GAMES: GameSpot | GameFAQs MUSIC: Last.fm | MP3.com MOVIES: Metacritic | Movietome TV: TV.com
Home | About Metacritic | About Metascores | What's New | Wireless Versions | Discussion Forums | Advertising Inquiries | Contact Us | RSS
Metacritic.com: We Deal With Criticism
     Help
> Switch to Advanced Search  
Film Video/DVD Music Games TV

Film

Upcoming Release Calendar
Weekend Box Office
Film Awards & Top 10s By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores
How Metascores Are Calculated
Discuss Film In Our Forums

 

Wide Releases

sort by name sort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

 

Limited Releases

sort by name sort by score

67 $9.99
75 24 City
66 Adoration
74 Afghan Star
48 Alien Trespass
56 American Violet
82 Anvil! The Story of Anvil
57 Away We Go
81 Beaches of Agnes, The
62 Big Man Japan
28 Big Shot-Caller, The
78 Boys: The Sherman Brothers' Story, The
55 Brothers Bloom, The
82 Burma VJ: Reporting from a Closed Country
xx Call of the Wild
63 Cheri
62 Cherry Blossoms
63 Dead Snow
65 Departures
18 Downloading Nancy
58 Easy Virtue
70 End of the Line, The
77 Every Little Step
64 Examined Life
80 Food, Inc.
38 Gigantic
56 Girl from Monaco, The
67 Girlfriend Experience, The
87 Gomorrah
89 Goodbye Solo
63 Great Buck Howard, The
79 Harvard Beats Yale 29-29
xx Home
82 Hunger
91 Hurt Locker, The
16 I Hate Valentine's Day
81 Il Divo
54 Is Anybody There?
71 Jerichow
58 Julia
74 Lemon Tree
36 Life is Hot in Cracktown
40 Limits of Control, The
42 Little Ashes
64 Lymelife
50 Management
57 Merry Gentleman, The
66 Moon
35 New York
62 Not Forgotten
xx Offshore
78 O'Horten
64 Outrage
40 Paris 36
54 Pontypool
71 Pressure Cooker
52 Quiet Chaos
83 Revanche
67 Rudo y Cursi
86 Seraphine
65 Sex Positive
70 Shall We Kiss?
77 Sin Nombre
59 Sleep Dealer
74 Song of Sparrows, The
54 Stoning of Soraya M., The
82 Sugar
84 Summer Hours
61 Sunshine Cleaning
28 Surveillance
42 Tennessee
63 Tetro
64 Throw Down Your Heart
80 Tokyo Sonata
63 Tokyo!
70 Tony Manero
74 Treeless Mountain
88 Tulpan
74 Two Lovers
83 Tyson
83 U2 3D
60 Under Our Skin
69 Unmistaken Child
69 Valentino: The Last Emperor
22 What Goes Up
45 Whatever Works
57 Youssou Ndour: I Bring What I Love

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

 



Printer-Friendly Version Email This Page Discuss In Our Forums

Time Machine, The
Warner Bros. /DreamWorks Distribution L.L.C.

Time Machine, The reviews
Critic Score
Metascore: 42 Metascore out of 100
User Score  
6.0 out of 10
based on 33 reviews
Read critic reviews
How did we calculate this?
based on 34 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie

MPAA RATING: PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence

Starring Guy Pearce, Mark Addy, Jeremy Irons, Yancey Arias, Philip Bosco, Phyllida Law, and Samantha Mumba

A film version of the visionary novel by H.G. Wells in which a man in the 1890's builds a time machine that sends him into the future.


