The Time Machine by H.G. Wells has been adapted into several films, most notable being the 1960 version starring Rod Taylor, then the 2002 version starring Guy Pearce. Personally, I like the former version better than the more recent telling.
I do have a question, though:
For those of you who have seen the 2002 version, was it presumptuous of Alexander to interfere with 800,000 years of evolution? The Morlocks were just living by what evolution had made them. The Über-Morlock was rather civil to the protagonist and even answered his driving question, yet Alexander [SPOILER - highlight to read]: kills him rather unjustifiably, in my opinion. Was he wrong to change the course of the world?
I havent seen the remake in ages. Although i remember enjoying it i don't remember enough to respond to this question. Weren't the morlocks breeding and eating the humans though?
__________________ "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything" -Twain
(sig by Scythe)
Gender: Female Location: When in Doubt, Go to the Library.
Obviously Alexander would've felt more obligated to help those who were his ancestors - at least, more visually comparable to the peers of his own time. I think that there's also a measure of horror/guilt - "We turned into THAT?!" and so, by killing them, he has made sure they're going to be killed in the future. (?)
Blegh. Thinking about time paradoxes always feels like putting my thoughts in the washing machine.
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.
KMC Community Forums
Oct 25th, 2008 06:43 PM
