I just finished watching 
Timeline, based on the book by Michael Crichton. I don’t know anything about the book it’s based on — I haven’t read a Crichton novel in years — but the movie?
Oooh, ouch. Bad movie. No biscuit.
Bad enough that I spent most of the movie bored and often rolling my eyes, but I pretty much knew I was in for a dud (well, I’d picked it up already by the utter lack of acting ability by anyone in the cast, but…) when the group arrived in the late 14th century and anyone they ran into who spoke English spoke perfectly understandable, if anachronized, modern English.
Given that Geoffrey Chaucer wrote the Canterbury Tales around the end of the 14th century, and it reads as follows (as many people will remember from their high school english classes)…
Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth Inspired hath in every holt and heeth The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne, And smale foweles maken melodye, That slepen al the nyght with open eye- (So priketh hem Nature in hir corages); Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes; And specially from every shires ende Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende, The hooly blisful martir for to seke That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke. Bifil that in that seson, on a day, In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage To Caunterbury with ful devout corage, At nyght was come into that hostelrye Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye Of sondry folk, by aventure yfalle In felaweshipe, and pilgrimes were they alle, That toward Caunterbury wolden ryde.
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
<
p>…and generally needs a translation for modern readers to comprehend it, the fact that the language barrier wasn’t even mentioned in passing, let alone given any sort of (however implausible) explanation, was enough to have me scoffing.
Bleah. Don’t bother.
“Happiness (Dub)” by Front 242 from the album Mut@ge.Mix@ge (1995, 6:10).
CJ
Brandon
Tim Who?
ندى
4 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
I haven’t seen the movie, but have read the book twice. I would recommend reading the book. Since you have an issue with the language the people speak, Crichton has the students wear a translator when they go into the past. When they first encounter people, they is a delay as the translator deciphers the language. To help the reader, Crichton has it written in the old language, then translates it. I’ve been meaning to watch movie, just to see how bad they mangle the story. Crichton’s books have a hard time being made into a movie, beacuse he explains so much information. For example, Rising Sun, not a good movie, book was better because he explained the Japanesse culture.
I agree with Chris, and I have both read the book and seen the movie. As often hapens, the book is better. I read it before the movie came out, and hoped the movie would be better than it was.
I haven’t seen the movie and don’t intend to—but the book is good. It’s more than good. It’s great. It’s awesome. It’s on the ‘Jurassic Park’ level. The historical descriptions and the characters and the fights and even the writing are all very well done. (Especially the fights/battles.)
Jurassic Park was also quite messed up in the transition between book and movie. I read Timeline and Sphere a few years back and have avoided either of the movies. Sphere because I think the ending is far below what Crichton is capable of (though the movie may well remedy this) and, as you said, Timeline because of the lack of acting ability of the cast. Definitely not going to rent Timeline now.