GENRE(S): Sci-fi  
WRITTEN BY: John Logan
David Duncan (earlier screenplay)
H.G. Wells (novel)
 
DIRECTED BY: Simon Wells  
RELEASE DATE: DVD: July 23, 2002 
Video: July 23, 2002 
Theatrical: March 8, 2002 
RUNNING TIME: 96 minutes, Color 
ORIGIN: USA 

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

75
Philadelphia Inquirer Steven Rea
The film, in its early going, also has a nice light humor about it, and an engaging, albeit tragic, love story.
Read Full Review
75
Seattle Post-Intelligencer William Arnold
For the most part, it's imaginatively staged and consistently entertaining.
Read Full Review
70
New Times (L.A.) Gregory Weinkauf
Delivers a thoughtful what-if for the heart as well as the mind.
Read Full Review
63
The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Rick Groen
A revisiting of George Pal's 1960 adaptation of the H. G. Wells novel. Pal's take on the book was visually delightful and occasionally clever; this one is always workmanlike and mainly pedestrian.
Read Full Review
60
The Onion (A.V. Club) Keith Phipps
Machine makes its look-to-the-future-not-the-past message as clear as a Grammy acceptance speech, but as an exploration of regret and the elusive quality of time, it falls well short of "Memento," another film starring a sad-eyed Pearce.
Read Full Review
60
Salon.com Charles Taylor
The Time Machine is, for the most part, a handsome, pleasant entertainment.
Read Full Review
60
Washington Post Desson Thomson
Amazingly stilted before accelerating into its exciting finish.
Read Full Review
60
Chicago Reader Jonathan Rosenbaum
As old-fashioned movie fun, this isn't bad, even -- especially? -- when it skirts the edge of silliness, and it's better than the 1960 George Pal version.
Read Full Review
50
USA Today Mike Clark
Drab as it is, the movie is not impossible to endure -- in part because the concept has a timeless appeal.
Read Full Review
50
Miami Herald Rene Rodriguez
Most of Wells' details are there, and so is the basic premise, but the soul of the thing -- the point -- is missing.
Read Full Review
50
ReelViews James Berardinelli
The Time Machine is stupid -- too stupid for the impressive special effects or the competently directed action sequences to wash away the bitter taste.
Read Full Review
50
Chicago Tribune Michael Wilmington
It's a movie that robs the story of its politics and point and never really matches the charm of the '60s film.
Read Full Review
50
LA Weekly Manohla Dargis
In the new film, it's personal tragedy that provokes the journey, not social upheaval or even scientific curiosity -- which, predictably, makes for a story that's at once more familiar and less interesting.
Read Full Review
50
Charlotte Observer Lawrence Toppman
The last 40 minutes descend further and further into nonsense, until we're in an underground grotto where Jeremy Irons plays a furry, cannibalistic albino with psychic powers and super-strength.
Read Full Review
50
Los Angeles Times Kenneth Turan
If Welles was unhappy at the prospect of the human race splitting in two, he probably wouldn't be too crazy with his great-grandson's movie splitting up in pretty much the same way.
Read Full Review
50
Entertainment Weekly Owen Gleiberman
Deliberately quaint and old-fashioned, a once-over-slightly exercise in nostalgic wonder directed by the British-born great-grandson of H.G. Wells, who treats the spirit of his ancestor's novel with literal-minded fealty.
Read Full Review
50
Washington Post Stephen Hunter
Weirdly disjointed and uncertain as to tone.
Read Full Review
50
Boston Globe Jay Carr
The best thing about the new film of H.G. Wells's The Time Machine is the machine.
Read Full Review
50
San Francisco Chronicle Mick LaSalle
There's something wrong with a time-travel movie that allows an audience's interest to drift so that we have time to worry over where he's parked, and whether he remembered to take his key.
Read Full Review
50
Slate David Edelstein
The film has no spirit of inquiry -- no spirit at all, really.
Read Full Review
40
TV Guide Frank Lovece
They STILL didn't get it right this TIME.
Read Full Review
40
The New York Times A.O. Scott
This uninviting and pallid version, starring Guy Pearce, is intent on grinding all the sharp edges off the original story, in effect making the movie childproof, so no one can get hurt touching it.
Read Full Review
40
Variety Todd McCarthy
Breaks down when it gets to the distant future, which in this case isn't a good place to be stranded.
Read Full Review
40
Austin Chronicle Marc Savlov
The film's two saving graces are the time machine itself -- a gorgeous, whirling array of burnished copper and blazing light -- and the CGI-created rise and fall of New York City.
Read Full Review
38
Baltimore Sun Michael Sragow
The movie gives us a time machine that resembles a twin-engined Mixmaster and a script that was tossed together inside one.
Read Full Review
38
New York Daily News Jack Mathews
Wells' vision of the distant future is cartoonishly simplistic without the subtext of British class consciousness that informed the novel.
Read Full Review
38
New York Post Jonathan Foreman
So tedious it's almost worth watching to see just how bad acting, inadequate direction and most important, a criminally crass and unimaginative screenplay can make so little out of a proven idea.
Read Full Review
38
Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert
A witless recycling of the H.G. Wells story from 1895, with the absurdity intact but the wonderment missing.
Read Full Review
33
Portland Oregonian Shawn Levy
While there are some glittery bits in it, the film is frustrating, cluttered, inelegant and garish.
Read Full Review
30
Wall Street Journal Joe Morgenstern
Joyless and largely witless sci-fi fantasy.
25
Christian Science Monitor David Sterritt
If you want a movie time trip, the 1960 version is a far smoother ride.
Read Full Review
20
Village Voice Dennis Lim
If it's remembered at all, it will be as a time capsule of early-21st-century blockbuster cowardice and redundancy.
Read Full Review
10
Film Threat Chris Gore
I’m getting fed up with classic films being remade or ruined by being turned into “Special Editions” that are less than special.
Read Full Review

