Book Club: The Time Traveler's Wife

[angieh]

What a great insight DM - you are IMO quite right about the fairy story element.

I've had a look at Audrey's website, but unfortunately much of it is still under construction - I think she is a very complex person and look forward to the finished site! The front page does have a sort of fairy tale twist - but with a rather dark element, which of course was present in the original "fairy stories" and got all saccharined by Disney.

[angieh]

Oh, and I've been thinking about the "traveling" bit - again, not thought it through yet.

[dinahsmum]

Thanks Angie - it wouldn't have struck me if I hadn't watched that film and if we hadn't been having this discussion here. I'll claim no credit or wonderful intellectual insight; I simply realised Clare was a princess and took it from there.

I think I agree with others who say - no sequel please. Unless the author did it in very J K Rowling fashion, and had a number of books and plot lines developed before publishing TTW, I feel other books would be a pale imitation.

I'll look forward to the film but ... they usually disappoint, don't they? Mostly because the characters aren't as they have been in your head but often because they just can't do justice to the wonderful situations - or worse, when they change the storyline or ending. I wonder if they will? - the test audiences they try films out on tend not to like sad endings.

[dandysmom]

DM, very impressed at your "fairy tale" insight! Hadn't thought of that aspect but makes a lot of sense. I'm enjoying this thread; very interesting all the different viewpoints. About the feet incident, as I wasn't emotionally connected to the characters I'm sorry to say I was dry eyed. Sort of like when you see a pic of a terrible car crash on TV you just think, oh, how tragic, but don't tear up...Am I making any sense here?

[dinahsmum]

I'm enjoying the discussion too - much better than the first book which we all panned - once we had said 'Didn't like, didn't like the characters etc etc' there was little left to discuss. It's really interesting hearing everyone's take on it and I think we are all getting more out of it by bouncing ideas.

[calismum]

Prince, Princess, Castle etc - yes, I can see how that makes sense. Have to admit I would never have thought of that but it fits so well.

I too think this is a better discussion than our first venture. Perhaps where there are differing views it makes for better discussion?

I do hope that the fans of the book are not too disappointed in the film. I do agree that films of favourite books very rarely come up to the mark. Trying to think of films I've seen before reading the book - can't think of any right off.

Looking back over the thread again just picked up the bit about a baby time travelling. Although the book doesn't have a starting age it just doesn't bear thinking about. It would have been hard to imagine how that could have been built in to the story.

[dandysmom]

Originally Posted by calismum

Prince, Princess, Castle etc - yes, I can see how that makes sense. Have to admit I would never have thought of that but it fits so well.

I too think this is a better discussion than our first venture. Perhaps where there are differing views it makes for better discussion?

I do hope that the fans of the book are not too disappointed in the film. I do agree that films of favourite books very rarely come up to the mark. Trying to think of films I've seen before reading the book - can't think of any right off.

Looking back over the thread again just picked up the bit about a baby time travelling. Although the book doesn't have a starting age it just doesn't bear thinking about. It would have been hard to imagine how that could have been built in to the story.

Gone With the Wind. An all time classic great movie; but I'd read the book before and adored it: had my mental images of everyone (including the dress made from curtains!) and they were completely wiped out by the movie..

Sorry, a bit off topic here, but I never see a move of a book I loved, because it simply isn't the same.