazing. Breathtaking and heartbreaking.
Posted by: Candace at June 17, 2009 3:03 AM
Nobody is going to read this comment so many days later, but I went and bought the book yesterday when I was selling stuff back at Half Price. 12 hours later, I had finished it. For the life of me, I couldn't put the fucking thing down.
And yeah, when I was done I almost cried, but I was also too happy to cry. Very strange.
So now I can say with authority that the trailer looks insipid and frightful. And if I don't get to see some of Clare's sculptures, I might smack someone.
And yes, the fading out doesn't match AT ALL what I had in my head. And Bana doesn't match Henry at all, either.
I had a quasi-handsome nerdy punk in my head. You know, LIKE HE WAS DESCRIBED. Very lean, kind of whip-thin . . . wiry. Very much a guy who randomly stole and survived. Not Bana. And McAdams is playing a watered-down version of Clare. I don't like it.
Hmmmmm, Eric Bana and Rachel M, now that at least guarantees a certain watchability.
Isn't he a little old for her...?