Time After Time (1979) movie review - Sneak Previews with Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 05. 2019
- This is the original review of Time After Time by Siskel & Ebert on "Sneak Previews" in 1979. All of the segments pertaining to the movie have been included.
- Zábava
Not sure if it's a "comedy" but David Warner was incredible.
As he usually was
I never thought of Time After Time as a comedy... There are amusing moments such as HG Wells remarking on that ‘Scottish’ restaurant Mcdonald’s... but there are serious (and somewhat shocking) moments such as when he catches up with Jack the Ripper in a motel room and is shown, via television, what a violent society they have stumbled upon.
A very good film.
Mary Steenburgen is fantastic, by the way.
I fell hard for her with this movie.
@@kentonkruger8333 So did Malcom...they ended up getting married in real life.
Caligula becomes a time traveler
" Every age is the same. It's only love that makes any of them bearable." best line ever
TIME AFTER TIME IS AN ABSOLUTE MASTERPIECE
"Time After Time" is fantastic but I wish they gave some props (not even a mention!) to David Warner as Jack the Ripper, he's simply phenomenal and really makes the movie IMO, even as great as Malcolm McDowell obviously is. Too bad there was no sequel.
This is a charming and at the same time a very thrilling movie that keeps you on the edge of your seat.
I love these two movie reviewers. Relaxed no pompous airs or superiority complexes. You can tell they are both genuine movie buffs but don't criticise or praise just for the sake of it. If they both really like a movie then it means it is genuinely good. Time after Time is genuinely good old fashioned movie making like Siskel and Ebert says. I was not old enough to see it in the theatre when it first came out. But saw it on cable tv in the late 1990s and I thought was excellent.
A "comedy" featuring Jack the Ripper with several graphically violent scenes.
IKR? I was scratching my head thinking I might have been wrong about the movie lol
thanks for the confirmation.
I've been wanting to see this since I'm into sci Fi and I hear good things but I don't like horror movies or gory shit so I'll probably skip this.
@@chapterblaq And don't forget...this film was Corey Feldman's debut.
This is really good film with a terrific story and engaging characters. I agree with Gene and Roger on this.
Awesome movie. Nicolas Meyer also directed Star Trek II, and in Star Trek IV, the crew go to 1986 San Francisco, where Kirk has to trade an antique for cash and convince a 20th century woman that he's from another time. Then she winds up going back with him.
the guy loves time travel!
Meyer recently pitched a new Trek film.
Good catch
The difference in this movie is Davis Warner, proving a "good bad guy" can take a film for better-than-average to excellent.
i would have only been 7 in 79, i dont think i saw this film til a few years later and it was on cable. but i have always absolutely loved it since.
This film was a Masterpiece the day it premiered.
I have the softest of soft spots for this wholly original , clever & thrilling,charming movie. Been in love with Mary Steenburgenfor 40 years now thanks to this movie!
And the boys had it right on the chemistry between Mary andMalcolm. They were married after doing this film. THAT is good chemistry!
Had a childhood crush on her from this movie that got renewed 10 years later with the movie Parenthood.
Should add casting Mary Steenburgen in Back to the Future 3 was great.
I wonder if Zemeckis casting Steenburgen in Back to the Future III was a subtle acknowledgement that this movie influenced their trilogy. I haven't seen this movie, but just the shot of the time machine dashboard and the reveal of dark discoveries in newspaper headlines recall scenes from the BTTF trilogy. Roger, if you hadn't said Gene's comment had something to do with the ending, it wouldn't have given anything away.
Just caught this last night.....and I believe it was...the 70s and the 80s had the best adaptations of Victorian-era stories both movies and TV
Great film. Plus gave Cyndi Lauper the title of her classic song and McDowell recommended the Tadich Grill, which I love going to.
How about seeing Corey Feldman as a little boy in a scene I believe in the museum. Classic combination of comedy and suspense with Malcolm McDowell excellent as HG Wells, Mary Steenburgen charming as the damsel in distress and David Warner phenomenal as Jack the Ripper. I heard Mick Jagger was considered for the Jack role but certainly Warner was great in the role though Jagger might have done fine as well.
This movie terrified me as a kid, when it was on HBO. It was the blood...
It’s a great movie, no argument there. But as sure as DIE HARD is not a Christmas movie, TIME AFTER TIME is not, repeat, NOT a comedy. David Warner was no joke. But man, how adorable was / is Mary Steenburgen?
More of a mystery with elements of fantasy, romance, and comedy. I liked it a lot and the performances are charming and Warner made a great Ripper
Yes there was great chemistry between McDowell & Steenburgen - they fell in love...
This movie was released the day I was born.
I watched it in a theater in Hawaii around your birthday. I was 10.
