The Time Traveler's Wife movie...how bad will it be? [SPOILERS]

So I saw a commercial for it last night. A voice over from Clare started the commercial, and it said…

When Henry and I got married, I thought things would be sooooo perfect.

Seriously, WTF? This is not the book I read. The casting of Clare turns her from an intellectual artist into a simpering wimp. The official full trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USUDlMBR-dQ) is a little better, but I no longer have high hopes about this movie.

For those of you who read and loved the book, do you think the movie is going to be as much of a trainwreck as I do?

I’m with you - I loved the book, but the movie looks sappy & shallow, if the trailers are to be believed. They took a great story and made it into a chick flick.

I don’t know, I thought parts of the book were sucky. I liked the concept but Claire was just a dumb girl to start with. I was really pissed at her irresponsibility of having a kid in the first place - hell, what if she had gotten all of her father’s traits? Why would you want to subject a kid to that?

The book was fascinating and an interesting read, and made me think, but Claire certainly did turn me off. I thought she already had a pretty strong “chick-flick” feel to her.

Rachel McAdams is one of my favorite actresses, so I’ll see it just for her. I don’t have high hopes though. I guess the movie’s release date was pushed back for nearly a year because they had to do some re-shoots. That doesn’t bode well.

Ron Livingston as Gomez is some strange casting. He doesn’t fit the character’s physical description at all.

Well…

She did, remember? Alba becomes a time-traveler just like her dad, but with greater control over it, and public awareness of her condition (her teacher and classmates know about it).

I’m cautiously optimistic. The preview looks OK to me. I thought the book was a very engaging tragic romance, and hope the movie will be the same.

Yes but her MOM doesn’t know that ahead of time - she just hopes. Or really, doesn’t even think it through. Thoroughly irresponsible. And the seven miscarriages really made me sick. I mean, so anxious to have a child that they killed seven babies - and somehow abortion is the wrong thing here?

Are we spoilering things here? Maybe the OP can ask to have “spoilers” added - I figured it was open season, so apologies to anyone who wasn’t expecting it.

If the characters in the movie are somewhat likable, that’s already improving on the book, in my opinion. I love time travel and the book was readable, but I don’t think i felt a thing for any of them.

Okay, I haven’t read or seen this, but it’s not like they knew they would miscarry–can you really consider having seven miscarriages to be killing seven babies?

Yes! If you keep on doing it time and time again. I think I would have minded less if they had addressed it even a little but she kept blindly going even knowing the odds. It’s been a while since I read it but I distinctly remember feeling like she never stopped to even think about it.

OK, spoiler tags are over. If you don’t want to have the book spoiled, you should stop reading this thread now.

About the miscarriages: It WAS addressed. She did agonize over whether she was doing the right thing. And Henry got a vasectomy because he couldn’t stand it anymore.

A lot of good that did him.

In their case, an argument can be made.

I’m sure you’re right, but it really bothered me a lot. It bothers me that abortion is considered immoral but continuing to get pregnant and having miscarriages is considered “tru luv”.

The point of this thread being the chick flick thing - yeah, I think that pretty much fits into the realm of “chick flick”.

That may be true, but it doesn’t mean that the character herself believes it.

Look, having 7 miscarriages in a row is pretty traumatic. But the book presented it as traumatic, it didn’t gloss over it.

In a lot of ways the characters in the book aren’t likeable. They’re kind of assholes a lot of the time, and they are certainly pretty self-centered. So are a lot of people in real life.

And to overshare a bit. When my wife had a miscarriage, all of the sudden the stories of other people’s miscarriages started to come out. And miscarriage is much much more common that is generally acknowledged. It happens all the time. And I know personally a woman who went through something like the story in the book…she had 5 miscarriages in a row before finally carrying a baby to term. I don’t know how to react to that, but I can’t imagine putting myself or my wife through it. It would wreck me. But I can’t quite say she shouldn’t have done what she did.

Is there a point where you have to stop? Like, after two miscarriages, are you never allowed to try to have babies again?

No of course not, and that was my point.

Personally? Yes, I think one should stop, when it is obviously tearing your marriage and your sanity apart. Allowed? Who am I to allow or disallow anyone any such thing?

Here’s the deal though. I would never say to any real person “You’ve had X miscarriages, stop trying”. But to a book I can criticize all I want.

She can agonize all she wants. That doesn’t change the fact that she went right on killing babies. If I got pregnant seven times and aborted times you can bet I’d get censure. Why is it so different? I don’t think it’s an “accident” anymore, not after seven times.

And it doesn’t change the fact that it disturbed me greatly. I can’t help that part. It is right that the characters are kind of assholes, though I did feel pity for Henry.

Well, my question is is it wrong because you’re doing harmful to yourself/your marriage? Or morally wrong as in having seven abortions because you can’t be bothered to use condoms is wrong. It seems different because obviously you don’t want a miscarriage–you’re hoping it’ll turn out well.

Maybe it’s time for a new thread?

I watched the official trailer and it didn’t seem bad. I have somewhat low expectations for the movie just because it’s a film adaptation of a book I loved so much, and those never quite turn out the way you envisioned them. But I figure if it manages to capture anything that I liked about the book, I’ll enjoy that part of it.

The biggest reason I think it will suck: it was supposed to open last year. There was a scheduled release date and an ad campaign that were cancelled. That usually means that they couldn’t find a way to make test audiences like it, and they’ve been hashing it out in editing rooms and conference rooms for months. Not an auspicious beginning.

I don’t know. And I won’t participate in the new thread - this is way too touchy of a subject for me, and things get nasty really fast around here when it comes to pregnancy/babies/abortion/miscarriages. There’s a reason I don’t participate in abortion threads even though I have very strong views. I am only willing to discuss the specific incident of Claire, in this novel.

What if the exact thing had happened to me only I knew? Ok, so I really want a baby, so I get pregnant seven times. Each time, the baby has some sort of horrid defect. So I abort it. And each time I willingly get pregnant again.

If people think that is a baby then that is murder. Abortion is not casual to me. Why are miscarriages so casual to Claire?

I do genuinely want to apologize if I’ve hurt anyone’s feelings with my comments on miscarriages. It is for no one outside to judge what you do with your life, certainly, and I can only speak as far as it affects me - which the book did, greatly.

I wonder if the test audiences were full of people who liked the book, or who didn’t. Because that will make a difference. It’s not exactly a Hollywood ending, you know?