Starring: Paul Walker, Frances O' Connor, Gerard Butler, Billy Connolly, David Thewlis     Written by: Michael Crichton (novel) and Jeff Maguire (screenplay)   Directed By:  Richard Donner

The Story:

One night back in my college days, my roommate and I were having a few beers and discussing time travel. He said he'd love to visit the past an observe things quietly. I joked that I'd like to leave a Sony walkman in King Tut's tomb. He told me I'm the kind of person that would f*** everything up if I had access to a time a machine. He's probably right, at least back then. I wouldn't do something like that the way I am now.

I also remember reading a comic book where Iron Man and Dr. Doom were thrown into the dark ages and the only way the both of these bitter enemies could return to the present was to work together. In an issue of Marvel's "What if...?" magazine, they showed the exact same story but in a different light. What if Dr. Doom, (probably the Greatest Super-Villain of All Time) betrayed Iron Man and stranded him in the past.

Hell, I'm only rambling about this stuff because its a lot more interesting than this movie. Not that Timeline isn't interesting at all. It's got a pretty interesting premise. But it takes a lot more than that to make a good movie. Just like a girl with big boobs might look great, it doesn't mean that she's going to be a good date. But that's the truly frustrating thing about Timeline. It could have been a great time travel movie, and one would think it is from reading the box. But in the end, its not that good.

The tale begins when a man named Taub suddenly appears out of thin air in the mid-western US desert (present day). He's rushed to a hospital by a driver that almost hit him and dies quickly. Soon after a man named Gordon comes to retrieve his body. Gordon and the now late Taub work for ITC, a big mega corporation that is supposedly this world's version of Microsoft. The doctors discover that every organ, vein and  bone in Taub's body are misaligned, but there's no explanation. Gordon whisks the body away and that's all we hear about that in any real detail.

From there we go to Castlegard, France. I don't know if that's a real place or not, I tried a quick internet search on Wikipedia and came up goose eggs, so if anyone does know let me know, please. Here in France we see an archeological dig led by Prof. Edward Johnston (Billy Connolly). His prize pupils are assisting him of course. Among them are Kate (Frances O' Connor, who doesn't appear to act in this movie), the built in love interest for Johnston's son, Chris (Paul Walker, who shouldn't have even shown up), Francois,  the token French student (could they have maybe not named him "Francois"? Its so generic. It ranks just under "Pierre" as the generic French male name of choice for writers that don't want to think about French names) and Andre Marek (Gerard Butler, arguably the only one that entertains at all here), a Scot, who is actually the most interesting character in the movie. Well, not really, but he gets the most to do. Note that Chris, Johnston's son is not an archeologist. For that matter we never find out what Chris does for a living. He's just visiting his father at the dig. Funny thing is, the character is so bland I didn't care WHAT he did for a living. His only reason to be there in this movie is that he's the professor's son and that he's the hunk of love interest for Kate. Which given the fact that neither he nor Kate are intriguing in the least, it's little reason at all.

Johnston's dig is funded by ITC, and the professor wants to know why the corporation's leader, Richard Doniger (David Thewlis) has so much interest in it. ITC has given him so many clues on where to dig he thinks something is strange, so he travels to New Mexico (The corporations HQ) to get some answers. A few days later, the students discover a hidden room in the old monastery. In this room they find a document that's 600 years old and the professors glasses. But these items have been there for 6 centuries so how did the glasses get there...and why is there a plea for help on one 600 year old document written by Johnston himself?

Before I get into this, let me also tell you that Marek has a scene where he tells Chris about a sarcophagus he's been unearthing near the monastery of a French night and his lady. The knight's image on the stone has only one ear, which is remarked on in their conversation. Marek then goes on a speech about the romance and poetic stuff of these people and says his signature line "You make your own history". Folks, if you can't see the foreshadowing here, you need to seek help. I did the first time I saw this flick and I was drunk as hell.

Anyway, back to the freakin' plot. Chris and his friends demand that they be allowed to talk to Prof. Johnston at ITC, and Doniger has them flown to New Mexico. Its there that they find that ITC has actually perfected a time travel device somewhat. They were trying to create a way to fax 3d objects, but accidentally discovered a wormhole to the past. The movie quickly covers the technical aspects of this with technobabble. Suffice it to say that the wormhole is tied to 1357 France for some reason in the area of Castlegard. That's why ITC funded the archeologists. They were hoping that they may discover why. Doniger needs to have his head examined though. He's sent people back in time, but not an expert on the history or an archeologist, until Johnston showed up asking for explanations. Why didn't he do that in the first place instead of sending corporate mercenaries? Why am I asking? It doesn't matter. What matters is that Doniger convinces Chris and his friends to travel back and rescue the professor. Not for any humanitarian reasons, mind you....well, I don't know why. Really. What harm could the professor do to ITC now if he's trapped in 1357 France? I mean, anything he did then would have been over now...if he changed history in some way how would anyone EVEN know in the present?

