Science-fiction films from the fifties and early sixties, especially those made on a low budget, have a bad reputation today for ludicrous plots and inept special effects. Cheap B-movies such as "Attack of the Fifty-Foot Woman" and Ed Wood's "Plan Nine from Outer Space" are often quoted (and deservedly so) as classics of badness, among the worst ever made. To see all science-fiction from this period as bad, however, would be wrong, as there were also some very fine works made in this genre, such as "Forbidden Planet", the British-made "Village of the Damned" and "The Time Machine".
George, a late-Victorian scientist and inventor builds a machine which enables him to travel forward to the future. He witnesses the two world wars and another, fictitious, war in the mid-sixties, fought with nuclear weapons. He then speeds into the far-distant future, around 800,000 AD, when the human race has evolved into two distinct species, the gentle and beautiful but passive Eloi and the Morlocks, a race of brutal, subterranean, subhuman monsters who prey on the Eloi for food. George returns to his own time, but cannot forget the world of the future, especially Weena, the beautiful Eloi girl with whom he has fallen in love, and must decide whether to stay in 1900 or return to the future.
There are a number of holes in the plot of the film; some of these are due to Wells, others to the scriptwriters. Although the Eloi have neither government nor laws, and presumably have not had for many thousands of years, they are well aware of what these concepts mean and so are able to tell George "We have no government. We have no laws". In reality, the passive Eloi, with no concept of social cohesiveness or altruism, and no means of either fleeing from the Morlocks or of defending themselves against them, would doubtless have been wiped out altogether. (It seems surprising that Wells, with his interest in Darwinism, ignored the point that a prey species which does not evolve some defence mechanism against its predators is doomed to extinction. Perhaps, like a number of nineteenth and early twentieth century "Darwinists", he was less interested in evolution as a biological mechanism than as evidence in support of his own political and social theories).
These plot-holes do not, however, matter too much. The film is not intended as a "realistic" picture of what the distant future might be like. It rather uses its time-travel theme in order to make philosophical points about the nature of twentieth-century society. The film changes some of the concerns of the original novel on which it is based. The novel was written in the 1890s, during the earlier part of Wells's career, when the greatest threat to civilisation, at least from Wells's socialist viewpoint, seemed to be the gulf between the social classes. In the original, therefore, the Eloi are the descendants of the wealthy, leisured class and the Morlocks of the working class. In the 1960s, the greatest threat seemed to be nuclear war, and the film reflects the concerns of its age; the world to which George travels is the direct result of the wars of the twentieth century, with the Morlocks shown as the descendants of those who took refuge in underground shelters and the Eloi of those who somehow survived while remaining on the surface. Those who criticise the film for departing from Wells's vision should be aware that during the later part of his life he too came to see war as the greatest threat to mankind and wrote novels, such as "The Shape of Things to Come", which reflect this preoccupation. Had he rewritten "The Time Machine" in later life, the result might have resembled the plot of the film more closely.
I would agree with the reviewer who said that the film does not entirely dispense with Wells's pessimism. The battle of the Eloi and the Morlocks is not one of good against evil. The film is not only warning us of the dangers of war, it is also warning us against the twin evils of bestial violence (symbolised by the Morlocks) and of apathetic passivity (symbolised by the Eloi). A significant episode is when Weena falls into a stream; George rescues her from drowning, but none of the other Eloi will lift a finger to help her. The Eloi may lack the vicious qualities of the Morlocks, but they do not actively possess any good ones. The only hope for their race lies in George, the figure who has come to help them from a more vigorous era in the remote past. There is more to virtue than mere non-violence; in Immanuel Kant's words, if men were as good-natured as sheep, they would still be good-naturedly grazing in the fields.
