Star Trek IV: Voyage Home

Time Travel Device: Looping around the sun

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To save earth from the whale-communicating probe.

Coolness Factor: It's Star Trek! The fun!!

Flaws: How nice are these whales? And this probe? The whales tell the probe, "Well, the present humans rescued us, but the humans in the past wanted to kill us," and the probe goes, "Okey-dokey, see ya later"?

Paradox: Some predestination:

McCoy: You realize that by giving him the formula you're altering the future.

Scotty: Why? How do we know he didn't invent the thing?

Kate says this is a great movie. In fact, the more times I see it, the more I appreciate how clever and well-directed it is.

However, since this movie ends the time-travel list (the next list--"Movies Based on Books"--coming soon!), I'm going to focus on comparing it to the first item we reviewed for this list: Star Trek's "City on the Edge of Forever."

Voyage Home is actually quite similar to "City." Not only does Kirk get a girlfriend (although this girlfriend doesn't die), but Kirk and Spock operate throughout the movie as a team. Nimoy did a very smart--and a very gentlemanly--job showing-casing all the actors (everyone gets a scene), but the bulk of the interaction is between Kirk and Spock, focusing specifically on their friendship.

Kirk's extroversion versus Spock's introversion, Kirk's emotional desire for connection versus Spock's Vulcan-training (with that substrata of human understanding), Kirk's desire to re-establish the original status of the friendship and Spock's growing understanding of his role on the ship and in Kirk's life are all nicely highlighted.

And the serious and humorous byplay between the actors is excellent. My personal favorite is the exchange on the bus:

Spock: Your use of language has altered since our arrival. It is currently laced with, shall we say, more colorful metaphors, "double dumbass on you" and so forth.
Kirk: You mean the profanity? That's simply the way they talk here. Nobody pays attention to you unless you swear every other word. You'll find it in all the literature of the period.
Spock: For example?
Kirk: Oh the neglected works of Jacqueline Susan. The novels of Harold Robbins...
Spock (supremely dryly): Ah, the "Giants".

This exchange is very reminiscent of exchanges in "City" such as the following:

Spock: Captain, I must have some platinum. A small block would be sufficient--5 or 6 pounds. By passing certain circuits through there to be used as a duodynetic field core...
Kirk: Mr. Spock, I've brought you some assorted vegetables, baloney and a hard roll for myself, and I've spent the other 9/10ths of our combined salaries for the last three days on filling this order for you. This bag doesn't contain platinum, silver, or gold, nor is it likely to in the near future.
Spock: Captain, you're asking me to work with equipment which is hardly very far ahead of stone knives and bearskins.

Most of all, I appreciate how well-written both the episode and movie are. In both cases, disparate events (McCoy showing up in the past separately from Kirk and Spock or, in the movie, the need to find the whales, arrange for the whales to be transported, and to replenish the ship's "gas") are handled cleanly and expertly. They don't feel jumbled at all.

I enjoyed it as much as I did the first, uh, five . . . six . . . seven . . . (I'd have to go back in time and count!) times.

Mike says I've mention before (on this very list) that one of my earliest memories is seeing Back to the Future in the Theater. The truth is, I do have one earlier memory-- though it may be only by an hour or so, and that's the preview for The Voyage Home. As such, this movie has been a part of my life for literally as long as I can remember!

Star Trek, for as often as they explore time travel, has really become pretty adept at it. Out of the eleven movies, three focus on the topic. So, Trek writers are pretty much experts on making time travel work. The goal here, saving the whales, while of cataclysmic importance to the crew's home time, is so minor and small in the scope of the twentieth century that it's easy to see no big waves, no major ripples in the time stream.

And while the crew does cause different changes here and there (Bones saving the old lady, Scotty inventing transparent aluminum), I think this film, more than any other, shows just how big the world is, and how small little actions don't always carry from one day to the next in the grand scope of things.

This is the one Star Trek movie EVERYONE has seen, and it's easy to understand why. Not only does the real world really dominate the movie, but the characters are REAL, approachable people, with senses of humor, flaws, and quirks that make them likable and understandable. My wife normally doesn't like the "alien characters" because they're so different, so, well, alien. But this movie, when she first saw it, made her fall in love with Spock.

Leonard Nimoy did an AMAZING job with this movie. It differs from almost every other Star Trek film. I would imagine it has the most dialog; I know it has the most humor (at least, the most successful humor--Yes, I'm looking at you Final Frontier). What's even more notable is the lack of any real action scene, though there are two great, short, and fun chase scenes. One phaser is fired, no ship weapons are used at any time, and Spock makes a Mormon joke (well, not really, but "too much LDS" instead of LSD is pretty funny for most Mormons).

Many Sci-Fi movies, especially time travel movies, have a bad habit of getting their plots all tangled and complicated (I could preach a sermon on the idiotic complexity of the Transformers movies). Journey Home, however, keeps it simple and straightforward. It's hard to get lost when you have one, two, or three things going on.

I also love how the Trek movies feel timeless. They really avoid, for the most part, feeling dated. Journey Home doesn't really succeed with this as well, mostly due to the fact that they're walking around the streets of San Fransisco in the 80's! But still, it holds its own pretty well. But, I must say that Journey Home is a true product of its time. Not only was EVERYONE throwing iconic characters into the streets of the modern day (Beast Master 2, Masters of the Universe, Galactia 1980), but the ocean and the environment in general was really on everyone's minds (Cocoon, Superman IV).

I LOVE this movie, and it's really one of the all time great sci-fi movies, if only because of its universal accessibility--almost ANYONE can watch and like this movie, at very least as a comedy.

Wow! This was a great list! Time travel is one of those sub-genres that are so prevalent, it's almost its own genre! And the sad thing is, with a 16 week list, we barely scratched the surface! A week hasn't gone by the Kate and I haven't thought of another movie we could have added! But I've really enjoyed it, and I'm glad we were able to start and end with Trek, arguably the patron saint of time travel in television and movies. To end this great list, I thought I'd include one of my favorite mash-ups of all time. Wow, I really wish they would make this movie!!!!!

Quantum Leap: "Genesis"

Time Travel Device: The Accelerator

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To get Sam home/to help people.

Coolness Factor: All the different opportunities/settings Sam gets to experience.

Flaws: Rough estimate, the show starts in the "future" of 1996. Why does it look like the future in Back to the Future II? Why did people in the 80s always imagine the future as containing neon jewelry?

Paradox: Definitely predestination since Sam can't leap until he has put people back on the right track!

Mike says Holy deja vu! A few weeks back I had the wonderful chance to see Source Code. Not only does the plot resemble Quantum Leap to an astonishing degree, but toward the end (SPOILERS!) the main character uses the opportunity to call his father--something he can no longer do in the "real" timeline. Not only is the conversation VERY reminiscent of Sam talking to his father at the end of "Genesis," But the father is played (in voice only) by none other than Scott Bakula. For me, a very cool "easter egg." Sorry, I was just really excited to share that!

Quantum Leap is a great show, for many reasons. I have to agree with Kate, the character interaction of Sam and Al really is what makes the shows work. The main idea is gr-at- not only does it save money on a large recurring cast, but (as Kate mentioned) Sam gets a new adventure, and chick, every week!

Something I like about the show is Sam's memory loss. It's a great set up, in that Sam, even though he's a super genius, is still able to be the audience surrogate. We learn stuff as he does. Al gets to play the all knowing-overseer (and sidekick) and does a great job of it.

I remember there being a lot of dispute about the series finale when I was younger. Due to it's quasi-religious message, some peple were peeved to find God as the cause of Sam's leaping! This is my first time seeing the pilot, so I was surprised to learn that, apparently, (and according to Al) God was a possible explanation all along! I think this is a great example of a show with mostly has stand-alone episodes that can still have a sense on internal continuity. For me, it's nice to know that everything that has happened actually mattered.

One thing I have to give props to the show for is the great mix of genres. A little bit of sci-fi, a little romance, some mystery with a dash of drama makes for a show that can really appeal to a large range of interests. As such, this is totally going on my "Compromise show" Show List. I think the wife would dig it!

Kate says for me, Quantum Leap is all about Al. I think Scott Bakula is a talented actor, but I adore Dean Stockwell. I love his clothes. I love how often he changes clothes. I love his dark, smudgy eyes. His dry humor. His contained amusement. His sudden bursts of gentle compassion.

And the camaraderie between Sam and Al works--even before Sam remembers who Al is. A lot depends on that relationship! After Quantum Leap and Magnum, Bellisario never did again rely so much on two principle actors (although Gibbs and DiNozzo have a similar-type relationship).

