Jaye (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jayes_musings) wrote2018-09-12 09:19 pm
jayes_musings) wrote2018-09-12 09:19 pm
Entry tags:
Book Reivew: Timeline by Michael Crichton
I've been doing quite well at getting through books this year. I'll review some of the others at some point, but I just finished a reread of Michael Crichton's "Timeline" last night and wanted to jot down some thoughts while it's still fresh.
I first read this around 2000, about three years before the movie starring, yes, Gerard Butler was released. I really liked the novel, a blend of two of my favourite genres, historical fiction and sci-fi. And I admit, I was so happy when I first heard that Gerry had been cast as my favourite character Andre Marek. But this is not a review on the movie or a comparison between the two as it's been a long time since I've watched it.
Generally speaking, I still really enjoyed the story with its blend of science and history, and well I am a sucker for a good time-travel yarn. Still, while it is still very enjoyable, and a book I will probably reread again at some point in the future, this time round I couldn't help but notice some of its problems. Of course, Crichton was one of the most popular authors and many of his books were blockbuster films ("Timeline" ironically was not one of these, and he apparently hated the film).
1. Show not tell. In quite a few places, especially at the beginning of the novel, there are pages and pages of scientific/technobabble exposition dumps. Yes, there is a lot of science-y and historical facts to be explained to give a basis for the story, but it is not naturally inserted but just told to the audience. Perhaps this is more noticeable on the reread when I had a general idea of what was going on?
2. The characters are flat.
Marek is still my favourite, but he like the rest are actually given very little development overall. He's an experimental historian who lives and breathes the 14th Century, sword fight, is learning jousting, and speaks Occitan. He is the expert for our heroes to help them stumble through 1300's France. I really don't know that even he would fare so well. It's one thing learning something and another to put it into practice against people who are native to such things. For example, Occitan is a dead language, while he could understand and perhaps make himself understood, it would be with some difficulty -- how would one know what the correct pronunciations of words would be? -- and he would be nowhere as near as fluent as he's depicted.
Kate as the only woman on the team, she lends very little except the fact that she can climb, and the 'romance' between her and Chris comes out of nowhere and just seems that, well they should be together and not for any character reasons. Especially in the Epilogue, where out of nowhere she's pregnant, because that's what happens isn't it? Not only that, because of the impending baby, she's suddenly helpless and needs a man's assistance.
Professor Johnston is just a plot device with very little actual role, except to basically be the story's McGuffin.
Chris, okay this guy is a graduate student of history. I repeat a graduate student. He is a key member of the dig site, and yet he seems to have very little knowledge of the medieval period. In fact, he suffers from the opposite problem to Marek. He has no idea what language they are speaking, when while he might not know Occitan, he would know that is the language of the time. He mistakenly allows himself to be thought a member of the noble class, when he would at least be familiar with the distinctions. In fact, for much of the story, he is pretty clueless about everything.
De Kere/Decker, could have been such an interesting and rich character, but he is reduced to little more than a cardboard cutout villain. The idea of him being a security man who, suffering to many transcription errors (physical effects of too many trips to the past), but who had managed to attain a position of trust with one of the warring lords and can overhear much of what the historians plan is very intriguing, but it needs more than a couple of sentences explanation at the end of the story and more than the fact that he could pick up languages extremely quickly when our heroes, who are experts, struggle.
The "redshirts", Really what was the point of having the security personnel be there when they are just going to be killed in five seconds of arrival? Yes, the one shouldn't have brought the gun with him, but they had plenty of other modern tech with them that were also anachronistic.
3. Romance. As I've already mentioned the romance between Chris and Kate comes out of nowhere, has no development, and feels like they are put together at the end simply because. As for the romance between Marek and Lady Claire, where the hell was it? This is one thing the film does so much better than the novel because other than a few admiring gazes from afar and maybe fewer words there is nothing between the two. Yet, within a couple of paragraphs we learn that Marek and Claire married, had lots of children, and lived happily ever after in the 14th Century together. It feels very tacked on and last minute. Maybe Crichton should have written a sequel. In the film, they at least interacted (the coracle scene) and they had unwittingly discovered his tomb before they went back in time, and when he loses his ear, he realizes he is meant to stay. His decision to stay in the book is a last minute whim.
4. Too many bad guys. Yes, I love bad guys, but other than our three (maybe four) heroes, everyone is a murderous, unreasonable bad guy. You have Lords Oliver and Arnaut, knights Malegant and Raimondo, and De Kere, even the monks don't exactly welcome them with open arms. And Lady Claire...who seems to be on no one's side, and we never get a real explanation for her motives as they seem all over the place. Again she just seems to be a plot device to help or hinder our heroes as required.
There are things that the book does well, and painting a cinematic action scene is something that Crichton does well. My favourite is the jousting scene which was criminally left out of the movie. It's well done, tense, and you can almost feel, smell, and taste the tilt. Another scene that became a favourite (I had forgotten about it) was Kate trying to flee across the beams above the feasting hall from the knight, Malegant, and being a climber, she is far more nimble and balanced that the warrior.
Overall, like I said it is still a very enjoyable story with lots of excitement, tension, and set-action pieces, but I did realize a lot more of its faults this time around.
I give it 7/10
I first read this around 2000, about three years before the movie starring, yes, Gerard Butler was released. I really liked the novel, a blend of two of my favourite genres, historical fiction and sci-fi. And I admit, I was so happy when I first heard that Gerry had been cast as my favourite character Andre Marek. But this is not a review on the movie or a comparison between the two as it's been a long time since I've watched it.
Generally speaking, I still really enjoyed the story with its blend of science and history, and well I am a sucker for a good time-travel yarn. Still, while it is still very enjoyable, and a book I will probably reread again at some point in the future, this time round I couldn't help but notice some of its problems. Of course, Crichton was one of the most popular authors and many of his books were blockbuster films ("Timeline" ironically was not one of these, and he apparently hated the film).
1. Show not tell. In quite a few places, especially at the beginning of the novel, there are pages and pages of scientific/technobabble exposition dumps. Yes, there is a lot of science-y and historical facts to be explained to give a basis for the story, but it is not naturally inserted but just told to the audience. Perhaps this is more noticeable on the reread when I had a general idea of what was going on?
2. The characters are flat.
Marek is still my favourite, but he like the rest are actually given very little development overall. He's an experimental historian who lives and breathes the 14th Century, sword fight, is learning jousting, and speaks Occitan. He is the expert for our heroes to help them stumble through 1300's France. I really don't know that even he would fare so well. It's one thing learning something and another to put it into practice against people who are native to such things. For example, Occitan is a dead language, while he could understand and perhaps make himself understood, it would be with some difficulty -- how would one know what the correct pronunciations of words would be? -- and he would be nowhere as near as fluent as he's depicted.
Kate as the only woman on the team, she lends very little except the fact that she can climb, and the 'romance' between her and Chris comes out of nowhere and just seems that, well they should be together and not for any character reasons. Especially in the Epilogue, where out of nowhere she's pregnant, because that's what happens isn't it? Not only that, because of the impending baby, she's suddenly helpless and needs a man's assistance.
Professor Johnston is just a plot device with very little actual role, except to basically be the story's McGuffin.
Chris, okay this guy is a graduate student of history. I repeat a graduate student. He is a key member of the dig site, and yet he seems to have very little knowledge of the medieval period. In fact, he suffers from the opposite problem to Marek. He has no idea what language they are speaking, when while he might not know Occitan, he would know that is the language of the time. He mistakenly allows himself to be thought a member of the noble class, when he would at least be familiar with the distinctions. In fact, for much of the story, he is pretty clueless about everything.
De Kere/Decker, could have been such an interesting and rich character, but he is reduced to little more than a cardboard cutout villain. The idea of him being a security man who, suffering to many transcription errors (physical effects of too many trips to the past), but who had managed to attain a position of trust with one of the warring lords and can overhear much of what the historians plan is very intriguing, but it needs more than a couple of sentences explanation at the end of the story and more than the fact that he could pick up languages extremely quickly when our heroes, who are experts, struggle.
The "redshirts", Really what was the point of having the security personnel be there when they are just going to be killed in five seconds of arrival? Yes, the one shouldn't have brought the gun with him, but they had plenty of other modern tech with them that were also anachronistic.
3. Romance. As I've already mentioned the romance between Chris and Kate comes out of nowhere, has no development, and feels like they are put together at the end simply because. As for the romance between Marek and Lady Claire, where the hell was it? This is one thing the film does so much better than the novel because other than a few admiring gazes from afar and maybe fewer words there is nothing between the two. Yet, within a couple of paragraphs we learn that Marek and Claire married, had lots of children, and lived happily ever after in the 14th Century together. It feels very tacked on and last minute. Maybe Crichton should have written a sequel. In the film, they at least interacted (the coracle scene) and they had unwittingly discovered his tomb before they went back in time, and when he loses his ear, he realizes he is meant to stay. His decision to stay in the book is a last minute whim.
4. Too many bad guys. Yes, I love bad guys, but other than our three (maybe four) heroes, everyone is a murderous, unreasonable bad guy. You have Lords Oliver and Arnaut, knights Malegant and Raimondo, and De Kere, even the monks don't exactly welcome them with open arms. And Lady Claire...who seems to be on no one's side, and we never get a real explanation for her motives as they seem all over the place. Again she just seems to be a plot device to help or hinder our heroes as required.
There are things that the book does well, and painting a cinematic action scene is something that Crichton does well. My favourite is the jousting scene which was criminally left out of the movie. It's well done, tense, and you can almost feel, smell, and taste the tilt. Another scene that became a favourite (I had forgotten about it) was Kate trying to flee across the beams above the feasting hall from the knight, Malegant, and being a climber, she is far more nimble and balanced that the warrior.
Overall, like I said it is still a very enjoyable story with lots of excitement, tension, and set-action pieces, but I did realize a lot more of its faults this time around.
I give it 7/10