Review of "Timeline" (2003)

Although author Michael Crichton isn't known for horror, his books have been among the scariest I have ever read. It's the insidious concepts, and imagining yourself in Westworld, or Jurassic Park, or on that doomed plane in Airframe. Or vicariously witnessing supernatural Eaters of the Dead killing and consuming Vikings, blood, bones and brains. Scary. The thought of being transported back into Medieval France via a painful wormhole doesn't exactly bring to mind ponies and lollipops, either. That's Timeline, the story of modern day archeologists on a rescue mission in 14th century France, and now it's a major motion picture.

In the novel, one character who finds herself in a Medieval meadow almost immediately finds herself beheaded by broadsword as her companions look on, horrified at the random act of violence - not to mention the spewing arterial blood. In the book, there is a mad, hermitcrab-like knight who also enjoys separating folks from their noggins. He uses a razor-sharp ax. In the book, there is a modern-day lab cat who went back in time one time too many and is loaded with "transcription errors" that have rent not only his body, but his mind.

None of this is in the movie. Nope, in the movie the archeologists are young hotties (Paul Walker, who's character has been altered for cinematic purposes, and Gerard Butler) who fall in love with two other young hotties (Anna Friel and Frances O'Connor) and that's the focus of the film as they incidentally dodge broadswords, outrun armored bad guys, and search for their professor (the amiable Billy Connolly, the only bright spot in Timeline), who has been stranded in the 14th century. Instead of the 37 hours they had to find him in the novel, Hollywood has given them a much more intense (and insane) 6 hours. Who needs character arcs or an overview of how history in the making is affecting said characters? Not us moviegoers, apparently.

As a fan of the book already, I was disappointed to hear about the lightweight casting (with the exception of Mr. Connolly) but thought perhaps the director (Richard Donner) could do something with the story - he wowed me with The Omen, Ladyhawke, and Superman, after all - but he didn't even try. The fascinating possibilities of quantum physics and the moral questions about time travel which the novel raises are traded  for Medieval horseplay and laughable declarations of love in the face of dire danger (and I do mean laughable: several people in the screening chuckled during the "serious" bits of dialogue).

For those of us who've read the book, it's automatic disappointment. If you haven't read the book however, I still think you will be disappointed by the lack of passion in general; the characters are little more than cardboard cutouts, the scripts assumes you aren't smart enough to understand how the dimensional travel was made possible so they don't bother you with those details, and finally, the action and battle sequences are just plain dull.

It's a shame when a good novel is used and abused in this manner. Why not just buy an original script on time travel? Although I am sure Mr. Crichton's bank account would beg to differ, it is sad to see good books tarnish by bad movies. (And this isn't the first bad adaptation from one of his stories… let's not forget Sphere or The 13th Warrior) It's sadder still, for those who may have read the book for the first time if the movie was good, won't now.

The tagline says, "This November, you're history." And let me guess: by next month, Timeline will be history, too.