The pilot is quite good. Tom having a reputation of a joker makes for a better storyline than Tom being perceived as crazy. In fact, most Quantum Leap episodes are much better when Sam and Al just get on with solving the problem rather than Sam having to cope with people not believing him.

The pilot also prepares us for one constant and one necessary deux ex machina: (1) it is an excellent way for Sam, a chivalrous good guy to get a new woman every week! (2) Sam is an intellectual superman who can pick up on things very, very quickly and happens to have all kinds of languages and degrees tucked away in his "Swiss cheese brain." The former was clever from an advertising/writing perspective. The latter made Quantum Leap a kind of hero-show, "a time traveling Lone Ranger," as Sam says.

Tons of fun!

The Lakehouse

Time Travel Device: The mailbox (the movie could be called The Lakehouse's Mailbox)

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To bring the lovers together.

Coolness Factor: The parallel timelines that aren't precisely parallel due to the occasional overlaps.

Flaws: There seem some easy solutions like Kate giving Alex her phone number or telling him to meet her somewhere where she remembers she was in the past.

Paradox: Not strictly predestination since the events are happening to both Kate and Alex simultaneously, but they (or Alex) decide to "obey" the rules after he avoids death on Valentine's Day. On the other hand, some predestination would have to be at work since, if Alex doesn't die, why would Kate go to The Lakehouse to recover from his death? (Granted, she does express a need to go several times after that day.)

Kate says I really enjoy this movie. I've always liked Sandra Bullock and although I would be the first to say that Reeves is a better physical than emotional actor, I think this part works for him. For most of the movie, he is directed as just a guy talking to people. He isn't asked to emote much, and the few times he does are understated.

But then--with the exception of some corny visuals--the movie is fairly low-key, even leisurely. A few things like the tree are a bit overstated, but the meeting at Kate's birthday party is nicely done. Alex's decision to not stampede her makes him likable and also underscores the movie's theme: to wait, to be patient.

The movie, like all time travel movies, does entail a suspension of disbelief, and that suspension does occasionally stretch rather far. However, I can forgive the director and scriptwriter quite a lot in this instance since the focus is so patently on an artistic interpretation. Based on the correspondence, Kate is making VERY frequent drives out to the lake-house. However, instead of seeing those trips, we are given a sense of togetherness by having the characters converse (rather than just read).

All in all, a light, worthwhile film.

Mike says that I have this really weird tradition of seeing great chick flicks with other guys. I know, strange, but true. Shortly after getting married, I watched Moulin Rouge with a good friend while my wife was out. I saw A Walk to Remember with the son of one of my old church leaders. And Lake House, well, I watched it with one of my dads (don't ask, LONG story, but I have many parents).

So, getting beyond the weirdness of watching romances with men, this is a fairly great movie. As Kate says, it's simple, and light, keeping everything just heavy enough to care but light enough to not over think. If we were to break down genres into sub-genres, and then sub-sub-genres, I think The Lakehouse would be in (or around) the same category as The Kid. We never really know how or why the time travel is happening. Instead, it's a simple trick of fate, a bit of magic in a very real world. I like that. Some of my favorite movies deal with just that: a completely real world, with one small helping of magic to make things interesting.

Overall, the film is very tight. I've always been impressed by movies that can move up and down their own timeline and keep it consistent. Lord knows, I shouldn't be-- it seems that staying consistent would be one of those basic expectations for movies. Instead, it's a thing to be appreciated when it's actually present!

Along with the writing, the script is good, and the letter writing progressing to a conversational tone was a nice touch. It helps keep the relationship moving, alive, and vibrant, without just giving in and having the characters meet up.

While I wouldn't classify The Lake House as a compromise movie, it's definitely a great "chick flick" with a nice little sci-fi twist that keeps things interesting.

Doctor Who: "Blink"

Time Travel Device: The weeping angels AND, of course, the Doctor's time machine

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: In the case of the statues, to consume potential energy; in the case of Sally Sparrow & the time machine, to save the Doctor from 1969.

Coolness Factor: Watching the episode unwind from Sally's point of view

Flaws: Not a flaw but a query--does the Doctor read Sally's notes before he gets trapped in 1969? If so, why does he still allow himself to be trapped?

Paradox: Definitely predestination but predestination wrapped up in free-will since Sally causes her own predestination

Mike says the angels have the Phone-box! "Blink" is perhaps one of the best written time travel pieces of all time. Not only does it explore the idea of messages left in the past by people who know the future for someone living in the present (wrap your brain around THAT one), but it does it in a way that keeps you guessing, and believing, every moment.

I'm a reluctant Smallville fan, and when the second season came out I was very excited when Clark discovered a cave with the story of Superman painted on the walls. I was so excited, you'd think it was a real cave! Years later, I shake my head and laugh. The idea was cool enough to make me forget reality completely. The DVD Easter egg with the Doctor on it has a very similar effect on me. Every time I watch the episode, I get excited when Sally starts having a conversation with the TV. The best part is how the conversation works in different circumstances! Sally pokes fun at the Doctor's timey-whimey dialog and gets a shamed response early in the episode; later, when Sally references this, the Doctor's shamed response plays again, exactly the same as before but still completely in the right tone and context. Brilliant!

Sally Sparrow is also a wonderfully written and acted character. She is so vibrant, believable, and genuine, that we as an audience follow her and bond with her within just a few minutes. It's not often that a guest character can carry an entire episode in their FIRST APPEARANCE. It's a shame she couldn't have replaced Martha as the companion... while I LOVE season three, Martha can often be a little (and by a little, I mean extremely) )grating on the nerves. Sally, however, is enjoyable, adventurous and smart.

While I love Tennant's Doctor (he's still my favorite), I love how this episode uses him sparingly and effectively. Altogether he may have only 5-8 minutes of screen time, those minutes have a solid impact, affecting the plot, providing insight, and all while supplying a solid laugh or two.

Finally, I love the weeping angels. As a monster, the concept is chillingly simple and terrifying. We never see them actually move, yet these props are used so effectively that the danger they pose to characters feels real and immediate. The climax, when the Angels assault the phone-box as it disappears around Sally is truly suspenseful. Impressive for what was probably Styrofoam figures!

I'm always impressed with Doctor Who's ability to focus on time travel and yet continually make it fresh and enjoyable as a concept. "Blink," more than anything else, shows the result of truly solid writing. That a filler episode that barely features the main characters of a long running fan favorite show can quickly become one of the best episodes of the series really shows how good something can be when the proper effort is put in. Take that, Smallville.

Kate says this is an excellent episode for many reasons. I've always enjoy non-Doctor episodes--someone experiencing the Doctor's interference second hand.

The best part, however, is how simple the "magic" is (the Doctor's appearance on the DVDs, the writing on the wall, etc.) and how much it is based on the simple fact that we forget that the Doctor travels in time.

Okay, by "we," I mean "I."

It gets me every time. I know I'm watching a time travel show, but I'm so wedded to linear-thinking that non-linear-events still surprise me. When I first started watching Doctor Who with Eccleston, I remember thinking, "But the Doctor who shows up in historical photos wouldn't be Eccleston! It would be Peter Davison or Tom Baker." And then, I had that "a-ha" moment--oh, OF COURSE, Eccleston could travel to whenever he wanted, before and after Rose meets him!

This makes me sound far dumber than I actually am, but I think this is what makes "Blink" work. The Doctor's appearances seem magical, random, or just-dumb-luck. But in fact, they are carefully planned out and arranged. This isn't Bill & Ted which, however funny, used the same idea of "oh, yeah, we went back and fixed that" to get rid of plot problems. In this case, "fixing things from the past" IS the plot problem.

I also think it is cool that Sally Sparrow is one of the few people to come in contact with the Doctor who has the strength and self-confidence to take the initiative with him and to walk away when she is done. She is a simply awesome character who makes a definite "I could have my own comic book series" impression in just one episode. I also have a soft spot for Lawrence, especially for the line: "I've got it on my t-shirt!"

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: "Little Green Men" & "Trials & Tribble-ations"

Season 4: "Little Green Men"

Time Travel Device: Time wrap caused by a cascade reaction of kemacite . . .

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: The Ferengi (and Odo) end up in 1947 America.

Coolness Factor: The misinterpretation factor: how nobody understands anybody at first and actions are misinterpreted with the best anthropological intentions. Odo as the big German Shepherd.

Flaws: The time travel explanation--huh? As Quark says, "I have no idea what you're talking about."

Paradox: Nog worries about disrupting the time-line, but I, Kate, think this episode falls into the predestination category.

