Was this a made-for-television movie? - Time After Time (1979) Discussion

[–] arnaud-asseray 13 years ago

i have never watched a movie made for Tv using a beautiful 2.35 Scope.. What happened to youth? Movies nowadays are lesser formal than they used to be and ugly films shot everyday are a shame for the 7th art.. So youth decided that a good movie was what today ?? Transformers? Instead of crying wolves kid, watch the light, the frame, the actors and the way a movie is edited.. You remain me a certain "myself" during the 80's going to theater for Cobra and Rocky4..

I have evolved and in a couple of years i bet you will enjoy the movie you previously found cheesy.

PS: If you have got more than 30, there is a problem..

reply

[–] tmisterb 13 years ago

Nope; saw it back in the day.
32 years later it suffers in comparison to films made today.

LOVED this film; Malcolm never looked better.

reply

[–] sisterdebmac 13 years ago

You are so right. This is the movie that turned me on to him. I was only 16 when I discovered it on HBO in 1980. I'd never seen anything else he'd done at that point. Of course I went back and watched everything. I was fortunate enough that I got to see things like If and O Lucky Man! and Clockwork and Britannia Hospital on the big screen at the Rhodes Theatre in downtown Atlanta in the early 80's. I actually saw both versions of Caligula on the big screen as well. In my opinion, the R version is an OK movie. The X version is garbage.

I also love Long Ago Tomorrow and Royal Flash, both of which I watched on cable repeatedly back in the day. He's done tons of interesting work throughout his career, but some of his early stuff is just so special. Time After Time will always have the top spot in my heart though.

I came out of that film also in love with Mary Steenburgen and David Warner.
________________
there will be snark

reply

[–] jbacks3 13 years ago

Nope. I also disagree with your qualitative assesment. The film was made in pre-CGI 1979 and suffers today by comparison to other more recent Sci-Fi (which this isn't)/fantasy (still not entirely accurate) movies. The script is terrific and the acting is entirely believable. Nick Meyer was a first time director (wisely rejecting Mick Jagger for the part of Jack the Ripper!) with very little studio encouragement, and I think, did a bang up job. I saw this during it's first run and enjoyed the hell out of it.

reply

[–] JumeirahSun 12 years ago

I had the same thought while watching it. Parts of it are out of focus, and the special effects are obviously low-budget. It does seem kind of like a TV movie, but I think it was really a film made for cinema release, on a modest budget.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] moodie-1 11 years ago

@ JumeirahSun
This was definitely *not* a TV movie since I saw it on its first theatrical release in 1979 and loved it.

@ jbacks3
If this film "suffers by comparison" it's only because it was a moderate-budget movie at the time, certainly not what's known in the industry as a "major motion picture". Unfortunately many (of the "less refined") people these days are so spoiled by today's expensive CG-laden blockbusters that they turn down their noses at any movie more modestly produced, like this one. Also, it could be that since both Malcolm McDowell and Mary Steenburgen played such passive characters (allowing David Warner's character to gain the upper hand), along with the tragic and grisly death of Amy's roommate, a lot of viewers were turned off of this film. A shame, because this movie is still well worth watching, if only for the ingenious "H.G. Wells vs Jack The Ripper" plot.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BarelyHere 11 years ago

It does have a made for television feel to it, even compared to other movies of that era. It was Nicholas Meyer's first film he directed. And I'm guessing not a large budget.

The movie has an excellent cast and an interesting story that makes up for it's shortcomings. If you can get past the film quality it might be worth giving it another try.

Censorship is advertising paid by the government.

reply

[–] sylvicrowe 11 years ago

I saw this movie the other day for the first time and I had the same feeling. I readed a lot of comments about it from people that love the movie but the reason I think they said so is because they are nostalgics about it.
I also watch movies of all decades. We can understand the part about the special effects and the look of the 70s in clothes/hair and all that. But my point is I was expecting a movie about time-travels and it has a really smart part of sci-fi on it.
It becames a romantic comedy with scenes that made me feel embarrassed of plus I found the actors without charisma with the exception of the bad guy (although there is no motivation or explanation on his thoughts!) -and then... he disappears completely in a foolish way and we have the happy ending for the couple O_o' Really? The villain was the full movie expecting for the "machine key" and then he forgets that other piece of the time machine at the end?. And I think it's a pity because the movie really starts so well with that first scene with the fog at the streets...

reply