It’s a wonderful and fun picture, with a lot going for it. I own it; seen it many times.
I first saw this on cable 1980 when I was 13. It was my 1st Malcolm McDowell, Mary Steenburgen & David Warner movie. I loved it. Im surprised they didnt say a word about Warners Jack the Ripper. He was very good.
Same here. I was visiting my cousins who lived in the middle of nowhere and they had cable tv and we watched it many times and it is still one of my all time favorite movies!
This basic plot also seems to have inspired the Doctor Who TV movie from 1996, starring Paul McGann. Both plots involve a steampunk time machine, a brilliant, charming & dashing "fish out of water" time traveller in 19th century clothing, a murderous arch-enemy who comes from the same time & place as the hero, a contemporary San Francisco setting and a worldly skeptical female love interest who seems destined to die at the hands of the villain, until the hero uses the time machine to perform a wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey deus ex machina.
By George, you're right!
Great movie. My favorite scene is when McDowell finds Warner in his hotel room. Warner wants him to sit in watch the evening news on TV which shows violence on almost every channel. It's that point where Warner shows that he belongs in the future and McDowell does not. I agree is not a comedy, it's a Sci Fi thriller of a different kind.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FILM: 1. Where did Jack The Ripper get the huge amount of cash he brought into San Francisco ? (Amy:"Thats him. He had a huge money belt. I tried to get him to open an account with us...") 2. How did Jack come into Amy's house to kill her? Did he pick the lock? Did Amy not lock the door. 3. How could the Time Machine end up in San Francisco? The fact that it was later transported there in the 20th century causing Wells also to end up there, makes no sense. Then the film plays fast and loose with the facts about H.G. Wells. The real H.G. Wells lived in poverty when he wrote the Time Machine yet the film begins suggesting that hes quite wealthy (a mansion and a servant!). The film suggests at the end that H.G. Wells and Amy Robbins lived happily ever after, yet in realty H.G. Wells was a womanizer who cheated on both his wives!
Comedy? Umm, no. I saw this movie in the theater in 1979, and the graphic violence and mild gore scared the hell out of me, and this began a lifelong fascination with Jack the Ripper and serial killers in general. Malcolm McDowell was perfect in this film (kinda the opposite sort of character that he played in A Clockwork Orange), and a young Mary Steenburgen was good, but a little annoying with her ditzy New Yorky accent and 70s era feminist persona. The scenes between McDowell and David Warner were what made this movie really excellent.
I always wondered if women like the Mary Steenburgen characters in this movie ever existed. Never seen one. :D
Back then and into the nineties. Now they're pretty much shallow and shrewish.
They do. I married one.
@@derekseven1647 Congrats my friend!
"Free Love" 😁
Definitely not a comedy. Hasn’t dated all that well but it was good for it’s time and the book was even better.
Yeah, not really a comedy with Jack the Ripper as the villain. One of the best movies of that time period and one of the best with Malcolm McDowell.
Its not a comedy. Love the film.
I had a crush on Mary Steenburgen at the time(funny), but making Malcolm McDowell the good guy was quite a feat.. BUT the director would make Star Trek 2 so I guess everything is up to (warp) speed?
Nice to see that neither Rog nor Gene embarrassed themselves on this one...
Good scifi thriller.
It has some comedy in it, but it’s definitely more of a drama.
Its weird whenever Siskel agreed with Ebert
I like the movie, but I wouldn't classify it as a comedy.
Hostage or time traveler; no better evidence than a newspaper
A Comedy!!!??? I sometimes question why I use to like them lol what movie did he see ?
Exactly what kind of accent was Mary attempting to pull off?
i think she was just playing dumb
That of a flaky neurotic late 1970s American female?
Really good film, why these two called it a comedy is a comedy 🤣. No but seriously this is a classic romantic thriller with a time machine .
A comedy?
Too bad HG Wells didn't choose to show up in the San Francisco of 2023!
They forgot the movie is sbout tracking Jack The Ripper for fucks' sake, through time. That part is not too funny! LOL
I wouldn't call this a comedy by a long shot. It does have its comic moments but a comedy it isn't
I thought that was a major hole inn the plot. How could she have been murdered when she was with him the whole time.
Not really a plot hole, just one of the issues with any sort of time travel story.
She wasn’t murdered. The newspaper got it wrong... that was a major plot point... LOL...
What in God's name does it matter if it's a "comedy" or not?
Why shouldn't it matter? They're describing the movie to people who hadn't seen it yet.
This movie seems to have dropped off the map.
Not a comedy at all! I don't recall them calling it that back then, either. It's anything but a comedy, but of course there are some anachronistic laughs in it.
Not a comedy!
Not a comedy!