Season 5: "Trials & Tribble-ations"

Time Travel Device: Defiant taken back by a Bajoran orb

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To prevent Captain Kirk's death

Coolness Factor: Classic Trek! The Department of Temporal Investigations!

Flaws: The orb moves the Defiant through time AND space?

Paradox: The investigation establishes that it is NOT a predestination paradox.

Kate says I love the underlying premise of "Little Green Men." I totally believe that if aliens did show up, the first order of business (ha ha) would be economics; again, as Quark says, "We just want to sell you things." I also totally believe an alien race would have its fair share of used car salesmen.

The time travel explanation of this episode definitely falls into the "magic door" category of explanations. It really doesn't matter how they get back; they just need to, so the jokes can start.

"Trouble & Tribble-ations" is a sweet episode. It is also lovingly done; the use of a Classic Trek actor, not just character, is inspired. The editing is smooth. As Mike says, the digital work doesn't look artificial; I think one reason is the layering (Odo appearing behind Chekov, etc.).

I got a huge kick out of Bashir's time argument: "I could be my own great-grandfather!" As Mike also mentions, the show takes a light-hearted look at the franchise's obsession with time travel. (Star Trek episodes do appear four times on this list!)

And the final scene is excellent although I can't help wondering, Will this "next generation" enlightened Federation beam the tribbles to an enemy ship?

Mike says that out of all Star Trek, DS9 was always the most willing to have fun, and both of these episodes testify to that. "Little Green Men" is really fun and cute and has a special place in my heart due to a few interesting months I spent living in Roswell.

In my opinion, Star Trek has always been about the science. More than just the setting, the science fiction and how the characters use that technology almost always drives the plot. While this can always be boiled down to the proper use of power, in the end Star Trek really is about how we use technology. As such, techno-babble has always been integral.

I love how "Little Green Men" stays true to using technology, yet having Rom explain it makes it completely incomprehensible: definitely a playful jab at the long-standing tradition of time travel in Star Trek. The story is fun and playful, though only to hide the real point. Hollywood using aliens and time travelers to critique society isn't new . . . however, using both at the same time might be. The political comments are sparse, though, and lighthearted enough not to ruin anything.

I've always enjoyed Quark, and it's no surprise that Quark-centric episodes became more and more popular as the show went on. The slight nod here in the first few minutes of comparing Nog to Worf is a nice touch since being the first of a race to join Starfleet is definitely an honor. But I wish they had developed that relationship more. "Little Green Men" is playful, fun, and really takes full advantage of Quark and company .

"Trials and Tribble-ations" goes even further in the direction of poking fun at the time traveling happening in the universe of Trek. I love the idea of an agency that keeps track of every incident of time travel. Not just funny, but practical! I love how sparingly the special effects are used in this episode. So much so that even years later, it looks authentic in many scenes! The use of the popular original series episode was clever, and not replaying the entire episode, so much as touching upon the highlights, was really a good decision as the episode wasn't bogged down by old material.

The time travel here is classic "magic door": the magic Orb of the Prophets is the culprit, and it's never discussed how the orb works. Here, they're just having fun, and how they got back in time isn't so important as the "Holy crap it's Kirk!" moments. There are so many jokes, nods, and references in this episode, it'd take forever to mention them all. My favorites include "I'm a doctor, not a historian!" and Kirk's appearance.

The Kid

Time Travel Device: Man's younger self "travels 30 years across time" to visit him.

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To help make Russell's next 30+ years a success

Coolness Factor: The idea of change being a real, not instant, possibility. The cast!

Paradox: Avoids the Grandfather paradox since Russell doesn't "fix" his past but starts anew from forty.

Mike says I have a duel problem: Not only do I wait to the last minute to do these reviews, but I have a brilliant, insightful, and talented blogging partner who very often says exactly what I wanted to. While it's my turn to go first, please enjoy Kate's delightful review below, and I'll add a few awkward lines (and my two cents!) after.

Kate says this is a delightful movie. I hadn't seen it in several years, and from the opening scenes, I laughed my head off. Then I got a little weepy. Then I "hoorayed" my way through the ending. It is a great ride!

First, the movie has an excellent cast. I quite like Bruce Willis. Unlike other action heroes, he has aged with not grace, perhaps, but hutzpah. And he has explored less action-type roles within his range. (Christian Bale can just passably switch between action and arty roles; few actors can or should. Also, Bruce Willis is one of the few action heroes who is still cool as an aging tough guy. Harrison Ford just makes me wince.)

Bruce Willis has strong comedic talents with great timing and deadpan looks. Lily Tomlin is hilarious. Emily Mortimer is sweet. And Spencer Breslin . . .

Spencer Breslin is impressive. I love how normal his character, Rusty, is. Cute, yes. Adorable, yes. But ultimately completely, believably normal. He is also a plausible younger version of Willis. I don't know if he copied Willis or Willis copied him, but their inflections and tones match up perfectly.

Before I move on from the cast, I have to mention Jean Smart (who plays Deirdre, the anchorwoman Willis meets on the plane). I'm a fan of Jean Smart (she plays Lana on Frasier), a very talented comedienne. I admire how she is used in The Kid. Her appearance in the beginning of the movie is paid off neatly towards the end. One of the nice things about PG movies is that issues must be resolved platonically or complexly. An "R" movie would have fallen back on a fling between Russell and Deirdre which wouldn't have worked. But a friend giving advice (returning a favor) at the right time/right place works perfectly.

Regarding the theme, I enjoy Back to the Future, but I admit I consider The Kid a more realistic approach to life. Russell and Rusty hope that resolving the confrontation with the childhood bully will make their future life perfect. But the pains of childhood aren't so easily resolved. What Russell can give Rusty is an adult perspective. "Did I do it?" Rusty asks regarding his mother's coming death, and Russell can say, "No" and can even understand where his father's anger came from.

Consequently, Russell's life isn't "fixed." Although that type of solution works with Back to the Future, it completely fails with 13 Going on 30 where the horrible, conniving, deceitful woman becomes a happy, decent one simply by making one right decision when she was 13. I don't buy that.

Instead, in The Kid, Russell is given the opportunity to move forward. The story becomes less about who he used to be and more about what he can do in the years to come. It is about loving, not despising, that little dweeby kid in all of us--"a dogless, chickless guy with a twitch"--precisely so we can let that kid go.

Truly one of the best movies of all time.

Mike Says (again) that this is a wonderful movie, and a fantastic example of using Time Travel in a way the avoids nearly all of the snags and plot holes time travel usually brings. The problem is, all of the things I'd love to point out about this movie, Kate already did! And so well, I don't have much to add!

My favorite thing about this movie (in addition to the humor, the cast, and the music) is that the Time Travel itself is so simple, yet so effective. Russell and Rusty quickly rush past the "how" to tackle the "why?" And it's in the search for the why that everything plays out. Even in the end, when Rusty and Russell meet Russ (old guy), he acknowledges that Russell might have some questions. Instead of launching into techno babble, he just nods, and says, "Well, I wouldn't worry about it. You have thirty years to figure it all out." Awesome. Tightly written, simple, and avoids everything that would, frankly, ruin the tone and distract from the point of the movie.

Watching the movie this time around, something that kept going through my mind is how much Russell dislikes Rusty and the things about himself that Rusty reminds him of. Something I've been known to say quite often is that I'd love the chance to go back in time and beat the crap out of my younger self. Why? I was a socially inept, blundering and clueless blockhead. And I made a lot of mistakes I wish I could forget. Russell, it seems, wants the same thing. He doesn't want to face his past, or resolve it. He resents it! He wants it to go away, so he can just live his life.

The problem is, living your life and MOVING ON with your life aren't the same thing. Rusty gives Russell the chance, or more accurately, FORCES him to look back, understand, and accept those thing he didn't like. I Love, Love, LOVE, that despite all of their efforts, Rusty and Russell don't change a single thing about the past. Instead, Russell gains that perspective that Kate mentions, to see his life as it was, and apply it to the now. And with that, he's able to leave his old self views in the past, and move on to be the adult he wanted to be when he was a kid. And the idea that this opportunity is ultimately set in motion and offered by Russell's older self really shows how the wisdom gained from life and age really help us to see everything in its proper perspective.

If only all of us could have that same chance!

Lois & Clark: "Tempus Fugitive" & "The Night Before Mxymas"

Season 2: "Tempus Fugitive"

Time Travel Device: H.G. Wells’ Time Machine

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To kill Superman/Clark Kent

Coolness Factor: Getting to see Clark Kent/Superman’s story from the beginning. Lane Davies as Tempus.

