The Time Traveler's Wife (2009)

Movie Photo
IMDb Rating
(view IMDb page)

Audrey Niffenegger’s best-selling weeper gets the multiplex treatment, with Rachel McAdams in the title role as a woman in love with a librarian (Eric Bana) who is cursed with a genetic anomaly that can send him through time without any warning. DP

  • 2/5 Star Rating.
(Based on 2 Ratings)
MPAA Rating:
PG-13 for thematic elements, brief disturbing images, nudity and sexuality.
Runtime:
107 Minutes
Genre(s):
Drama, Romance, Sci
Director(s):
Robert Schwentke
Writer(s):
Bruce Joel Rubin (screenplay)
Audrey Niffenegger (novel)

City Newspaper's Review

Dayna Papaleo on August 19th, 2009

Favorite This Like this Movie? You can Favorite it on your Profile.

In the years since 2006's preposterous (and preposterously romantic) "The Lake House," many have learned to embrace their inner suckers and allow just about any sweet-talking chick flick to have its way with them. The least we can do is make our emotional manipulation easier, since our real-life romantic entanglements have apparently become such cakewalks that cinema is now forced to invent new and scientifically dubious complications to them just to get the ol' tear ducts a-flowing. It's clear from the title that "The Time Traveler's Wife" is dying to both pluck at your heartstrings and blow your mind, but this uninvolving sci-fi romance is unlikely to do much of either, unless confusion and boredom turn you on.

Former "Hulk" Eric Bana stars as Henry, a Chicago librarian who is understandably bummed over his "genetic anomaly," which causes him to involuntarily leave the present day and drop in on different points in his past and his future, then return just as abruptly to his everyday life. Though he has no control over his travels, the most inconvenient part might be the nakedness; his clothes crumple in a heap, unable to make it through the space-time continuum, so Henry spends most of his time scrambling for something to wear. But things begin looking up for Henry one day when he's accosted by Clare (Rachel McAdams, "State of Play"), an intense, beautiful woman who claims to have known him her whole life, and after a snoop through his medicine cabinet, they're in love.

"The Time Traveler's Wife" follows Henry and Clare through their days together, with Henry's sudden departures and returns mostly tolerated by the adoring Clare, her one tantrum mollified when Henry provides her with winning lottery numbers. And though actual conflict arises in the form of Clare's desire to have a baby despite Henry's time-travel gene, their fascinating problem just seems dull. The always excellent McAdams - no stranger to a proper weepie, if you've ever seen "The Notebook" - does what she can with her underwritten part, but she's forced to play against perhaps the most lifeless leading man around. Bana, who has thus far been unsuccessful in replicating the charisma that got him noticed in the 2000 Australia film "Chopper," plays Henry as a crabby mope, not surprising considering the circumstances but hardly compelling and certainly nothing to swoon over.

Things do get a little unintentionally creepy whenever adult Henry visits young Clare in the past, but director Robert Schwentke ("Flightplan") and screenwriter Bruce Joel Rubin (who has handled metaphysical kinks with "Ghost") already have an uphill battle with the material, charged with keeping the audience from thinking too much while making the implausible romantic. Based on the 2003 bestseller by Audrey Niffenegger (which, in the interest of full disclosure, I have never read and now probably won't), "The Time Traveler's Wife" seems to be trying to convey something about the impermanence yet endurability of love, but what it actually says is a man will leave without warning, and once he's gone, guess who has to fold his clothes? You do, my friend. You do.

User Reviews of The Time Traveler's Wife (2)

City Newspaper is not responsible for the content of these reviews. City Newspaper reserves the right to remove reviews at their discretion.

User Photo
  • 2/5 Star Rating.

Bernie said on Aug. 24, 2009 at 8:20am

Though you can never get a movie based on a book to be just as good as it. I think having read it before helped me a bit more from being disappointed.

User Photo

Tommy said on Aug. 24, 2009 at 2:54pm

Rachel McAdams in a chick flick?

No matter what you say about it, everybody will go see it...

Leave A Review

(This will not be published)

(Optional)