Movie wasn't great.

Gee, sorry Michael Bay wasn't around to make this movie for you in '78-'79.
________________
there will be snark

I would have liked to see a bit more time travel stuff and a bit less romance stuff. Like when he proved to her that he could travel through time, I expected that he'd take her on a wild journey through the ages. Instead we get 3 days into the future... yawn. He could have taken her back to see the dinosaurs, or taken her a hundred years into the future.

------------------------------------------

I guess he didn't realize that his top priority was giving guys like you gratuitous action scenes even if it risks him and Amy being eaten by a T-rex. He was only trying to prove that the time machine works, which he did.

Hmmm... this movie is GREAT! Plot wise, actors & tone, it's almost perfect.

MANY movie fans consider it a classic, especially in the SciFi/Time Travel genre.

This isn't a time travel movie so much as its a fish out of water movie. I thought that Meyer got a good mix of scifi, romance, comedy, action and horror...not easy to do.

Love little things like curious Wells dropping a fork into the garbage disposal thinking its a utensil washer, or the scene of him analyzing the tables at that "Scottish place" he breakfasted at.

👷👳
Bob the Builder and Hadji walk into a bar...

I disagree, and think unfortunately that the film's creation period (its actual filming era) is simply hitting you the wrong way in this era.

The film's central story is the romance, so it's really hard to envision removing it to make way for more action or time travel. I also frankly disagree with you that time travel adventures would have been more fun. I definitely think they would have been included NOW, but at the time, this was a character-focused story, outlining believably the intersections of these three lives -- Herbert, John/Jack (Warner), and Mary Steenburgen's character.

Meanwhile: HG's "fumbling about trying to get money" was totally realistic. The entire POINT of the film is that HG has no luxury of time. He has no luxury to make a few bets or investments. He has to run after the Ripper IMMEDIATELY. That's what makes it challenging and fun.

I agree that Herbert is bumbling, but it's because of the believable reason that he is a Victorian gentleman trying to survive in 1970s San Francisco. His catching on instantly would have been laughable and not believable. What is believable is that he was, well, pawning watches and sleeping on benches and eating Burger King. And that makes the movie richer, to me. (And look, I like Back to the Future, but you're talking about an entirely different scenario there in which a character had literally unlimited time to communicate, invest, plan and more -- here, Herbert has just a few days to find and track the Ripper.)

For me, I like that Meyer focuses mostly on the characters and on H.G.'s journey and investigation. I love the palpable friendship between the two men before Herbert discovers John's real tendencies, as well as the sweetness of Herbert's unexpected romance. I also like the characterization of the Ripper, which Warner invests with real nuance and complexity.

If the movie had been a simple time-adventure piece without that richness I'd never have thought of it again. But two decades after I first saw it, I still love it and still think it's a wonderful movie.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I keep thinking I'm a grownup, but I'm not.

Neither was your mom

agree, it's 6/10 movie, good for viewing once but no re-watch values





so many movies, so little time