Its pretty frustrating though, this movie....after they go back, it becomes a big chase scene. There are so many interesting possibilities here, but the movie doesn't pick on any of them. Like how the language barrier would work....Francois is there because he's French and speaks French, but many of the characters are English soldiers. No language barrier, even though 14th century English is different than 21st...or even 20th century English. I'm sure the French language of those time periods is different too. Can history be changed, and what would the repercussions of the time travelers interference in a 600 year old battle be? Oh, yeah, I forgot to tell you...this time travel experiment lands the heroes in the middle of the Hundred Years War. So we spend a lot of time watching them evade Lord Oliver and his English knights....and its not that exciting. There's even Decker, a rogue ITC employee that's been trapped in the past, but nothing interesting is done with him. He's just there and he's evil for evil's sake. Chris is a boring character, though we get the idea that he's supposed to be the hero because he is Johnston's son. Not so, Marek is the real hero. He's the one that does most of the fighting and he's actually good at it. Kate is by far the worst of the characters. She's almost as boring as Chris and her only saving grace is that she's cute. Other than that, she's a pain and lord help me, if you call that acting, I might have to quit watching movies. She sucked, but it might just be because of her lines. Even when she yells "Yahoo!" at a minor victory it sounds fake.

I'm not going to waste any more time on this movie, but I will tell you this, and only because I did mention it...the foreshadowing of Marek's fate. If you want to know run the mouse cursor over these next lines: Yep, the knight in the sarcophagus is Marek. He elected to stay behind because he fell in love with a French damsel. Right. Like a 14th century French woman would even be attractive to a 21st century man. But there ya have it....if you have seen this movie and didn't guess that from Marek's speech, shame on you!

Timeline doesn't suck so much as it drags. The battle for the fortress of La Roque is good to watch but the other elements make it a dreary experience. I can only hope the book is better. If anyone has any info on the time period and has seen the flick, The Inferno would appreciate the input.

ADDENDUM: I have not read the book this movie is based off of, but I've heard that it covers most of the plot holes and inconsistencies of the movie. That's all fine....for the book. But just because the book isn't dumbed down it doesn't mean the movie is forgiven.

Best Lines:  “The only thing worse than dying here is living here...” -Kate realizes the sheer suckiness of the life of medieval peasant.

 Are you kidding me?

1.) The biggest problem with time travel movies is trying to make things make sense even though there's a paradox. Geez, I don't even think I can say that without confusing everyone, including myself. In order to return to the present the characters have to wear these little necklaces called "markers". They don't really go into any detail about how these things work, or why they have a finite usefulness, which is only slightly annoying....But here's the bit....the markers are supposed to last for six hours right? (These guys are in past for WAAAAY more than six hours so maybe I'm wrong...maybe its more than six hours...aw, [unwrite] it, there's a time limit) Anyway, by which clock are we taking the six hours in? The people sent into the past or the people in the "present"? because to the people in the present the six hours are already up if the people in the past are in 1357 AD. Get it? It doesn't make any sense to EVEN have a time limit on the markers, because the six hours or hell, it could be a week....are already over when you're 600 years in the friggin' past!

2.) Let me do your head in with this conundrum, droogies.... if this wormhole actually is locked into a certain time and place....like 1357, Castlegard, France....then wouldn't everyone sent back arrive at the same time? They don't explain this, but here's the question. The professor has been trapped in the past, right? Well when the others come back to rescue him he's obviously been locked up by the English for some time. But it doesn't make sense, really. Because if the wormhole is locked into that time wouldn't they arrive at the same point the professor did? If its July15th 1357 and I wait 2 days to send someone back will they arrive on July 17th 1357?

