Timeline Timeline discussion


180 views
Timeline

Comments Showing 1-25 of 25 (25 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Daryl Buckner Michael Crichton always had a talent for making the science behind his stories palatable without dumbing it down for the general public. Reading this tale will make you believe time travel IS possible. A great book---he will be sorely missed.


Mark Gardner It's a shame the movie was so poor. I've seen some wonderful adaptations (Sphere comes to mind) but, Timeline wasn't one of them. The book is way better than the movie.


Richard the book was fantastic until the history plot kicked in. he chose such a boring time for the to travel back to

don't read his last one, Micro, it is so so bad


Holly Sandyboy wrote: "the book was fantastic until the history plot kicked in. he chose such a boring time for the to travel back to

don't read his last one, Micro, it is so so bad"


Although I liked the book, I agree that there are historical eras much more interesting to me than the one visited in this book. The French Revolution, the English Civil Wars......there are so many fascinating historical periods; the one Crichton chose was a tad dry.


Cephus Payne This book was the book that got me hooked on Crichton, also one of my favorites.


message 6: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim Swike I really liked this book, I am a History buff, and also enjoy the time travel aspect. I even liked not loved the movie.


Robert J. It was an interesting concept, but not really one of Crichton's stronger tales, the characters seemed watered down versions of some of his other ones. On the other hand, the great thing about his books was the rich historical detail and effort he put into researching them.

The Feast of Saint Anne


Mark Gardner Airframe was the book that got me hooked on Crichton. Strangely enough, I think this was the only Crichton book not turned into a movie.

Holly wrote: "Sandyboy wrote: "the book was fantastic until the history plot kicked in. he chose such a boring time for the to travel back to

don't read his last one, Micro, it is so so bad"

Although I liked t..."



message 9: by L.A. (last edited Feb 09, 2014 10:18AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

L.A. Kragie Airframe was also one of my favorites. I learned so much about aeronautics engineering and the FAA regulation from it.

"Micro" really is bad, but that wasn't his book. It was written posthumously by Richard Preston.

Vampire Chimeras by L.A. Kragie


Freya Ingram I loved this book, both the historical detail and the discussions of quantum physics (and the differences between that and what we traditionally think of as "time travel". Fascinating.


Randall Christopher This was one of the few books that totally blew me away while reading it. I could not wait to pick it up and read what was going to happen next each and every day. I loved the concept, the history, the science, and the execution. The movie was alright, but definitely not something that was comparable to the book. Crichton was amazingly gifted as a writer, and to me this and Jurassic Park were his absolute masterpieces.


message 12: by Ken (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ken Richard wrote: "the book was fantastic until the history plot kicked in. he chose such a boring time for the to travel back to

don't read his last one, Micro, it is so so bad"


b..b...boring time?! Are you joking? This was the height of European war! What was perhaps boring about it were the facts of the encounters that the author changed or mistook, resulting in a pseudo-history that never was. The time travel element was the driving point for this novel as it was very carefully thought out.

Still, it is no James Joyce.


Jesse I agree Kenneth. Great time in history. Great execution by Crichton on this one. Another novel to 'escape into' much like Pirate Latitudes.


message 14: by Taz (new) - rated it 5 stars

Taz Roux My favourite of Crichton's books. My idea of really brilliant, from super-hi-tech to fairly primitive history. I love how he can make both completely credible. I'm sure the history is not absolutely correct, but it didn't affect the brilliance of the book.
The movie annoyed me, though. They made a hash of a great story, but that's nothing new.


message 15: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim Swike I would root for a movie re-boot.


message 16: by T.E. (new)

T.E. Kinsey I remember liking this one so much that I re-read it a short while later. I'm not sure it stood up to the second reading but it's still very enjoyable.

I'm afraid I also agree that Micro was beyond terrible.


message 17: by Amy (new) - rated it 2 stars

Amy Smith I actually thought this book was underwhelming. There were a lot of loose ends (De Kere / Deckard, Lady Claire) that weren't tied up, and the concept of time travel used (while plausible and interesting) left a plot hole big enough to drive a 18 wheeler through. As Richard said, the characters were watered down. The most impressive thing about this book was time he obviously put in to researching this historical era, and how he challenges our given perceptions of how people acted at the time. Also reminding us that history is written by the victors, and not all may be as is seems.


message 18: by Marc (last edited Dec 08, 2014 08:13AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Marc Stevens This book was brilliant in all aspects. I have read it more than once, and will read it again. And I have given copies as gifts too.

The movie was indeed quite sad.


Anthony O'Brian Richard wrote: "the book was fantastic until the history plot kicked in. he chose such a boring time for the to travel back to

don't read his last one, Micro, it is so so bad"


I believe Micro was a finished manuscript by another author, as it was incomplete when he died.


Anthony O'Brian I am going to stick my neck out and say that I LOVED the book! I would change NOTHING about it. As I have told many people, Crichton makes science fiction plausible and shows how it could affect our everyday life. I also enjoyed "State of Fear" it was a hoot at times.

On the historical era, while medieval time travel MADE the book, the medieval setting and era wasn't the complete FOCUS of the book. We forget that Crichton needed a reason for that era. That reason was the excavation and archeological work. He established his premise for choosing the time and I thought made a good choice. If we want to read history or fiction about that time or a different time there are many books out there that can satisfy that craving.

Crichton, as an extremely accomplished author, I am sure sifted through many ideas and time periods. The key to the whole story was the professor's bi-focul glasses. These had to be found and found for a reason. That reason also had to be explored in order to find the time machine. To change the glasses and the chapel would mean an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT book altogether; one we may not even like or be discussing. That being said, we ARE discussing it and that does mean something. :-)

I have to say, I was terribly sad when I heard about Michael Crichton's passing...


Garyjn I found Crichton's explanation of the mechanics of time travel (actually, multiverse coordinate change) fascinating and recall reading that section many times before continuing my read. I did at times have a problem with suspension of disbelief. Also one character's concern with time paradoxes, like the grandfather paradox, I felt was brushed aside. But, overall, I felt it was a good read. Just not my favorite Crichton. That would be Sphere.


Randall Christopher Anthony wrote: "I am going to stick my neck out and say that I LOVED the book! I would change NOTHING about it. As I have told many people, Crichton makes science fiction plausible and shows how it could affect ..."

Definitely a poignant response. I absolutely agree with everything you said. In my opinion, the book was totally amazing and I thought it was flawless. Absolutely nothing needed to change for me. I enjoyed the ride immensely.


Anthony O'Brian Randy wrote: "Anthony wrote: "I am going to stick my neck out and say that I LOVED the book! I would change NOTHING about it. As I have told many people, Crichton makes science fiction plausible and shows how ..."

Thank you (rubs neck)...that was close!


message 24: by [deleted user] (new)

Disappointed. Chrichton has always used the science to leverage the tension. He wasn't a Sherwood Forest Adventure writer. Not his strong suit.


Shelley Young This was most definitely a good book. As a Chrichton fan, I must admit it wasn't one of his strongest, but it was well written and I loved every page of it. Every author's book can't be the best, but every book should be GOOD. This one was good. The literary world will definitely miss this guy.


back to top