ALL SCI-FI

[Bud Brewster]

Tim, you took my example a too literally. Consider this part

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

Obviously we have very different opinions of this movie and every other time travel story. Gee, Tim, you can't have 'em without paradoxes!

The basic concept is a colossal paradox!

For me, I don't care the "alternate timeline" versions of time travel. I prefer the idea that when a time traveler arrives in the past and makes a change, the entire timeline is altered by it from that day forward. There's no "alternate version". It just rewrites history from that point forward, and the former timeline is erased just like a cassette tape.

Back to the Future illustrated it best. Doc Brown told Marty he was being "erased from existence" by the changes he was making in his own original timeline. But Marty caused a change in this father's personality, allowing him to slug Biff and gain self-confidence.

The long-range results completely altered Marty's whole dysfunctional family . . . for the better.

But then Old Biff stole the almanac and gave it to Young Biff in 1955.

Presto! History is rewritten a second time, and the new timeline ]replaced the previous one.

Ah, but Doc and Marty returned to 1955 and retrieved the Almanac so that Young Biff's disastrous influence could not take place.

Presto again! History is rewritten a third time, creating a timeline which recreated the good aspects of the second one, the one that replaced the first one with Marty's screwed up family.

Tim, there are many paradoxes in Back to the Future which Robert Zemeckis cleverly hid from the casual viewer. However us non-casual viewers delight in spotting these and admiring Zemeckis' cinematic slight-of-hand!
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[scotpens]

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

By the way, it occurred to me that since George told Filby that he was going to die in 1915 during WWI, that might change the timeline, because Filby's advance knowledge could help him prevent his own death.

Concerning the subject of paradoxes, click on the link below and enjoy an interesting post I added recently!

Two Big Paradoxes in Back to the Furture
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Gord Green]

BUD WROTE:

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

I have indeed watched it, Gord, and it's one of the special features on the Blu-ray.

We all wish George Pal had made a sequel to The Time Machine instead of the somewhat disappointing Atlantis the Lost Continent.

As for saving this friend, David Filby, I think George was hoping Filby believed his story enough to heed the warning he gave him. However, we all know that after Filby heard the time machine leave, he figured out why George moved it back into the house before departing. At that point, Filby was completely convinced that George had actually talked to his son, Jamie, in 1916.

But of course, neither George nor Filby knew exact how and where Filby would die. So, the only way Filby could avoid being "killed in the war" (as Jamie put it) would be to go to America. More than 30 countries were involved, and battles took place throughout Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Pacific, and parts of Asia! Nine million soldiers died and twenty-three million wounded, plus another five million civilian deaths from numerous causes.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

I had a spirited debate recently with an intelligent member of All Sci-Fi who dislikes time travel stories which included paradoxes.

He contested my claim that ALL time travel stories included paradoxes.

In fact, he insisted that The Time Machine includes no paradoxes caused by story elements which altered the timeline.

But after giving the matter considerable thought, I believe I can prove this is not correct.

However, before I address that issue I'd like to point out how the screenplay cleverly avoids several potential dangers that time travel can cause.
____________________________

Danger #1 - George could have returned to 1900 and appeared at the same spot in his laboratory from which he departed and the same moment he left . . . thus causing two time machines to occupy the same space!





Fortunately, he chose to come back five days later. And the Morlocks moved the time machine into the sphinx, which caused George to materialize outside his lab when he came back.





Danger #2 - According the Filby's closing dialog, George intended to returned to the future and materialize just outside the Morlock sphinx, right where Weena and the Eloi were standing when he vanished from inside the sphinx.





However, doing this might have caused him to appear in the same spot as one-or-more of the Eloi, and that would result inthe fusion of the poor Eloi with George in his time machine!

Based on the scene in which George first arrived outside the sphinx, we know that he learned (the hard way ) to avoid "stopping too fast" — because doing that causes his machine to spin around and then tip over.





For this reason, George would be careful to "decelerate gradually" as he approached the moment in the future when he wished to arrive.

Hopefully this would have caused a brief "visible manifestation" at his arrival point — and the frightened Eloi would leap out of the way before the time machine became completely solid!

Actually, George did slow down gradually when he came back to 1900. Obviously he learned from his previous mistake.




______________________________________________

As for the actual temporal paradox this movie includes, it is caused by the fact that George tells Filby he's going to die in 1916. If we explore the ramifications of this single plot element, we're lead to a startling conclusion!

Here's what I mean.

At the beginning of the movie, George shows up and startles his dinner quests.





He begins the story of his journey in the time machine, which includes his brief stop in 1917, where he meets Jamie Filby (David's son) and mistakens him for his friend, David. Jamie informs George that his father died "in the war" (WWI), one year earlier.





David Filby, sitting at the dinner table in 1900, learns that he'll die in sixteen years.





At the end of the movie, as the dinner guest are leaving, David says goodbye to his friends while they board a carriage, and then he goes back into the house to have words with George. But he hears the strange sound of the time machine, and he rushes into the workshop . . . right after George has vanished.