3.) When Lord Oliver has Francois run through, the others are completely shocked. Personally I wonder why they are so shocked. I mean, in 1357 life was probably really extra cheap. But the dumbest line of the movie is when they find the professor. Lord Ollie has our erstwhile time travelers locked up with the Prof, and Chris says "We have 650 years knowledge on these guys. We should be able to get out of here and home in 20 minutes!". Its overconfidence like that that gets a dude killed, ya know. I mean, I have all kinds of modern knowledge far ahead of some tribes in the Amazon, but if you drop me in the jungle and at their mercy, I'm toast! I may know how to fire an M16 but it doesn't help if I don't freakin' have one!

4.) I made a mistake. Chris says something dumber than his line about having 650 years of knowledge on the people in the past. before he and the others leave to save his father, Chris berates Gordon...whom he JUST met, mind you....for leaving his dad in the past. He says "Better him than you, huh?". There's only one good way to answer that question my friends and Gordon didn't do it. But the answer is "Hell yeah! It was better him than me!". To be honest I think it takes a lot of balls for Chris to even say something like that to Gordon. After all, Johnston went back to 1357 on his own accord! Its not like Gordon actually KNEW him well. Why would Chris think someone else would risk their neck to save his father? Gordon should have punched him in the face right then.

5.) I'm actually wanting to read the book. The movie had a lot of flaws that bugged me and I'm hoping the book doesn't. (Read Patriot Games and then watch the movie....the book is 500 times better, I swear it!) One thing is this....De kere...or Decker...is unfinished. We never learn why Gordon left him in the past, if indeed it was Gordon's fault. We never learned why if Decker knew that too many trips would be lethal he actually went on his last trip. And we never really find out if Gordon is a cowardly weasel like he's painted to be. Yeah, he may have left without people...like Decker or Prof. Johnston...but maybe he had to. We never get the answer so the movie falls flat in motivating these characters.

6.) I think I should warn any of you science fiction fans out there about this....if you're at least hoping the time travel effects are bad-ass kewl, you're gonna be banging your head on a wall. they ain't. Its supposedly intensely painful momentarily so all we get to see are the characters grimacing like they're having an orgasm and passing a brick through their anuses at the same time. The special effects used on Dr. Who's Tardis are more impressive.

Nudity and Sex: none

Huh?:

These "heroes" decide all too quickly to accept the mission to rescue the professor. Look at it this way....would you fly in a prototype rocket to Mars, knowing that there's a good chance you could get killed without even reaching Mars or be stuck there forever? Would you? In real life, not some fantasy you may have about being an adventurer? Huh? Would ya? I didn't think so. For the love of Einstein if you wanted me to travel in a prototype time machine owned by a shady mega-corporation you'd better have the Pope, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln and Doctor Who swearing that it really is safe to use. In public.

I see movie arrows work much the same as movie bullets. If the plot requires that a gunshot kills you, you die instantly even if you get shot in the foot. In this movie people hit with arrows die in a second. Gordon's henchman died pretty damn quick, and Kate killed a guard with an arrow that she wielded with her bare hands. Marek shoots another guard later on he expires on the spot. But when one of the French soldiers is shot in the back with an arrow he lives....only so Marek can rescue him. Fickle ass arrows.

Maybe its just the military part of me speaking, but when Kate feels remorse at killing the guard I was all like "So what!?". I mean, its not like he wouldn't have killed her. I've never killed anyone but if I iced a dude that was going to kill me I like to think I wouldn't groan over it too much. Yeah, I'd be sorry I had to do it, but I wouldn't be all like "I have to live with the fact that I killed that guy.". To put it bluntly if a guy is intending to do me harm and I chill his ass I ain't gonna shed too many tears and neither would most people if they were threatened in a lethal way. Besides from Kate's point of view that guy she snuffed has been dead for six centuries!

During the siege of La Roque, both sides, the English and the French fire flaming arrows at each other. Shot at night this is an impressive scene, I'll give the movie that. Of course both sides raise shields and duck and what have you when they see a bunch of flame laden arrows heading at them. Then Lord Oliver says he has a surprise for the French and orders his archers to fire night arrows. At first I wondered what that meant until I realized that these arrows weren't afire. So the French didn't see them hurtling towards them on the black night sky and were basically skewered. Cool! The only thing is that this was such an obvious trick I wondered why either side bothered to light arrows in the first place! the only reason to do so would be to set stuff on fire, but one arrow on fire isn't gonna burn a castle down.

The Final Judgment: No reason to see this movie unless you are big ass science fiction fan. It might do for a rental, but I wouldn't buy it If I were you. The demons in the Infernal pits give it only 2 devil heads and trust me, one of those heads is solely for the great siege of the castle scene. Too bad. It had a lot of potential.