NationStates Jolt Archive

I was thinking about the various incarnations of H.G. Wells' The Time Machine story. Each is very different from the ot hers and has a unique message.

The novel appeared to be focused on the evils of varying forms of Government. Specifically, the classism symbilozed by the Eloi and the Morlocks.


The first movie, directed by George Pal slightly altered that message, focusing instead on portraying capitalism as distasteful and exploitative by means of the friends of the Time Traveler and their desire to use his invention to make money.

The most recent, directed by Simon Wells, is the most unique instead using the condition of the Morloks and Eloi as symbolizing the negative effects of technology unchained as opposed to harmony with the Earth.

Which do you like best?

I only saw the latest one and figured out the whole "Your wife has to die in order for you to invent the time machine, so every attempt to save her using it will result in PIME TARADOX" thing way before the protagonist did. Seriously, for a man smart enough to invent a fucking time machine, that guy is an idiot.

I never really thought about it as a novel of social, political, or economic injustice. I always looked at it as simply a good story. (The best for me was the book, by the way.)

The book was best, in my opinion. I also quite enjoyed Stephen Baxter's Wells-estate-sanctioned sequel to it, The Time Ships, which I read a couple of years ago.

I just treat them as stories though ;)

I was thinking about the various incarnations of H.G. Wells' The Time Machine story. Each is very different from the ot hers and has a unique message.

The novel appeared to be focused on the evils of varying forms of Government. Specifically, the classism symbilozed by the Eloi and the Morlocks.


The first movie, directed by George Pal slightly altered that message, focusing instead on portraying capitalism as distasteful and exploitative by means of the friends of the Time Traveler and their desire to use his invention to make money.

The most recent, directed by Simon Wells, is the most unique instead using the condition of the Morloks and Eloi as symbolizing the negative effects of technology unchained as opposed to harmony with the Earth.

Which do you like best?

barely remember the book and the 1960 movie.

I always thought the 2000 movie was about the foolish use of technology and intellect.

He builds a time machine to prevent his fiancee's death
The use of the holo computer that kinda negated books and reading
The use of nuclear weapons on the moon for mining (I think the reason was)
and the Morlocks veiwpoint of superiority due to their intellect.

the 2000 movie was good, but from what I remember of the 1960 movie, it was better. the book was still the best tho.

Has anybody else here ever read 'The Chronal Argonauts', the short story in which Wells originally dabbled in the time-travel concept BEFORE writing 'The Time Machine'? It's worth a look...

Actually, I've always felt more sympathetic to the Morlocks than the Eloi. The Eloi are a dumb, backward, and docile elite that do nothing but sponge off of the labor of the Morlocks and are perfectly willing to be used as cattle for their real masters' needs rather than accomplish anything on their own. If anything, the Eloi and their society deserve nothing more than contempt...they're perfectly willing to be eaten in order to maintain a lazy and unaccomplished lifestyle.

Sort of like the people who remain in Omelas rather than walk away.

Actually, I've always felt more sympathetic to the Morlocks than the Eloi. The Eloi are a dumb, backward, and docile elite that do nothing but sponge off of the labor of the Morlocks and are perfectly willing to be used as cattle for their real masters' needs rather than accomplish anything on their own. If anything, the Eloi and their society deserve nothing more than contempt...they're perfectly willing to be eaten in order to maintain a lazy and unaccomplished lifestyle.

Sort of like the people who remain in Omelas rather than walk away.

Actually, that's exactly the point of the book and to some extent, the 1960 movie. That's why the Time Traveler becomes disgusted with them and leaves.

I never really thought about it as a novel of social, political, or economic injustice.

H.G. Wells was a member of the Fabian society, y'know.

barely remember the book and the 1960 movie.

I always thought the 2000 movie was about the foolish use of technology and intellect.

He builds a time machine to prevent his fiancee's death
The use of the holo computer that kinda negated books and reading
The use of nuclear weapons on the moon for mining (I think the reason was)
and the Morlocks veiwpoint of superiority due to their intellect.

the 2000 movie was good, but from what I remember of the 1960 movie, it was better. the book was still the best tho.

I always saw it as tech going TOO far. After all, some of the tech was used in a positive way, like when the time machine changes the future that would have been the Morloks destroying everything, or the Photonic telling stories to the kids at the end, essentially preserving the literature.

Actually, the time traveler even states it out loud: "You were right, Philby... We did go too far."

But I think it was also a statement against conformtiy. The hero is one who stubornly refuses to conform to 1900s intellectual and cultural standards, and later in the future, he refuses to take Mara's kidnapping lying down and despite the objections of the other Eloi, goes off to rescue her. He is both haunted AND driven by the phrase "what if?"

Actually, that's exactly the point of the book and to some extent, the 1960 movie. That's why the Time Traveler becomes disgusted with them and leaves.

Really? I guess Wells' message was pretty clear to me (not surprising, given how many of the themes touched on in the book correspond with my own interests and concerns).

