Movie Review: The Time Traveler’s Wife (2009)
The Time Traveler’s Wife is a romantic drama directed by Robert Schwentke, adapted from Audrey Niffenegger‘s bestseller of the same name. Adapting a novel with complex elements and undertones to the silver screen is a daunting task and director Robert Schwentke struggled to compromise between satisfying readers of the novel and making the movie accessible to people unfamiliar with the book. Overall, the movie has some significant directing and screenwriting flaws but does make for an unpretentious and above-average romantic tragedy thanks to its two compelling leads.
Synopsis: The Time Traveler’s Wife is the time-defying love story of Henry DeTamble (Eric Bana) and Clare Abshire (Rachel McAdams). Henry is a librarian afflicted with a genetic disease that causes him to travel through time more or less randomly. Henry’s random and unpredictable escapades are often dangerous, terrifying and sometimes life-threatening ordeals because he ends up buck-naked and starving in unknown places and times. For those reasons, Henry keeps himself in top physical shape and taught “himself” all type of survival skills such as pick-pocketing, street fighting, or picking locks. After a random while, he always goes back to his “present” but is largely unable to affect his future. At age 28, he meets 20-yr old Clare Abshire. He doesn’t know her but she has known him since she was 6 and has been waiting for him all her life and will do so the rest of her life.
The main weaknesses of the movie can be traced back to trying to fit the book into 107 minutes. Director Robert Schwentke and screenwriter Bruce Joel Rubin appeared over-matched and took the path of least resistance, oversimplifying the plot and characters. Screenwriter Bruce Joel Rubin made some compromises to keep the movie from becoming excessively long or inaccessible to its PG-13 audience, which resulted in significant structural flaws. Even though the movie is nearly two hours long, it feels jumpy and too short as if we are skimming through the plot line of the novel.
Although the main events and characters of the book were translated to the big screen, non-essential characters such as Kimi or Ingrid were completely omitted while the ending was slightly altered (I did like it better). The supporting characters are a mere passing thoughts, the key relationship between Clare and Gomez is one-dimensional. Even the two main characters, Henry and Clare, are under-developed. Ideally, the direction of the movie should have been given to a director with better credentials, and the movie extended up to 140 minutes to develop the characters fully and take advantage of the terrific cast.
Despite those shortcomings, The Time Traveler’s Wife is one of those movies you can’t help but like. It is at heart a simple star-crossed love story with a refreshing sci-fi twist that touches on universal themes such as fate/free will, true love, and loss. The time-traveling device is only a metaphor for the distance in relationships that keeps everyone, even lovers, from truly being as one. A story that focused on the depth of the characters’ love, not its showiness. Their will to move forward and enjoy every minute they have with each other before Henry’s impending fate. This meant more close-up shots and a more realistic exploration of what it means to be Henry and Clare. The movie succeeds in moving the audience thanks in big part to moving performances from the two leads, who surrendered themselves fully to the premise of the novel.
The Time Traveler’s Wife stars the fetching Rachel McAdams as the title character. Most will have missed her terrific performance in the 2008 indie The Lucky Ones and this puts her back on the radar for mainstream audiences. Beside matching the physical description of her character in the book, McAdams has an unusual ability of making underwritten characters feel real and she is often able to give her character a heartfelt sensitivity and vulnerability that ground her movies. In less talented hands, Clare could easily have turned into a self-pitying weeper but McAdams infuses her with a quiet strength of spirit. Overcoming a surprisingly thinly written character, she carries the emotional weight of the movie and was luminous portraying Clare’s spirit and unyielding love for Henry. Will someone give Rachel McAdams meatier roles for God’s sake??!
Eric Bana was a fairly pleasant surprise as a romantic lead, making for a solid Henry. Although he does not fit the physical description of the book (Henry is more runner than football player) Bana’s Henry was tormented, introverted, poignant, and more importantly, had some chemistry with his co-star. The only issue I had was that Henry was mostly a one-note character and it would have helped to have him be a little more lively and eccentric. The supporting cast was solid albeit given very little opportunity to be memorable. Gomez (Ron Livingstone) was a pivotal character in the book but merely a passing thought in the movie. Jane McLean as Charisse, Arliss Howard as Henry’s father, Stephen Tobolowsky as Dr. Kendrick all did a fine job with the small parts they had while the children performers, notably Brooklynn Proulx and Tatum and Hailey McCann, were solid.
