Editing the future, cutting the past. So, being a fan of both H.G. Wells and Guy Pearce, and always looking for a good bad movie, I rented The Time Machine at the local video store. You know what? It wasn't quite as bad as its reputation. Don't get me wrong; it probably deserved to sink like a stone when it was released. But the design was actually quite good, and Jeremy Irons wasn't as embarassing as he could have been. And hey, what's a convoluted story with no second act among friends?

You know, though, one thing to say for it, it was short. So many action films are bloated to over two hours these days, but this one was a trim 92 minutes. Which makes it all the odder that they made such an awful editing decision.

You see, if you rent the DVD, you should check out the "Deleted Scene." It's a nice little character moment, but more importantly, it introduces a theme that pays off at the denouement. The ending would have been much more powerful had they left the scene in. I don't get it. They didn't need to cut any minutes out of it. Maybe it was a pacing decision, but still... I wouldn't have done it.

Betcha my version woulda been a hit, too.

Edit: I just read the IMDB user comments on the film... the one that popped up claimed to be a "big fan" of the original; turns out he meant the "original" movie from 1960, not the book! He thought it was just a remake. Idiot...