Flaws: Not really a flaw since Lois & Clark is such a blatantly campy show, but I (Kate) have never really gone along with the idea that Superman is not only super-strong but SO smart, he can build a time machine from plans in a few seconds.

Paradox: Totally the Grandfather paradox (indirectly) since Tempus presupposes that he would still be around once Superman’s utopia is destroyed. But in reality, without the utopia, Tempus’ existence is not a guarantee.

Season 4: "Twas the Night Before Myxmas"

Time Travel Device: There's that loop again! (In this case, the loop does have an origin or source, which it doesn’t in many other episodes/movies we’ve watched for this list.)

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To demoralize the world/get rid of Superman.

Coolness Factor: Love those Christmas episodes!

Flaws: Not to be cynical but Lois' "unthawing" seems a tad convenient.

Paradox: Loop

Kate says this is one show I own all four seasons of. It is unbelievably adorable. Dean Cain as the everyday American boy who happens to be a superhero is exactly my idea of Superman. Teri Hatcher is one of the few Loises that doesn’t drive me crazy; in fact she's very sweet. Martha and Jonathan Kent are the perfect parents. I could keep going about all the other characters . . .

The show is funny, spoofy, campy, clever, touching, insightful. I could keep going . . .

"Tempus Fugitive" is one of my favorites although, in this case, it is a favorite not for the regular stars but for the best guest star ever! That voice! That sarcasm!

There are too many great Lane Davies’ lines to list them all, but here is one (towards the beginning):

Tempus: Well, this is a special pleasure, Ms. Lane. I'm Tempus. I'm from the future that you and Superman created.
Lois: Me and Superman?
Tempus: A world of peace. A world with no greed or crime. A world so boring you'd blow your brains out, but there are no guns.

Setting aside the great fun of Tempus, the episode is important because Lois not knowing Clark is Superman gets pretty old. The creators do have Lois find out in Season 3, but even by the middle of Season 2, it was getting exasperating. This episode is a nice “hey, she knows, no, she doesn’t!” break.

"Twas the Night Before Myxmas" is far more heavy on the theme than "Tempus Fugitive." As a "redeeming Scrooge" type tale, it is pretty good, but it also illustrates some of the flaws of the last season. Once Lois & Clark got married, the episodes got downright squishy with sentiment. On the one hand, I think squishy sentiment is underrated: I love a happy ending! On the other, how much work would it really have taken to give the plots more plausibility? So many plots in Season 4 are resolved through Lois & Clark's love which is nice but not really conflict-inducing.

Still, "Twas the Night" does have some nice elements embedded in the loop (the shrinking tree for example). The script-writing may have been overly sentimental but the episode isn't lazy.

Final note: One thing I really like about Lois & Clark is the emphasis on Clark as the "real" personality: "Superman is what I can do. Clark is who I am." I’ve never been able to relate to the version of Superman that emphasizes the god-aspect of the man rather than the human aspect. I'm always appreciated that Clark/Superman has to struggle with decisions in this show. You aren't sure what he will decide!

Mike says no, no, I'm full, really. Thank you, but I've had all the cheese and corn I can stand. Anymore, and my head will explode. Dang it, I said NO! If you haven't guessed from my very clever and witty retort, I was a little overwhelmed by the camp and sentiment of these episodes. HOLY COW! I really don't remember this show being that painful to watch!

I too love Lois and Clark, and I, like Kate, own the entire series. As a teenager, it was one of those shows everyone was talking about Monday morning. I, the biggest comic fan in the school, never could join in because my mother HAD to watch America's Funniest Home Videos (which was on at the same time). *Sigh*

Having rewatched the show just a couple years ago, it was surprising how much I'd forgotten of these episodes. Both are great for our discussion on time travel. That "Night before Myxmas" actually defines a time loop while showing one is also fairly cool.

"Tempus Fugitive" covers so much ground, and the idea behind it is so epic in scale, I was shocked that it was just a hour episode. It is a busy, compact forty-five minutes, and Tempus makes it a fun ride.

One thing I like a lot is the idea of Clark keeping the knowledge of his own timeline, and being able to interpret the changes, such as the great bank hiest. Very cool stuff. The idea that Tempus would happen to run into Jesse James? Phfffffft. Well, if a man in tights can fly, and HG Wells can show up with a time machine, then yeah, I guess Jesse James could have been in Smallville that day. I guess. But I agree with what Kate said about meeting famous people in her review of Man From Earth:

"Why is it that people with past lives or people who have lived forever always have to know famous people? Why don't they just know that guy who ran the fish stand in Istanbul? Why aren't their day planners filled with 'Bobs' and 'Jills' rather than Columbus and Attila the Hun? Even if I lived 10,000 years, I doubt my circle would enlarge to include Hollywood magnets and political personalities..."

This is easily applied to Time Travel. While it's more likely you'll meet someone if you time travel specifically to meet them, I think celebrities were just as hard to find then as they are now.

Anyway, a fun episode, and while it explored a Lois that knew Clark's secret, it was quick to restore the status quo.

"The Night Before MyxMas" was . . . painful. Kate is right in saying that the fourth season oozed sentiment (so much in fact, I find myself occasionally cleaning up the puddle of sentiment that pools around the DVD stand where I keep my copy of the fourth season). Lois and Clark were married, happy, and the show could no longer run on pure sexual tension and the will they/won't they cliff hangers. The show had two choices: go real, or go cheesy. As a result of the producers' choice, there have been more mice-related thefts of season four of Lois and Clark from stores and homes than any other TV season, EVER.

Sorry, I'm very tangent prone tonight. Anyway, the episode is cute, but that's about it. I do like the idea of the people in the loop feeling its effects despite not being aware of it (though, to justify the changes in people and surroundings, it would have to be a loop of a couple days, instead of a few hours). The tree and Jimmy's girlfriend are great visual cues to help the viewer understand when they are in the loop, and the progression of despair everyone is feeling.

Mr Myx (I don't feel like googling the name and cutting and pasting right now) is played well by Howie Mandell, and I can understand why they choose him for the part. The comic version of Myx wasn't really one for world domination... he just REALLY liked annoying Superman. Still, his inclusion here is clever.

Overall, it really is the hokey feelings and mushiness of the episode (and that's really saying something considering this is a CHRISTMAS episode) that makes it hard to watch. But the trick used to send back Myx? Very Funny.

X-Files: "Monday"

Time Travel Device: Loop

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: Mulder & Scully don't die in the bank; the loop ends.

Coolness Factor: X-Files' willingness to tackle the big meaning!

Flaws: “Monday” avoids the flaw that Mike mentions regarding Groundhog Day: "the human mind can only stay stable for so long with no true measurement of time." Pam--the only character to remember the previous loops--becomes progressively unstable as the loops continue and she gives up trying to find a solution.

Paradox: Loop (Does the universe restart each day?).

Trivia: Did you notice the brand of Mulder's wrist watch?

Mike says Sorry! As a procrastinator, one of the worst things that can happen to me is for Blogger to go down for maintenance the night of my deadline! Having to work, I wasn't able to add my review till just now.

Anyway, "Monday" is one of the first X-Files episodes I saw and has the distinction of making me fall in love with the show. This episode, though, does something far more boldly than many X-Files episodes: it leaves no doubt to the viewer that something extraordinary is going on. Many episodes will give you a wink, or make things look plausible, but often in the X-Files, Scully's view of the situation is just as plausible as Mulder's. In later seasons, though, that goes to the wind, and Scully is left looking dumb while we and Mulder know what's really happening.

The time loop is pretty well regulated--the show avoids showing the same thing over and over and shows different views so it doesn't get old. One thing that I appreciated is that Mulder ALREADY had thoughts of deja vu being a time loop... it's not an idea that conveniently came to him while he was in one.

This is also a great one-off episode. Any viewer can come in, watch this episode, and know what happened, even though the point of the show might be lost on them. The standard X-Files watcher can be happy too, as there's plenty of wiggle room in the plot to allow Mulder one of his rants on the unexplained. Fun Stuff!

Kate says the great thing about "Monday" is that the loop doesn't feel repetitious. Loop narratives can get rather dry. "Monday" avoids this; not only do we see/learn more with each loop, but the loops aren’t exactly the same. One time Scully goes to the bank; another time, Mulder starts on a rant about fate versus free-will.

And, of course, there’s the X-Files' humor! (Note: the waterbed appears for the first time in "Dreamland" when Michael McLean, while possessing Mulder, enhances his apartment: Mulder finally gets a bedroom!)

