The Time Traveler's Wife The Time Traveler's Wife question

Very difficult book to adapt to the screen.
Carrie Carrie Jul 10, 2012 10:31PM
The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger. Love this book and worked on the film adaptation. The script was a massacre.

I disliked the book, but thought the movie was OK. Honestly, I thought they did a great job of stripping away all the unnecessary scenes, and the creepy interactions between kid Clare and grown-up Henry. Not a great movie but definitely better than the book.

deleted member Aug 18, 2012 04:17AM   0 votes
I re-read the book recently and it struck me that actually the film is very true to the book...obviously there are SOME differences, and the "message" isn't quite the same...but I do love both of them.

Loved this book! The story would have been very hard to adapt, I think, and indeed the movie fell short.

The movie came out pretty good i liked it.

Honestly I think could have been better with different actors. I have always thought that Eric Bana doesn't commit fully to his characters and playing a person like Henry that involves a lot more then just being good looking he bombed, majorly. I think some books can go without be made into crappy moie & The Time Traveller's Wife was definitely one of them.

I was very disappointed in the film adaptation. I didn't think it did the book justice. I do believe though that bringing the story to life on the big screen was doable. The film "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" has TIME in common with this book and I felt sympathy for those characters and I was invested. In TTTW film adaption I didn't care. I didn't feel the love between the characters.

Loved both the film and the book!!! But the book is truly amazing, and slightly tops the film!!!

The book was so awesome that I read it twice! Once on my own and then again with a book club. We all went to the movie together and I think we were all dissapointed with the movie. Besides character flatness, the movie was way to rushed. It truly was torturous!

I read the book about five years prior to the movie release. The film had the flaws of any typical Hollywood adaptation screenplay adaptation of a novel. A lot of Henry's angry and edgy behavior in the novel was left out and film script was closer to a Nicholas Sparks romantic novel and the film missed a lot of the emotional depth in the complicated relationship between Henry and Claire in Audrey Niffenegger's book.

I'm happy that the film managed to avoid the pitfalls of filming a complex romantic story with a sci-fi/time travel theme. I enjoyed the film because I was fully aware that any other film adaptation of "The Time Traveler's Wife" could have been a whole worse than director Robert Schwentke's sincere efforts to keep the film close to the essence of Niffenegger's novel.

The only other time travel film that equals the adapted screenplay of "The Time Traveler's Wife" was director George Roy Hill's faithful rendition of Kurt Vonnegut's time travel novel "The Slaughterhouse Five" in 1972.

I adored this book, but sitting through the movie was just torture... I did not like it at all.

I read the book and was fascinated by the entire concept. I found that the book gave me a better sense of where Henry and Clara actually were in their lives. My daughter and I watched the movie together and I had to keep explaining to her what was important and why. I think that the movie was good and undoubtedly diffcult to script and produce however I was disappointed after veiwng it.

I was heartbreakingly disappointed with this film adaptation. Absolutely adored the book, and felt that the film just ruined it, did not do it justice at all. The film left out all of the most interesting aspects of the novel, like all the chapters where the time travelling genetic disorder is explained etc. This is the epitome of how true the statement "the books is always better" is!!

I think it was so hard to adapt because so much of the book is based on thought, not action. I thought they did very well with what they accomplished, but the book will always have my vote.

I thought the movie was easier to follow having read the book first. I actually had to explain some parts to my hubby, who hadn't read the book.

I thought the movie was decent enough, but the book was way better. IMO, the movie lacked a lot of the atmosphere of the book - i.e. the feeling in the book that Clare and Henry are in their own little world.

Sometimes it's really hard to put onto screen what your mind sees. The book was full of emotion and although I enjoyed the film I don't think in this case you could ever match the power of the book. How can you put into images what goes through the mind of two characters who love each other but who have completely different lives? How can you convey the timelessness of Clare's love when Henry is changing all the time. It was so beautifully written, so poignant and so intense. No film could ever do that justice.

My main problem with the film adaptation was that I thought they completely missed the point of the book. That Clare is always waiting for Henry, even when he died she still waited, its very sad but also very true to life. You see it in many older couples who have been through 40-50-60 years of life together and when one dies the other never moves on, because they were truly and totally in love. There were other problems with the movie, but this for me ruined any chance for the film to work...

I thought the movie was okay but I did not see any passion in it like the book. I thought the passion Claire and Henry shared should have been more explored more, the movie kinda overlook that.

back to top

all discussions on this book | post a new topic

Books mentioned in this topic

The Time Traveler's Wife (other topics)