Speaking to Mrs. Watchett, David figures out why the garden doors are open, as well as why there are scratches on the floor. He concludes that George dragged the time machine back into the house so that when he journeys back to the distant future, he will appear outside the sphinx to be reunited with Weena and the Eloi.

So . . . David now knows that the time machine is real, and that George's description of his journey through time was the truth.

And, of course, this means George actually did talk to David's son — who informed George that David will die in 1916.

Gentlemen, the important question is this: What will David Filby do with this knowledge?

Knowing that WWI is coming (thanks to George's detailed description of his journey), David realizes that he might be able to prevent his death in 1916 by remaining in the area near George's house — simply because he knows (thanks again to George's story) that this area of London won't be bombed by the Germans before George's 1917 visit.

Remember, David is the owner of the small "department store" right across the street from George's house. Jamie inherited the store, and expanded it. Notice the vertical sign on the corner of the large building which is located in the upper right of this screenshot.

It says, "FILBY's"!





With this plan in mind, David waits patiently for his friend to show up in 1917 and meet Jamie (as we see in the movie). But on the day George arrives, he finds both Jamie and his father waiting for him!

David tells George the strange story about how he knew that George would stop 1917, based on what George related to his friends at dinner in 1900.





This new timeline would drastically alter what George would choose to do next, because David Filby could warn George about the nuclear devastation which will later occur — an event which Jamie probably will not survive.







So, there you have it, folks! I submit that The Time Machine does include a temporal paradox caused by story elements which change the existing time line.

Gentleman . . . I rest my case.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Pow]

Bud, you've done an astonishing job of analyzing this movie, and proving that time paradoxes exist. You could publish a paper on the topic.

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

Thanks, Pow! D

So much for the idea that The Time Machine includes no timeline changes like those in Back to the Future..
______________________________________________

On an unrelated note, I noticed this strange item in the movie several years ago. One of the clocks on George's mantle is turned around backwards!





Instead of the clock's face being in front, we see the backside with all the clockworks. The only part of the pendulum we can see (which should be in front) is a portion of the silver shaft and the lower two-thirds of the silver ball as it swings back and forth behind the mechanism.

The clock shown below is similar to it, although instead of a swinging pendulum, it has four spinning balls. Note that all of the clockwork gears are hidden behind the face.





Bear in mind that this isn't just a single shot of the clock in one scene — it's clearly visible in multiple shots, and always facing backwards!







Here it is again, right between Taylor and Cabot in the first shot below, and then on the far left in the second shot.







So, How could this just be an embarrassing mistakes?

Folks, I think this backwards-facing clock — which shows up so many shots — is actually a hidden bit of symbolism, placed there deliberately.

But what does it mean?

I think I know the answer.

All of George's other clocks are normal time pieces which report the passage of time as it moves forward.

But one of the clocks is a symbolic reference to fact that George has invented a machine which can make time run in reverse . . . ergo the backwards clock!

Not convinced? Well. . . there's more.

In the scene with George and David alone, David pleads with George not to use his time machine.

"If that machine can do what you say it can . . . destroy it, George! Destroy it before it destroys you!"

And during that entire scene (shown below), the pendulum on the backwards-facing clock is NOT swinging! So, the question is, why is not functioning in this one scene alone?

I believe it's supposed to mirror David's plea for George not to use the time machine!





Still not convinced? Okay, consider this next odd bit of evidence.

After David has left, and George writes a quick note to Mrs. Wathett about the upcoming dinner in five days. He crosses the room and places the note on the mantle with the clocks.

Then he heads for the lab to test his time machine for the first time . . . and we can see the pendulum swinging on the backwards-facing clock again!

This is consistent with the fact that George is has decide to test the time machine, in spite of David's warning,.

Finally, take a closer look at the mechanism inside the bell jar. I enhanced the image to bring out the detail, and I was surprised by what I got!

I swear, this looks more like advanced technology than simple clockworks. And yet in the movie we do see a pendulum swinging behind the lower area!


__________


Guys, I suppose all this could just be a coincidence. Perhaps none of the film crew nor the cast noticed that a careless stage hand put one of the clocks on the mantle with its face turned towards the wall.

But that doesn't sound very likely does it . . .

Well, rather than dismiss the backwards-facing clock as just an embarrassing blunder, I'd rather interpret it as a clever message for sharp-eyed viewers. A genuine Easter egg in The Time Machine.

I just wish it hadn't taken me 64 years to spot it.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Captain Starlight]

I'm surprised that nobody has replied to the two posts above. The concepts are fascinating. Nice job, Bud.

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

A member of the Classic Horror Film Board replied to a copy of the comment above about George saving Filby which I posted on the CHFB, and this is what he had to say.

[Captain Starlight]

Bud, you are obviously working hard to attract new members from sites like the Classic Horror Message Board. And you seem to be succeeding. We all appreciate your efforts to generate new life for All Sci-Fi. Thanks.

[17 Oaks]

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

17 Oaks! So good to have you back!

Obviously we share a great love for certain Classic sci-fi movies. I have DVD/BD's of the ones you named above . . . and many more.

Please drop in often. Your comment above put me in an even better mood than I was before.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)