Another great aspect of "Monday" is that the writers directly tackle the issue of free-will versus predestination (an issue that has arisen quite often on this list!). The conclusion seems to be that while minor things can change (as Scully says, "We are free to be the people we are . . ."), only a strong commitment/will to change can alter the big stuff. (We are programmed evolutionarily, biologically, and genetically unless we make the kind of sacrifices that result in a new direction.)

Finally, "Monday" has a neat twist in that it rests on the actions of the guest star rather than on those of the regular stars. I happen to like episodes like this (although they can’t usually occur until the later seasons--until, that is, the viewer really knows the regular stars). Star Trek: Next Generation has an episode, “Below Decks” about a group of young officers. The episode focuses on these entirely new characters, who only occasionally come in contact with the main characters. It’s a neat opportunity for the viewer to see the main characters from the "outside."

This happens in "Monday." Pam sees Mulder and Scully from the outside; as the loops continue, she begins to see them as a unit, partners who can be addressed individually to achieve the same result. This, of course, is something that the viewer already knows about them. But it gives the relationship a fresh start (this was the season right after the first movie when X-Files presumably collected more fans; it's a good season and very viewer-friendly).

All in all, this is one of my favorites, and one reason I wanted us to expand the original list!

Star Trek Next Generation: "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "Cause & Effect"

Season 3: "Yesterday's Enterprise"

Time Travel Device: Wormhole

Time Travel Outcome: Changes the current state of the Federation.

Coolness Factor: Seeing the Enterprise as a war ship. Also, Tasha Yar makes the greatest "return of a dead person" to television EVER. And Captain Picard gets to do his Winston Churchill impression.

Flaws: That's an awful lot of consequences resting on Guinan's say-so!

Paradox:Messing directly with the grandfather paradox here!

Season 5: "Cause & Effect"

Time Travel Device: Loop

Time Travel Outcome: Live the same few days over and over and over . . .

Coolness Factor: Seeing the Enterprise blow up several different ways. The clues Data sends himself. The idea of one choice leading in a completely different direction than another choice. Kelsey Grammar.

Flaws: People make thousands of minor choices every day. Eventually those minor choices would stop the collision from happening LONG before the actual moment.

Paradox: Although the episode resolves due to a single choice, the episode behaves as if some things are predestined.

Kate says so I love Star Trek, which means I rarely care how silly it is. Okay, "Spock's Brain" was pretty silly, not to mention early Troi. But generally, I just love Star Trek.

Of the two episodes, I think "Yesterday's Enterprise" is better, having more content to explore. One interesting idea of "Yesterday's Enterprise" is whether we really WANT to relive the past.

I recently thought to myself, "If I could go back to a year and a half ago and stop my Ford Focus from being pulverized when I hit a patch of ice, many of my current money troubles wouldn't exist. But I would have to live that year and a half over again." And I realized I wouldn't want to do that unless I remembered it (so I could tweak things here and there) and even then . . . well, gosh, there's just an awful lot of things that I just don't want to have to do again. It isn't that the past year and a half were bad; it's just . . . things happened; they are over. It took a lot of work for me to get to 2011. I'd rather take a breather, thanks.

Of course, that's not exactly the same as someone suddenly fast-forwarding me to 2015 and saying, "Hey, do you still want to live the last four years over again?" Still, if I liked 2015, I might say, "No."

And it isn't like I'm in the middle of a Klingon War; I've just never seen the appeal of, for example, going back to high school. I know people who live their lives in parallel--the life they have and the life they could have had. I don't see the point of this. This is the life I have. End of story.

Enough of the tangent! This issue of "what future or past do I choose for myself" is Tasha Yar's conundrum--in the "real" past, she's dead. But if she goes back into the WAY past, she'll likely be killed. If she stays in the new present, she'll continue to have a life.

Of course, she makes the noble choice (and lives to make another few guest appearances!). In any case, I like the idea of people struggling with where they belong time-wise. It gives the episode more ballast than just "oh, yeah, the Enterprise D shouldn't be here."

"Cause Effect" is fun, mostly because of how it is filmed--every day uses different angles or starts from different points of view. The idea is clever and the episode--like most Next Generation episodes--is well-plotted, but the idea doesn't really make internal sense, and there isn't enough other stuff to give it weight.

Mike says man, I love watching Trek. One nice thing, for our purposes, is that we can pick an episode, put it in for review, and usually not have to worry about what's happening in the season.

"Yesterday's Enterprise" is one of those episodes that changed all the rules. Altering the timeline, bringing back old cast members, and making everyone dark was all kind of a shock to us watching this for the first time years ago.

The idea is very cool, and I love the execution. When the Enterprise C leaves its timeline, time is changed, only returning to normal once they return. This is a big change to most time travel rules, as many keep the timeline, just assuming that history would be fixed later. I think it's the immediacy of the effect that I love so much.

Given all that, I do agree with Kate, the entire plot hangs on the very thin thread that Guinan "feels weird." While it's awesome that everyone has so much faith in her, it's a bit of a stretch (and by a bit, I mean "holy crap!").

"Cause and Effect" is fun, if very light compared to the heaviness of "Yesterday" (even watching it now, the opening teaser really throws off the viewer--Wait, everyone is dead? But there's another hour left!). One of the great things about TNG is that every cast member got a few episodes centered around them (though Worf, Data, and Picard really got the most screen time), and this Crusher-based episodes really fits the character, as the plot is simple, fairly mellow, with an explosive outcome.

The thing that really makes me laugh about these episodes, though, is how rampant time travel is in the Trek Universe. The timeline seems to be under threat every day, if not several times a day. If similar events are happening to every crew of every fleet of every race all over: yikes. The Trek universe is being rewritten everyday! Which really puts the validity of the Trek reboot into perspective.

Despite flaws, gimmicks, and gross overuse of a plot device, nobody does time travel like Trek.

Time Travel List!

As a reminder, here is the Time Travel list again (starting with the current set):

1. Back to the Future, April 8, 2011
2. "2010" and "1969," Stargate SG-1, April 15, 2011
3. Time Traveler's Wife, April 22, 2011
4."Yesterday's Enterprise," "Cause and Effect," ST: Next Gen, April 29, 2011

WEEK BREAK

1. "Monday," X-Files, May 13, 2011
2. "Twas the Night Before Mxymas," "Tempus Fugitive," Lois Clark, May 20, 2011
3. The Kid, May 27, 2011
4. "Little Green Men" & "Trials & Tribble-ations, ST: Deep Space Nine, June 3, 2011

WEEK BREAK

1. "Blink," Dr. Who, June 17, 2011
2. Lake House, June 24, 2011
3. "Genesis Part I and Part II," Quantum Leap, July 1, 2011
4. Star Trek IV: Voyage Home, July 8, 2011

The Time Traveler's Wife

Time Travel Device: Genetic anomaly

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: The anomaly itself doesn't appear to have a purpose, but Henry's purpose seems to be tied to fate; he always comes back to Clare.

Coolness Factor: The matter-of-fact nature of the "disease" and how Henry's daughter can control it. (In the book, it is implied that more and more children will be born with this anomaly and the ability to control it.)

Flaws: There don't appear to be any flaws except the script-writers don't make it completely clear that (1) the time traveling also involves traveling in space; (2) the amount of time Henry is gone is reflected in the "current" time line. The book gives a more in-depth description of the mechanics.

Paradox: The grandfather paradox is not allowed for. Henry CAN'T change things. (Nobody cares about the Prime Directive which is actually rather refreshing.) Pre-destination is the most employed, as Henry causes many of the events in his life to transpire, and there's no way to know when the loop started.

Mike says Thank Goodness for compromise movies like this one. Watching movies with a non-geek wife usually boils down to being little more than a test of endurance and love, either on that part of the geek or, usually, the wife (as non-geek wives don't watch nearly as much TV). And so, compromise movies are those that blend a solid romance/drama with some fun sci-fi/fantasy elements. Ghost is a solid example of one of the first really successful compromise movies, and The Time Travelers Wife is a worthy comparison.

The idea of time travel as mutation/power is not new; the X-Men have been employing it for decades. It's an interesting idea, though, and I like it a lot. The idea that a being could learn to traverse the time stream in the same way he might swim is really cool.

The movie also handles the idea of predestination in a cool way--while Henry's life is kinda of laid out, he doesn't know how or what will transpires, so he forges ahead, making the best choices he can. I loved when he used the lottery ticket to create a life and home for his family, as he was mastering his disability and this activity pushes the edges of his "predestined life." If everything I do is already set out, then I shouldn't be able to do anything I didn't do before.... so, if I was able to buy it, I must have always bought it, and always will buy it (Time Loops are FUN!).