What Our Users Said

Vote Now!The average user rating for this movie is 6.0 (out of 10) based on 34 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Pat C. gave it a2:
Took all the intrigue out of time travel.

cbd d. gave it a4:
Dumb, dumb, dumb. Fun to watch, but the acting was about the same quality as Barney, the kids' show, and the plot has holes that are miles wide. Some good effects. The last 1/3 is especially lame. Anybody know what Jeremey Irons said in the climax scene????? I replayed it 5 times and still couldn't understand him.

Steve gave it an 8:
I've watched this movie about 3 times now and I still enjoy it. It's fun, creative and has great special effects.

Wesley R. gave it a 10:
To a small part of humanity, a time machine could be sacred. The departure angle of the remake was stronger then the 1960's, not to mention that the machine looked so much more realistic with the spherical lighteffects and spinning lighthouse lenzes. What the 1960 lacks in effects, more then makes up with its charm, Rod's driven performance and Yvette's "Eloian" innocence. Both movies, were like Wells; ahead of their time. And both movies agree; if the world comes to an end; it' might be our own fault; that message is selden seen in others of its kind. Also, it was nice to see some Morlocks without a zipper running down their spine.

Draco B. gave it a 5:
Visually = 8 Screenplay = 4 Acting = 3 Watch it again? = 3

Benjamin C. gave it a 6:
This movie could have been a lot better. First the things I liked: Spcial effects, technical stuff. Guy Pierce was the only good actor of the main characters. The first time i saw it, I fell asleep to the menu of the DVD, and the music was wierd, I could hear it while I was still asleep. I liked that. The stuff I didn't like: Even though Orlando Jones was ok, I thought he shouldnt have been casted for the part. Truthfully, Orlando Jones was decent, but I couldnt stop thinking "Its the 7up guy!" All the actors that played characters in the year 800,000 sucked, except Irons, but that was a small part. The ending was stupid. Just the way he kills the morlocks was sort of stupid. its still worth seeing i guess.

Felicia N. gave it a 10:
Another great film of Pearce's. He is truly a great actor. He really knows how to keep his films together.The effects were great and I have to agree that the crumbling of the moon was a neat idea. The creatures were awesome as well.

Read more user comments...

Discuss this movie in our forums

Return to top of page
Home | FILM | DVD/VIDEO | MUSIC | GAMES | TV | Forums | About Metacritic metacritic.com

Popular on CBS sites: iPhone 3G | Fantasy Football | Moneywatch | Antivirus Software | Recipes | E3 2009

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use