Talk:The Time Machine (1960 film)/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
POV
... was a very special director... - that doesn't strike me as a very NPOV statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.128.23.192 (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Synopsis
Hello.
Regarding the synopsis: What about the talking rings and the informations about history that the rings provide? The nuclear war of 1966 was obviously not the end of civilized mankind. That end came way later. The synopsis says:
"Past the year 500,000 the roof of dried-up lava starts crackling and falling, then clears off. He sees new plants and trees growing on the ground. Then a building rises up."
Yes, and not only one building rises up after the year 500,000, but the entire monumental architecture of the future. Then the monumental architeture starts to fall apart, leaving only the monumental ruins. The great hall of the Eloi for example had a large tower attached to it when it was build. I don't know when the human super-civilization (capable of constructing the talking rings) came to an end, but it was definitely later than most people seem to assume. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.187.119.204 (talk) 13:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Three books
Just a query of interest from an analytical POV, is there any other meaning to "Which three books?" Other than as a thinking point for the viewer or perhaps a reference to HG Wells' most famous titles? Failing that having an answer: Which three books would you take? 81.101.117.230 14:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Is this perhaps a reference to Desert Island Discs ?
- 86.25.120.156 (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)