I think I also really like the movie as it's a wonderful look at a relationship with a handicapped individual, much like a mental illness, or even epilepsy. As I work in the field, I can say with authority that the movie is really true to the ups on downs of such relationships.

Like I said, it's a great compromise movie, as the sci-fi elements are presented in such a way as non-geeks can easily access it. The Time Travelers Wife is a fun movie, and a chick flick I can actually stand.


Kate says the one thing I really like about Niffenegger's story is that time traveling is risky. The risks aren't Genghis Khan barbarians trying to kill you but the simple (but terrifying) risks of cold, not being able to walk, not having clothes or shelter or money, etc.

It brings the whole issue down to its most elemental. So often in time travel stories, people aren't really physically affected. Time traveling is risky, but not something you have to learn to pick locks for in order to survive. In The Time Traveler's Wife, time traveling is made real and ordinary because it affects Henry in the most real and ordinary ways.

The movie is surprisingly easy to follow. The book is slightly more complex, but even in the book (as in the movie) Clare and Henry's relationship and Clare's aging give the story a stable, if winding, thread.

The theme is a curious mix of fate and free will. I like that the fate part of the relationship doesn't make it any easier. Henry and Clare still have to choose to make the relationship work. Clare has to accept Henry's younger self. They have to work on the marriage. During the pregnancy, Clare chooses to hope while Henry learns to stay calm.

The movie does stress the fate part of the relationship more than the freewill part. Which I suppose is to be expected. I saw the movie before I read the book. I recommend the book (although the beginning part is a little hard to get through since Henry is rather immature). Having seen the movie again, I almost expected to be disappointed (comparison-book-movie blues), but I actually think the movie holds up fairly well. I would have liked to see Henry go back to the meadow more, but I understand why visually that might be a bit creepy. I also would have liked to see the movie end with Henry visiting older Clare.

But all in all, it's a HUGE, complex book boiled down to 107 minutes, and the result is faithful in tone and intent if not completely faithful in plotting. The ultimate theme comes through: resilience and love in the face of pain and loss.

Stargate: "1969" & "2010"

Time Travel Device: Solar flares/Wormhole (via the Stargate)

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To get back to one's initial time; to restore society as it was originally.

Coolness Factor: Hey, it's Stargate! Seeing the characters in new roles (the past/the future).

Flaws: "2010" isn't really a time travel episode since nobody travels anywhere; they just talk about it--that's my fault (Kate). Also regarding "2010," I find it difficult to believe that NOBODY would notice the whole "we're not having babies" phenomenon. People just aren't that uniform in behavior; some people would keep their own doctors; some people would refuse the Aschen drugs; etc. etc.

Regarding both episodes, why do solar flares cause time travel?? Star Trek does the same thing (the Stargate writers KNOW their Star Trek), but it doesn't make any sense in Star Trek either. The sun is just a big gas star. Gas causes time travel?

Paradox: Samantha attempts to avoid the grandfather paradox in "1969" by not letting Jack influence the people the team makes friends with.

Kate says I love Stargate! It is one of my all-time favorite shows. Both "1969" and "2010" are from the early seasons (before Michael Shanks left and came back) when the episodes were still Star Trekky explorations of different worlds, rather than long-drawn out military affairs. I love these seasons!

"1969" is more fun than "2010" but not as deep. The premise of "1969" is basically the premise of Star Trek V: Voyage Home--get the team home from the past. Most of the episode is watching various characters try to fit themselves into hippy culture. Teal'c naturally does the best job. There's a nice moment with Catherine Langford (character from the Stargate movie) and some funny moments when the team first shows up in 1969 Cheyenne Mountain:

Major Thornbird: [You snuck in here] even though you achieved nothing?
Jack: Unless that was exactly what we were hoping to achieve.

(Actually, the entire exchange between Thornbird and Jack is extremely funny.)

But the episode is mostly an excuse to put Teal'c in hippy clothes. Although the script does cover some nice time travel issues.

"2010" has more grit (even though technically it isn't a time travel episode). What if we encountered aliens who took away all our problems (and didn't look like scary bug-creatures a la X-Files and Independence Day) but actually turned out to be far more villainous? Granted--as I mention above--the premise is a little strained. However, the underlying idea of a slow insidious invasion rather than a big, scary obvious invasion is classic sci-fi and brings up all kinds of questions about utopia and freedom and what power people should really be willing to give away. The humans in "2010" have given up all their military power for the sake of being protected. And it backfires. I'm not a huge fan of the NRA, but there's a reason the Revolutionary War patriots fought for the right to fight their own battles!

I enjoyed watching these so much, I'm going to start watching my four seasons all over again! I might even watch them all!!

Mike says that Stargate is definitely a lot of fun! I need to start watching from the beginning!

These episodes are pretty fun, and definitely take an interesting approach on time travel. In "1969," I really liked that the general let the team go--but sent along what they needed (the note). And the zany references to pop culture that hasn't happened yet, from competing franchises? Perfect.

I also liked that, for the most part, the episode employed pretty clean writing, covering most holes. "What about the tapes?" "Oh, those were in the boxes too." Nice and clean, let's tie up those loose threads and move on.

Despite this, perhaps the most frustrating thing about the episode is what they do leave hanging--like the hippy couple that helped SG-1. The episode seemed to hint that they were important, but no update, no information, no conclusion is ever given to the characters. It's frustrating and lazy.

I also enjoyed "2010," and I felt it was a great complementary episode to "1969." Not only does it reference the older episode, but it builds off many of the same ideas, and tackles it from another angle. Like Kate, though, I have a hard time believing the premise--there was at least one stubborn couple out there trying to have kids with their human doctor. And wouldn't the lower population of school age children (and thus, lower spending on schools) have been a big tip off? Sorry, I work in education.

I was also a little annoyed by the idea of the team dying to send the message, as at this point, the idea is cliche'. The great thing about time travel and alternate dimensions is you get to pay off on danger that doesn't normally exist for the main characters. You get to kill people off with no consequences. The problem is that there's no real weight to it if it's not real either. Ah well.

These episodes are a fun look at time travel, and a great introduction to a fun series... I'll have to give watching it a solid effort.

Back to the Future

Time Travel Device: "Are you telling me you made a Time Machine... out of a a DeLorean?"

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: Initially--prevent being killed by terrorists; eventually--save parents' marriage and self.

Coolness Factor: Comparisons between past and future town; Michael J. Fox; Christopher Lloyd

Flaws: One thing Spielberg proves with Back to the Future is that the rules don't have to make sense (88 mph) as long as they are consistent.

Paradox: Grandfather--if Marty prevents his parents' getting together, he will never exist to go back and stop them from getting together in the first place. To be fair, there is some predestination mixed in as well, as Marty inspires "Goldie" Wilson to run for mayor and inspires his parents to name a child "Marty." If this movie were made today, they'd have to go one way or another; you can't change your future while also inspiring your future to happen.

Trivia: The character name of Emmett comes from the word "time," spelled backwards and pronounced as syllables (em-it). His middle name is "Lathrop," which is "portal" backwards, with an extra "h" inserted in the middle. Also, 88 miles per hour was selected as the speed, as when you turn it sideways, it resembles "double infinity."

Mike says Great Scott! I love this movie. One of my earliest memories, and definitely my earliest theater memory (I was six, I guess) is the DeLorean taking off at the end of the movie. Since then, I've seen Back to the Future approximately a KAJILLION times. And I still enjoy it every time I see it.

In fact, this movie is among those I consider almost perfect. So to go back as an adult and review a golden standard is really hard!

The characters are all solid, with believable motivations and actions. Even if these are simple, they still work out. One of the things I love about this film is its lack of political correctness. Not that the movie is offensive; far from it. However, random terrorists are the bad guys and a bully without an in-depth back story of parental abuse are things you don't find in modern movies--today everyone has to be understood. Oh, how I miss the eighties.

The plot is really simple and and tight--there are a few holes, but they're few and far between. While I can pick some things apart as a long time sci-fi fan, for a family friendly sci-fi film, the movie is solid. Admittedly this is achieved by avoiding long explanations. The car travels in time, needs plutonium, and needs to reach 88 mph. Okay, GO! And a great movie follows.

I've got to say, this movie excels in many ways, but the music is truly fantastic. The score, Huey Lewis and the News, and some oldies (well, oldies where I'm from) all add up to really push the movie from cool to "WOW!"

The dialogue is fun and playful, and the jokes and one liners are great. And truly, is there another movie in history that ends with a cooler line? "Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads."

