The World According to Renee

Views, Reviews, Short Stories and More…

The Time Traveller’s Wife

The Time Traveller’s Wife is a simple love story with a twist. Man meets girl, man disappears. He’s a time traveller, with no control over when or where he ends up, or when he leaves. It’s more than an inconvenience, it’s a disturbance. As usual with time travel plots, don’t think about it too much and it all makes perfect sense.

Henry (Eric Bana) has been travelling since childhood. Although he doesn’t understand it, he accepts it. Clare (Rachel McAdams) meets him when she is a young girl, but he is much older. She’s been in love with him all her life, so when his present-day self meets her for the first time, it’s a little awkward. Sharing your life with a time traveller is always going to be difficult, but since she’s lived with it almost all her life, she too accepts it for what it is and becomes somewhat comfortable with it.

For those familiar with the book, it’s easy to keep track of when Henry is at the start of each chapter. Henry is 39, Clare is 18. Henry is 25, Clare is 12, and so on. The movie loses this, and keeping track is difficult because Henry always looks the same. I wanted a Sliding Doors -type effect, to tell each Henry apart. But alas, no. The only time Henry looked different was on his wedding day. I’ve also recently seen Benjamin Button; maybe I expected too much from the makeup dept.

Rachel McAdams is the perfect Clare. Again, hard to tell when Clare’s aging but as an actress, she’s certainly come of age. Gone are the days of Mean Girls, Rachel has matured as an actress and is perfect for the role. The scene where she meets real-time Henry is a gem. Her eyes convey everything Clare’s feeling, very warming and poignant.

Eric Bana has also come a long way from Full Frontal‘s resident bogan, Poida, but as a leading actor in a romantic drama: I’m not buying it. He’s flat. Monotone. At least he’s improved his American accent… I know some women find him sexy, but I’m afraid I saw a little too much of him than I wanted to. (I did hear a couple of women behind me sigh contentedly during certain scenes). Bana just isn’t a strong enough actor for a lead, especially one as demanding as Henry.

I didn’t come away disappointed; it was exactly what was expected. I did feel it lacked depth (perhaps due to Bana) but was moving at all the right moments.



November 2, 2009 - Posted by | Reviews

1 Comment »

  1. well what’s worse? Eric Bana as Henry or Tom Hanks as Langdon. Although I haven’t seen TTW yet, I’m still pinning the award on Tom’s chest. Worst … casting … ever

    Comment by Stacey | November 3, 2009 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: