The Movie: Kate & Leopold (2001)
The Time Travel Scenario: This centuries-hopping romantic trifle sees Hugh Jackman’s 19th century gentleman travel forward in time to meet Meg Ryan’s sassy Noo Yoiker.
Apparently, there’s a patch on the Brooklyn Bridge where the boundaries between time periods are weaker and people can cross between.
Usually the only displacement that happens on the bridge is when time appears to crawl to a halt in traffic jams.
Still, our hero adapts manfully to this confusing modern time, even recognising the "talking telegraph" (or telephone as we knew it in 2001, before the iPhone arrived) that he saw at a fair “last year”.
The Problem: Um, Leopold is from April 1876.
The first public display of the “talking telegraph” happened in MAY 1876, at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition. WE THINK YOU'LL FIND!
And seeing it “last year” is even more of a feat since Alexander Graham Bell only submitted his patent in EARLY 1876.
Maybe Leo’s been time travelling more than he lets on? Or maybe the writers needed to do a little more research and spend less time crafting witty/rubbish dialogue for Meg ‘n’ Hugh.
Albert Einstein Says: “It should be possible to explain the laws of physics to a barmaid.”
In Other Words: Time travel shouldn’t feature silly goofs, even in light-hearted rom coms.
Next: The Terminator
Comments
Desperation
Jul 10th 2009, 10:21
" (we’d like to credit them with the iPod and blame them for Johnny 5), " I'm sorry, you appear to have got these the wrong way round.
Alert a moderator
sowasred2012
Jul 10th 2009, 13:58
I always refer back to the parallel outcome idea in time travel movies these days - it's the only way to stay sane. Kudos to Terminator Salvation for running with the idea that they could be in an alternate timeline now, but I have a big problem with some of it's internal logic - (SPOILERS, kinda) as the movie opens Connor is freaking out cos he's discovered Skynet has started R&D on the T-800 model, yet Marcus, a guy who signed his body over to Cyberdyne upon his execution FIFTEEN YEARS ago, displays way more advanced tech then we've seen in previous terminators. Why put R&D into a model that can be beat by a unit you created 15 years ago? I was almost expecting this to be addressed, or at least hinted at, in the movie with some sort of time travel explanation - but I saw nada. Unless you count the stunt casting of Helena Bonham Carter, and the extra notice she makes you pay to that opening scene might suggest that story will be told in a sequel, but I'm not confident that's the case.
Alert a moderator
chriskilmartin
Jul 10th 2009, 14:03
agreed
Alert a moderator
WayneCha
Aug 17th 2011, 8:04
I'm not sure what you were getting at with "Back to the Future," but my problem with the film is that Marty and his siblings start to fade out in the photo towards the end when it would make more sense if the photo itself started to vanish instead. Why would anyone take a pic of nothing, right? Still, it's a ridiculously entertaining flick regardless.
Alert a moderator