Kate says I love the exuberance of this movie! Fox and Lloyd have great complementary energy.

And the film is really tight: the emotional problem is established early on. Multiple clues are provided for later entertainment (the mayor; Uncle Joey's parole; the parents' "first meeting" story).

In fact, the movie is the type that can be watched multiple times. I've seen it probably 8 or more times since it came out in 1985, and this is the first time I put together the "Brown estate" with Dr. Brown being independently wealthy. That's why he can afford to just do his experiments all the time!

One fuss made about Back to the Future when it first came out was the whole "violence begets positives" theme. I think this criticism is pretty ridiculous (and clueless). The fact is, violence does beget consequences, and realistically/mathematically speaking, sometimes those consequences will be positive. Hitting the bully might not result in long-term benefits but it could (presumably the dad kept standing up for himself after he learned to do it twice--this is implied by dialog at the end of the movie).

However, I think Spielberg et al. did a great job picking up on this particular criticism and then paying it off in the final film (without negating the first film).

It is great fun. I agree with Mike--the music really makes it work. There is something unabashedly FUN about Back to the Future--not to mention it is one of the few 3-parters I've seen where all 3 movies fit nicely together. I feel like the writer/director really cared about the story--not just about making sequels.

Groundhog Day

Time Travel Device: Repeat a single day over and over and over and over . . .

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: The main character learns and grows.

Coolness Factor: Pinpointing which minor actions can change a life.

Flaws: There is no apparent cause for the time loop, or why it ended. Also, the human mind can only stay stable for so long with no true measurement of time. Could Phil have stayed sane for the years (decades, centuries?) he was stuck in the time loop? (Kate--Good point, Mike! The list will encounter unending time loops again although the characters in these time loops won't remember. Remembering certainly changes the endurance factor.)

Paradox: Time Loop--a period of time that repeats, cycling from beginning to end over and over.

Trivia: Apparently in one version of the script, a voodoo curse was the cause of Phil's time loop, invoked by a love-spurned co-worker, but this was dropped from the final movie. (Kate--This sounds similar to Disney's Beauty & the Beast plot; hey, there's a similar motif!)

Kate says Groundhog Day is basically Scrooged, only far better. Bill Murray did Scrooged—based on Charles Dickens' Christmas Carol--five years before Groundhog Day. Scrooged is rather long, but the thing that makes it a failure, in my view, is that Bill Murray's deadpan mocking edge is too strong at the end. It is hard to believe he has changed.

Murray's deadpan mocking edge is what makes him funny, but it needs to be cut by some sincerity if the viewer is going to believe that Scrooge or Phil has really grown as a person.

I do believe it with Groundhog Day, partly because the viewer actually sees Phil change. (Come to think of it, the suddenness of Scrooge's change is one of that story's flaws.) He goes through an entire lifetime of choices, and his choices plus the results of his choices make him a better person, not a sudden decision to be a better person.

And the cycle of change is quite interesting. Murray goes through Maslow's hierarchy of needs: at first, he focuses on what the day will get him in terms of money and easy sex; then, he focuses on what the day will get him in terms of love; then he begins to reach out to others; finally, he focuses on improving himself for the sake of improvement.

And of course, Murray is very funny. "Do you want to talk about the weather or are you just making chit-chat?"

Mike says that Groundhog Day is a fun movie, but before this list, I never thought of it as a time travel movie; rather, a "odd occurrence" movie.

Groundhog Day does belong in this category, and Phil keeps traveling back again and again until he gets the day just right, allowing him to break the loop and continue with his life. I like that the cause is never really explained, or even hinted at; instead it's up to the viewer to decide. I like to think perhaps divine intervention was the cause.

Bill Murray is sometimes hit and miss with me. I'm not a big fan of "jerk" humor, and the jerk is Murray's typical role. I can't stand What about Bob? But Kate is right: Murray's mean spirited humor is toned down a lot in this movie, and as you see him grow, you believe the change... mostly. That edge still lingers, so when he's being "sincere," I can't help but wonder if it's all an act.

Groundhog Day is also extremely quotable: "Don't drive angry, DON'T DRIVE ANGRY!"

The overall appeal of Groundhog Day, I think, is a comical and simple take on a pretty deep topic--the true nature of life, and time, and how choices change us and those around us. It's told in such a universal accessible way, it's one of those movies everyone has seen. Does it deserve this status? Eh, sure. Why not? It is a fun movie, and it avoids all that technical time travel explanation stuff. Most importantly, I think it builds off something we've all experienced: the monotony of doing the same thing over and over. Groundhog Day isn't just a movie about an everyday man in a weird situation, it's a weird movie for the everyday man.

Dr. Who: "Human Nature" & "Family of Blood"

Time Travel Device: A(nother) phone booth!

Time Travel Outcome/Purpose: To hide Dr. Who as a human in history.

Coolness Factor: Hiding in time. Dr. Who's motivations for hiding are wholly unique.

Flaws: Dr. Who's laws are kind of a law unto themselves. However, if every alien-of-the-week could take out humans so easily, the earth would have been overcome long before now.

Mike says I really despise Martha Jones. The idea of a The Doctor traveling with a doctor is fun, but going with a brand new love interest, right after losing the first one, is kinda Blah. Then having her pine after the Doctor the whole time (without the slightest interest from him) grates on my nerves. Which is why it's kind of surprising that many of the best Dr. Who episodes are in the third season.

The writing throughout the season, which the exception of Martha's role, is all exceptional. But, of all the episodes in season three, I think the acting is at its finest in this two-parter. David Tennant really sells the "John Smith" persona, and truly assumes the morals and ideals of a man from the time period.

I really like the idea of hiding in time--and the idea that Dr. Who can truly "blend," fitting perfectly into the time period.

I also really enjoy the twist about WHY he is hiding. Very cool. All in all, a very well written, and powerfully performed episode. Now if only it had less Martha......

Kate says I'm not a huge fan of the "girl watching in despair from afar" motif-—possibly, one reason I've never been able to completely enjoy Dr. Who, Season 3.

However, there are a few things about the season—and this particular two-parter—that I really like.

One thing I like about it is that Dr. Who takes on the actual mind-set of his human self. This happens so rarely in time travel shows, it really should be applauded. So often, "good" people in time travel shows just happen to share all the same ideas and mentalities as us "good" modern people. So a "good" female character in a historical drama will ALWAYS be in favor of women voting.

When it fact, there were many women who-—for various reasons-—weren't, and they were still "good."

So I appreciate that Dr. Who as a human is a pre-WWI human with all the attendant attitudes of that person. He isn't a bad man, not at all, but he is good in the way a male human of that era could be good.

Consequently, he is not thrilled about being something other than what he is. In lots of sci-fi and fantasy, the Chosen One may query his or her own worthiness, but there is always this underlying belief that once he or she admits, "Yes, I am this special," he or she will be better off.

But Dr. Who's human self really, really, really doesn't believe that. At all. His Dr. Who self is glad to be back. But his human self refuses the whole "destiny" idea as so much rubbish.

My only problem with the history aspect is I'm not sure how well a young black woman would have fared in pre-WWI England. Unfortunately, I think Martha probably would have encountered far more prejudice than she does.

Other than this query, however, the historical setting/ambiance/mentality is pretty good. Dr. Who is a time travel show, of course, but this two-parter makes being able to time travel a factor, rather than simply a way of getting the doctor into a new situation.

Other good Dr. Who episodes where time traveling is a factor: Blink (we will review this episode later), Father's Day, Girl in the Fireplace, Turn Left, and The End of the World (where how much time has passed is an important issue).

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure

Time Travel Device: A phone booth!

Time Travel Outcome: Keep Bill and Ted together by helping them pass History.

Coolness Factor: Collecting historical dudes.

Flaws: Would anyone CHOOSE to base a civilization on Bill and Ted? (I'm not saying civilizations have never been based on Bills and Teds; I'm just questioning the mentality that would do it on purpose--though Mike makes a strong argument for why someone would!)

Paradox Featured: Predestination Paradox (the future exists as it is exists because of the act of going back in time; thus your actions fulfill destiny instead of changing or endangering it).

Kate says wow, this movie is stupid.

Okay, it actually isn't as stupid as it seems. But the initial opening "dudes" are a little difficult to get past.

I must have seen this movie at least five times when it first came out (and I never suspected that Keanu Reeves would become an icon in his own right!). It was not, in my youth, quite as initially annoying as I now find it.

