Regie:
Robert SchwentkeDrehbuch:
Bruce Joel RubinKamera:
Florian BallhausMusik:
Mychael DannaBesetzung:
Alex Ferris, Rachel McAdams, Eric Bana, Brooklynn Proulx, Ron Livingston, Arliss Howard, Stephen Tobolowsky, Maggie Castle, Tatum McCann (mehr)Streaming (3)
Inhalte(1)
Henry leidet an einem seltenen Gendefekt namens "Chrono-Impairment". Ausgelöst durch Stress ist er gezwungen, durch die Zeit zu reisen. Unterwegs lernt er das aus wohlhabendem Hause stammende Mädchen Clare kennen, das er immer wieder in der Vergangenheit besucht und letztendlich in der Gegenwart auch heiratet. Doch durch den Sprung zwischen den Zeiten stößt Henry immer wieder auf Geheimnisse, die ihm jedoch lieber verborgen geblieben wären. (Sat.1)
(mehr)Kritiken (7)
Endlich ist ein romantischer Film mit einer richtigen Idee erschienen. Wenn man nicht verrückt werden will, sollte man sich lieber nicht damit befassen, wie die Zeitreise funktioniert. Aber wen stört das? Ein idealer Film für Männer und Frauen. Die Männer würden zu Rachel McAdams auch ständig zurückkehren, die Frauen würden auf einen Zeitreisenden wie Eric Bana auch ihr ganzes Leben warten, so wie Clare… Ach, der Film war so rührend.
()
This is my idea of a perfect romantic movie. This story about a librarian who due to a genetic disorder jumps around in time, but, even so, finds love appealed to me for the ease and effortlessness with which it was told. The excellently cast Rachel McAdams and Eric Bana who simply slipped into their roles with amazing grace are one of the driving forces of the movie. You simply believe in them. Their ups and downs are (apart from one) perfectly plausible. That’s its main strength. The background music is also very pleasant and all in all it’s a really nice movie.
()
I've been thinking and asking myself for a long time: "What did this movie give me?" An enjoyable movie experience? I wouldn't say so. Did I get catharsis and shed buckets of tears? No, I didn't. Did I enjoy it? I don't recall doing so... Was I in suspense? Was I eating it up? Was I visually captivated? No, no, no. I can't say it's a bad movie, but I didn't take anything away from it – no impression, no feeling, no desire to discuss it with friends. I wasn't impressed with the acting either. Sure, the film has an interesting subject, but the execution is just so dry... it didn't sit well with me. I'm not going to say it's a waste of time when I know that for some, it's sure to be a powerful cinematic experience and a walk through the valley of tears. For me, it was just killing time and where I sometimes found myself staring out the window. A better 2 stars.
()
While the sci-fi part surprised me with remarkably glaring logical loopholes, blind plot alleys, and unresolved "mythology" of time jumps, in the romantic-dramatic aspect, I adored Schwentke's work, rooted for Henry and renamed the movie as "Enchanted in Love". Nobody has been as lovable as Rachel McAdams portraying Clare in a long time. 70%
()
The Time Traveler's Wife is a well-made, cultivated film that combines a love story with sci-fi themes, but to be honest, I found it boring to watch, and, although I can't fault it for anything major, as sci-fi it is logically unfinished and overall, it seems really unremarkable to me. It lacks a more significant plot and tension. It's an ideal film for a romantic evening at the movie theater, when a couple in love focuses primarily on themselves and sees the film only as a backdrop for their date. Overall impression: 45%.
()
Werbung