The stunning cinematography has a beautiful stark and cold quality to it which reinforce the tragic nature of the movie. The movie was beautifully shot by Florian Ballhaus and is the strongest attribute of the movie behind its leads. The crafty camera-work (already apparent in the trailer) using motion and placement selection gave a particular tone to his scenes and Schwentke used that to his advantage in the film, giving the movie a light touch of eerie fantasy. The ending of the movie which was re-shot after test screenings showed that audiences were not satisfied with the ending of the novel contributed to the delayed release. I actually prefer the movie’s ending which is a fitting play on the beginning of the love story and is sublimely shot with Rachel McAdams nailing it. The CGI effects of Henry’s time traveling are unspectacular but first rate while the overused musical score by Mychael Danna was melancholic, adding to the tragic tone of the movie.
Boasting solid performances from Rachel McAdams and Eric Bana, The Time Traveler’s Wife is a frustrating movie to review because the ingredients for a truly epic romance movie are there but the unambitious screenplay and directing prevent it from even trying to be one. It could have been so much more… Nevertheless, enjoy the movie for what it is: a charming, endearing and metaphorical romantic drama that will keep your imagination lingering long afterward.
B
(7/10)
Notes: Produced by Richard Brenner, Dede Gardner, Justis Greene, Brad Pitt, Nick Wechsler and Michelle Weiss, directed by Robert Schwentke, written by Bruce Joel Rubin, music by Mychael Danna, distributed by New Line Cinema. PG-13 for thematic elements, brief disturbing images, brief nudity and sexuality, 107 minutes.

















8 Comments
First, I wanted to say thank you for commenting on my blog. It is very appreciated. And, second, you wrote my thoughts about the film in a much more elegant, comprehensible way. Thank you! I agree that even with the film’s faults I can’t help but like it. I read that the writer for The Notebook film, Jeremy Leven, was originally slated to write The Time Traveler’s Wife screenplay. Though Bruce Joel Rubin’s script was tolerable, I wonder how well Jeremy’s full version would have been since The Notebook was adapted very close from the book.
Thank you MG, enjoyed your review as well!
You totally captured just about everything I wanted to say if I were to write a review! It was like they just skimmed the whole thing and by the time you might get what the deal is, it is over and you are still sctarching your head! My only disagreements with you would have to be Rachel McAdams,…I don’t think she even came close. Also, Gomez was totally cast incorrectly!
Thanks for commenting. I always appreciate people taking the time to leave a comment!
I thought Ron Livingstone did fine as Gomez for comic relief. Unfortunately it was all they asked of him… I realize he totally does not fit the book description in almost any way but given his small part, I didn’t really mind. As for Rachel McAdams, everyone has a different interpretation and vision of Clare’s character, she was optimistic, strong-spirited and not overly clingy and McAdams did a good job portraying those aspects. There just wasn’t enough scenes for either Bana or McAdams to develop their characters fully and cutting through the entire miscarriage ordeal, telegraphing Alba’s birth and omitting Clare’s mother’s death were a big part of that. Needless to say, this movie could have been a total disaster with a lesser cast.
Anything time travel makes me happy…and this was a pretty unique take on time travel, can’t control it, can’t change it, making time traveling babies…good things. I really liked this movie despite the negative criticism it endured from a lot of people…37% on RT…jerks. Anyway I liked it, you’re right though it definitely was way too short.
Yes Adam, another weird case of critics being completely out of touch with real people taste. This movie has a 7.1/10 score on IMDb so most people did enjoy it. I wish we would see more time travel movies but they seem to be out of grace right now.
don’t you just love the eyes of Rachel McAdams? she has some pretty eyes.:–
I love the eyes of Rachel McAdams, they seem to be always smiling
Trackbacks