One thing I did not like about the film was the Morlocks who, I felt, should have been more recognisably human, as they represent in symbolic terms negative human qualities. The hairy monsters we saw had an unfortunate whiff of the cheap B-movie about them. Apart from that, I found the film attractively photographed and designed, which well overcame the limitations of its budget. It was also well-acted, especially by Rod Taylor as the idealistic George and the lovely Yvette Mimieux as the innocent Weena. This is one of the better science-fiction films of this era. 7/10
George, a late-Victorian scientist and inventor builds a machine which enables him to travel forward to the future. He witnesses the two world wars and another, fictitious, war in the mid-sixties, fought with nuclear weapons. He then speeds into the far-distant future, around 800,000 AD, when the human race has evolved into two distinct species, the gentle and beautiful but passive Eloi and the Morlocks, a race of brutal, subterranean, subhuman monsters who prey on the Eloi for food. George returns to his own time, but cannot forget the world of the future, especially Weena, the beautiful Eloi girl with whom he has fallen in love, and must decide whether to stay in 1900 or return to the future.
There are a number of holes in the plot of the film; some of these are due to Wells, others to the scriptwriters. Although the Eloi have neither government nor laws, and presumably have not had for many thousands of years, they are well aware of what these concepts mean and so are able to tell George "We have no government. We have no laws". In reality, the passive Eloi, with no concept of social cohesiveness or altruism, and no means of either fleeing from the Morlocks or of defending themselves against them, would doubtless have been wiped out altogether. (It seems surprising that Wells, with his interest in Darwinism, ignored the point that a prey species which does not evolve some defence mechanism against its predators is doomed to extinction. Perhaps, like a number of nineteenth and early twentieth century "Darwinists", he was less interested in evolution as a biological mechanism than as evidence in support of his own political and social theories).
These plot-holes do not, however, matter too much. The film is not intended as a "realistic" picture of what the distant future might be like. It rather uses its time-travel theme in order to make philosophical points about the nature of twentieth-century society. The film changes some of the concerns of the original novel on which it is based. The novel was written in the 1890s, during the earlier part of Wells's career, when the greatest threat to civilisation, at least from Wells's socialist viewpoint, seemed to be the gulf between the social classes. In the original, therefore, the Eloi are the descendants of the wealthy, leisured class and the Morlocks of the working class. In the 1960s, the greatest threat seemed to be nuclear war, and the film reflects the concerns of its age; the world to which George travels is the direct result of the wars of the twentieth century, with the Morlocks shown as the descendants of those who took refuge in underground shelters and the Eloi of those who somehow survived while remaining on the surface. Those who criticise the film for departing from Wells's vision should be aware that during the later part of his life he too came to see war as the greatest threat to mankind and wrote novels, such as "The Shape of Things to Come", which reflect this preoccupation. Had he rewritten "The Time Machine" in later life, the result might have resembled the plot of the film more closely.
I would agree with the reviewer who said that the film does not entirely dispense with Wells's pessimism. The battle of the Eloi and the Morlocks is not one of good against evil. The film is not only warning us of the dangers of war, it is also warning us against the twin evils of bestial violence (symbolised by the Morlocks) and of apathetic passivity (symbolised by the Eloi). A significant episode is when Weena falls into a stream; George rescues her from drowning, but none of the other Eloi will lift a finger to help her. The Eloi may lack the vicious qualities of the Morlocks, but they do not actively possess any good ones. The only hope for their race lies in George, the figure who has come to help them from a more vigorous era in the remote past. There is more to virtue than mere non-violence; in Immanuel Kant's words, if men were as good-natured as sheep, they would still be good-naturedly grazing in the fields.
One thing I did not like about the film was the Morlocks who, I felt, should have been more recognisably human, as they represent in symbolic terms negative human qualities. The hairy monsters we saw had an unfortunate whiff of the cheap B-movie about them. Apart from that, I found the film attractively photographed and designed, which well overcame the limitations of its budget. It was also well-acted, especially by Rod Taylor as the idealistic George and the lovely Yvette Mimieux as the innocent Weena. This is one of the better science-fiction films of this era. 7/10