| Author | Subject: Nitpickers |
| Gary | Posted At 00:12:13 03/05/2004
There is a site I stumbled upon. It has a section on The Time Machine. Some of the observations are silly and some are interesting. Here is the site:http://www.nitpickers.com/movies/titles/42887.html |
| ady |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 03:19:53 03/07/2004 Hi Gary The FIRE SUIT ALERT is the silliest!;-) Would they really have wanted the guy playing the Morlock to have actually burn to death, in order to save them from finding this "obvious" piece of trivia? ;-))) |
| Gary |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 12:46:21 03/07/2004 Hi Ady, yeah, that one is good. I also liked the one titled,"Oops! I Crushed Weena", where it was brought to our attention about Filby's comment at the end of the movie explaining why George had moved the Time Machine--so he would be at the Exact spot where Weena was standing when he left her! Ha! |
| ady |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 15:55:53 03/07/2004 Hi Gary Yeah, if the Machine would have crushed Weena, it would have taken out half-a-dozen other Eloi in to the bargain.;-))) And let's not forget how STUPID we must be....What? Are you sure? My God! BIG(transworld)NEWS EVERYONE!! The cars (that's right cars) in the lava flow are actually (wait for it) MODELS!!! Well,(i tell you Gary) you could of knocked me down with a feather....;-)))) |
| Francois Beaulieu |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 17:44:38 03/07/2004 I guess the first thought that came to mind when I read these is "Gee ! Some people really have a lot of free time on their hands !" Then, as I read them, I thought they should have called the site "stupid nitpickers", because some of the comments are either plainly obvious to anyone or are simply incorrect. The best example is the argument regarding the scenes where the Machine ends up in front of the Sphinx, then inside, and then back in 1900. There are two posts arguing that the Machine should have ended up elsewhere than it does, once the Time Machine is back in 1900. One says, "inside the house" and the other, "in front of the house". Both of them seem to base their theory on the orientation of the Machine when it stops in 802701. The problem is that neither argument takes into account that, when the Machine arrives in 802701, it SPINS out of control !!! So, its orientation when it stops in 802701 is not related in anyway to its position in 1899 !!! But if you look at the orientation of the Machine when George recovers it inside the Sphinx and then, its orientation outside the house when he is back in 1900, it is completely consistent... |
| Francois Beaulieu |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 18:42:47 03/07/2004 OK, I have had another long hard look at this thing and I can see how these posters came up with their argument: Just as George says "I had to stop and find out", the Machine has not started to spin yet and one can see that its orientation is slightly more to the right than it was in the lab (in relation to the Sphinx), but the difference is minimal and, I am sure, must have been due to the turmoil during time travelling ! ;-))) The point is that this would not be enough to account for the Machine ending up anywhere else but in the garden on its return... |
| ady |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 14:42:17 03/08/2004 Hi Francois Thanks for your definitive(putting it in a nut-shell)reason why, those stupid nitpickers arguments disputing where, the Machine should have materialized on it's return to 1900 in any other place than the garden, are totally unfounded!!!;-))) Yeah,the Machine couldn't have ended up anywhere else! Even i know that!!!;-))) One nitpicker posted, that the Machine would have LANDED (remembering that time displaces space)....so it's OBVIOUS, he must have some inside knowledge of a pending RUNWAY going straight through george's house!!!;-))) |
| Francois Beaulieu |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 17:42:08 03/11/2004 Yes, good point about the Machine "landing", Ady. Actually, if one reads these posts carefully, many of them have such errors. For example, one poster arguing about the position of the Machine states: "the underground complex of the Morlocks appears behind it"... Seems to me that the "underground complex" is more likely "under" it !!! ;-))) |
| Richard D. Cole |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 11:12:53 03/17/2004 I've thought the same thing but if the camera postion is constant, he did right his machine (after spining) in exactly the same position. If directly behind the machine is the lab wall, with the machine console facing east towards the garden, call that North (for direction purpose)the machine was pull into the sphinx in a north direction, but the garden is east of his starting position, the machine was pulled sideways into the sphinx, but he pulled it from the back into his lab heading west. |
| Francois Beaulieu |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 14:29:07 03/17/2004 I don't quite agree with that viewpoint, Richard... When we first see the Machine in the workshop, it does appear like the wall is behind it. However, when Rod walks around it, one can see that it is positioned at a sharp angle. All you have to do is look at the position of the Machine in relation to the floor pattern (when George starts walking around the Machine). What you see at that point behind the Machine is some flowers to the left and the glass door to the right. It is that angle I compared to the Machine's position next to the right foot of the Sphinx. True, the Machine is even more angled to the right, once it reaches 802701. However, I think we can explain that away by what happened during time travel !!! ;-))) |
| Richard D. Cole |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 16:19:45 03/17/2004 The angles may be off a little, but no big deal. What happens during time travel? unless gravity holds the machine in place the earth would have moved away from 1899 space to somewhere else in 802701, reason I mentioned that is I liked how the idea of the machine starting in London and ending in Oakland, (Time After Time) |
| Francois Beaulieu |
Re: Nitpickers (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 18:56:35 03/17/2004 Well, there are many ways to look at it in that respect, but since this is time travel in a fantasy context (the only one we know so far !), the logic of the matter is up to the writer. I too enjoyed "Time After Time", although it does not follow Wells's logic. I think Wells made it clear that he is travelling from a fixed point in a specific surrounding - just as we do in real life. In other words, if one stays stationary in a given surrounding for any length of time, one doesn't start floating about to another region of the planet. I guess one has to accept this as part of Wells's rules of time travel. On the other hand, if one follows the logic in "Time After Time" through, the Machine could have very well ended up in space. That's why Wells felt it has to stay anchored to its spatial surroundings, otherwise it would be rather impractical. Sometimes one cheats with ones logic and gets away with it... as happens in "Time After Time". After all, it's much more poetic to have the Machine end up in a museum about Wells himself than in an iceberg at the North Pole ! |