However, if you keep watching, the movie holds up surprisingly well. The problem is basic and is set forth in a tidy fashion, using straight-forward explanations. I remember being impressed that the famous dead dudes speak the languages of their places and times--and I still am. (Except fifteenth-century Englishmen and women would, in reality, be fairly incomprehensible to Bill and Ted. I'm not sure I knew that when I was a teen.)

Bill and Ted do get less irritating as the film progresses--and not just because the viewer gets used to "So-crates" and "bodacious." They mature and problem-solve. At the end, Ted even suggests that they actually learn to play guitar before going further with the band!

And their final project is surprisingly good. Even if perceived as a mocking pastiche (which it really is even though Bill and Ted are being serious), it is a clever mocking pastiche. You can't mock what you don't know. I'd give it an A+! (I'm not sure I would pass Bill and Ted if they hadn't passed any other part of the course, but I'd certainly give them an A+ for the final project.)

And there are some excellent parts and lines. The part where Bill and Ted visit the future is oddly touching. I love the Star Wars reference in medieval England. I've always been struck by how well Alex Winter plays being upset over Ted's supposed demise. And I really love the line: "Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."

Oh, and Rufus (George Carlin) is great, of course.

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure is not a complete waste of your time!

Mike says reviewing Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (a favorite of my childhood) can be a little difficult without a certain goal in mind. It could be reviewed as a commentary on 80's metal culture, a comedy adventure film, or even studied as an early work of Keanu Reeves. In reality, the time travel/sci-fi aspect of the movie is so underplayed that it can be easily overlooked. But, then again, it should be; after all, time travel really isn't what the movie is about.

The simple fact is that the hows and whys of the the time machine are really unimportant to the story--Bill & Ted must overcome their ignorance and aimlessness if they are to achieve their destinies. While the movie contains many stereotypes of 80's comedies and is admittedly a little dated, the true story of Bill & Ted really surpasses the trappings of the 80's sci-fi/comedy film.

As teenagers, the future and the past are two big, mysterious unknowns that every adult seems to know all about. The idea that events transpired before our birth is a hard one to grasp for the teen-aged mind; so too the idea that we can truly shape our futures. While many are told that they have bright futures ahead, few believe it, and many wait for it to come instead of chasing after it.

When first introduced, Bill and Ted are in the here and now of teenage life. The future is in mind, but it is a shiny prize that neither knows how to reach. Likewise, the past is a mystery, something that offers no real value to their dilemma. Ted's father provides a wonderful vision of what awaits them--adulthood as men who are unable (and perhaps unwilling) to remember the dreams of their childhood and who failed to achieve them.

When Rufus arrives with the Booth, rather than save them and hand them their prize, he hands them not only the keys to shape their destiny but a way to meet and learn from historical figures who also actively shaped the futures of themselves and those around them.

By giving Bill and Ted the ultimate responsibility of their fate and future, Rufus empowers the aimless pair, and begins the journey that creates his world. While it it true that this creates a pre-destination paradox (the future must intervene in order for them to exist, so it exists in order to intervene), Rufus really represents the the culmination of Bill and Teds dreams: their music not only comes to be but honestly affects others for the better. Rufus appearing to inspire and empower the duo is really no different than being motivated to see your dreams come true, or being inspired by someone who has chased the same goal (a figurative representative of the future).

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure is fun, hilarious, and at times, VERY hokey. But its message is timeless: The future and the past are intertwined, and they touch here in the present. It is our job to look back, look forward, and then figure out where we want to go, and how we're going to get there. And that journey is most certainly an EXCELLENT adventure.

Star Trek: "City on the Edge of Forever"

Time Travel Device: A sentient portal

Time Travel Outcome: Change history

Coolness Factor: What might have been!

Flaws: The heroes are unaffected by the changes--how convenient! And why can't a sentient portal control its own abilities?

Mike says "City" is one of those classic episodes that every geek MUST see- not only is it a great episode of classic Star Trek, but it is a great exploration of time travel and the pitfalls that come with.

Something Kate has said in the past is that "if you give the fans enough time, they'll fill in gaps themselves," or something like that. This is absolutely true with this episode, and every possible flaw has been explained so much that it's considered almost canon.

Probably the biggest flaw is the Guardian itself- a sentient portal that serves as historian for the universe, built by a long lost civilization. VERY COOL. But... the need for a portal to be sentient kind of ceases when it has no ability to control itself! In the end, I think the talking portal was a way to save money (no guest actors or make-up to pay for: Yay!). But still, a very cool concept. So cool in fact, that several novelists have used the portal in their expanded universe stories, and all have given the Guardian his full powers when they use him.

The episode is a great example on the relationship between the Trek Triad of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, and of how Kirk and Spock bring out the best in each other. It also uses a ploy that is used so often in the old show that it's still joked about today: Kirk Falling in Love . While it is most certainly a heart-rending situation Kirk finds himself in (the woman he loves must die for his world to exist), the simple fact is that he is faced with this same crisis so often makes one wonders if James Kirk was a descendant of James Bond.

Perhaps the only other thing that bothers me is the bloodthirsty nature of the situation: this woman must DIE, not simply be removed from the time line. It seems that taking her to the future with them would have solved the problem too (something they actually do in another movie on our list!).

"City" really does deserve the attention it has received through the years. Extremely well written, rich with untapped back story and history, and perfected with great performances, it really is a classic episode.

Kate says this episode raises the classic grandfather-paradox: if you go back in time and kill your own grandfather, you will cease to exist, so you would never be able to go back in the first place and kill your grandfather.

Our travelers change history so drastically, the Enterprise ceases to exist.

Except! the travelers conveniently continue to exist.

The episode does imply that the time travel device is located in a bubble.

Once this problem is disposed of, "City" is a fairly cool time travel episode. It is also one of those episodes that prove what James T. Kirk is supposed to be: not the fighting captain who gets his shirt torn off every three seconds but the thoughtful captain who must make the ultimate tough decisions.

And his tough decision is to let history alone. In a way, this goes along with the idea of the Prime Directive (not the actual Prime Directive which captains break whenever the plot requires). Star Trek will continually preach the idea of history as a fixed purity that shouldn't be messed with.

I respect this approach, but I mostly prefer Connie Willis. In To Say Nothing of the Dog, she presents time as something that self-corrects itself. The outcomes are fixed but not how those outcomes come about. If time travelers mess stuff up, the time devices keep re-jiggling things until the travelers' minor actions work together to create the necessary outcome. (Star Trek Voyager uses this approach more.)

In any case, I do think "City" is one of the best episodes Classic Trek created. It was in Season 1 which includes most of the best scripts: the narrative arc is very nicely paid off--though I do think the beginning is unnecessarily long. To be fair, the idea of time travel is so well-established in science-fiction television now, tediously explaining it is kind of unnecessary.

And the characters/relationships of McCoy, Spock, and Kirk ARE the way they are now remembered. I especially like the exchanges between Spock and Kirk at the mission, and Edith Keeler's statement (in response to Spock's query), "You [belong] at his side, as if you've always been there and always will," and later, "'--Captain.' Even when [Spock] doesn't say it, he does."

No other Star Trek franchise captured this particularly type of camaraderie with the same panache.

New IMPROVED List: Time Travel!

CHANGES!

Mike and I have discovered that there are just way too many great time travel episodes and shows.

So—we will be doing four sets of four with week breaks between each set. This will take us into the summer, and we will have still just scratched the surface of time (I'm sure there's a mixed metaphor in there somewhere)!

Thanks to Joe for reminding us of the awesome "Blink."

1. "City on the Edge of Forever," Star Trek Classic, March 4, 2011
2. Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure, March 11, 2011
3. "Human Nature" & "Family of Blood," Dr. Who, March 18, 2011
4. Groundhog Day, March 25, 2011

WEEK BREAK

1. Back to the Future, April 8, 2011
2. "2010" and "1969," Stargate SG-1, April 15, 2011
3. Time Traveler's Wife, April 22, 2011
4."Yesterday's Enterprise," "Cause and Effect," ST: Next Gen, April 29, 2011

WEEK BREAK

1. "Monday," X-Files, May 13, 2011
2. "Twas the Night Before Mxymas," "Tempus Fugitive," Lois Clark, May 20, 2011
3. The Kid, May 27, 2011
4. "Little Green Men" & "Trials & Tribble-ations, ST: Deep Space Nine, June 3, 2011

WEEK BREAK

1. "Blink," Dr. Who, June 17, 2011
2. Lake House, June 24, 2011
3. "Genesis Part I and Part II," Quantum Leap, July 1, 2011
4. Star Trek IV: Voyage Home, July 8, 2011

Come stroll with us through (almost) every point in the universe!!