I only saw the latest one and figured out the whole "Your wife has to die in order for you to invent the time machine, so every attempt to save her using it will result in PIME TARADOX" thing way before the protagonist did. Seriously, for a man smart enough to invent a fucking time machine, that guy is an idiot.

Oh I dunno... meybe he just hadn't realized yet whose fictional idea of time travel he was dealing with. After all, the whole premise of Back to the Future surrounds the creation of a paradox that DOES change the past.

Actually what I find ironic is that although H. G. Wells was a Socialist, this story can be interpreted as a case AGAINST Socialism if one considers the Eloi as having devolved into an unambitious and lazy people as a result of everything being provided for them (In the novel/1960 movie)

Actually what I find ironic is that although H. G. Wells was a Socialist, this story can be interpreted as a case AGAINST Socialism if one considers the Eloi as having devolved into an unambitious and lazy people as a result of everything being provided for them (In the novel/1960 movie)

I'm not sure that really counts as socialism. If no-one has to do any work, then presumably they've engineered automated systems to do it for them. So you could argue that it's a case against automation.

It's been a long time since I read the book though, so I may have mixed up somewhere.

i think in the 1960 Movie he stops and there was some world war going on ,which i don't think is in 2000 Movie

I like the version where he makes it out of a phone booth, and he and his friend, take historical figures to pass history class.

That has to be the most profound version, IMHO.:D

I'm not sure that really counts as socialism. If no-one has to do any work, then presumably they've engineered automated systems to do it for them. So you could argue that it's a case against automation.

It's been a long time since I read the book though, so I may have mixed up somewhere.

It was actually the Morloks who were not only doing all the work to provide for the needs of the Eloi, but were also doing so because, in essence, the Eloi were cattle.

i think in the 1960 Movie he stops and there was some world war going on ,which i don't think is in 2000 Movie

Right. He stops at one point and meets a friend who is soon to go off and die in WWI. Later he stops again and it's a nuclear war. In the 2000 treatment, there's no war. In that one, the worldwide cataclysm results from the Moon breaking up after blasting for a lunar colony disrupted its orbit.

It was actually the Morloks who were not only doing all the work to provide for the needs of the Eloi, but were also doing so because, in essence, the Eloi were cattle.

Yes, the social classes. So the Morloks ate the Eloi? I even wrote an essay on this book, and I can hardly remember anything...

Right. He stops at one point and meets a friend who is soon to go off and die in WWI. Later he stops again and it's a nuclear war. In the 2000 treatment, there's no war. In that one, the worldwide cataclysm results from the Moon breaking up after blasting for a lunar colony disrupted its orbit.

Which is absolutely ridiculous, of course. The sort of blasting required would far exceed our entire nuclear weapon stockpile.

Yes, the social classes. So the Morloks ate the Eloi? I even wrote an essay on this book, and I can hardly remember anything...

Yeah I think that'e one of the few common items in all three incarnations, that the Morloks farmed the Eloi for food.

Dig in!

Which is absolutely ridiculous, of course. The sort of blasting required would far exceed our entire nuclear weapon stockpile.

BUT remember, that takes place in (I believe) 2037. Who knows what new wicked cool things we might develop for blowing stuff up will be before then. :cool:

BUT remember, that takes place in (I believe) 2037. Who knows what new wicked cool things we might develop for blowing stuff up will be before then. :cool:

We won't invent something to blow up the moon within thirty years. :rolleyes:

BUT remember, that takes place in (I believe) 2037. Who knows what new wicked cool things we might develop for blowing stuff up will be before then. :cool:

The moon is a 73,477,000,000,000,000,000 tonne ball of iron.

The moon is a 73,477,000,000,000,000,000 tonne ball of iron.

Any other minerals? I could have sworn there was some nickel in there somewhere...

Any other minerals? I could have sworn there was some nickel in there somewhere...

Perhaps you would also like me to overcome the uncertainty principle and describe the precise position and velocity of every particle making up our natural satellite? Or perhaps my impreciseness can be forgiven?

Perhaps you would also like me to overcome the uncertainty principle and describe the precise position and velocity of every particle making up our natural satellite? Or perhaps my impreciseness can be forgiven?

What? No! I was just wondering if there was some nickel in there or if I was remembering wrong, that's all. I wasn't asking for precise measurements.

What? No! I was just wondering if there was some nickel in there or if I was remembering wrong, that's all. I wasn't asking for precise measurements.

Oh yes, I'd be quite surprised if a planet had only one element in its core. Nickel, sulphur are also believed to be there, but iron is the primary constituent.

Oh yes, I'd be quite surprised if a planet had only one element in its core. Nickel, sulphur are also believed to be there, but iron is the primary constituent.

Oh, okay, thank you.

Right. He stops at one point and meets a friend who is soon to go off and die in WWI. Later he stops again and it's a nuclear war. In the 2000 treatment, there's no war. In that one, the worldwide cataclysm results from the Moon breaking up after blasting for a lunar colony disrupted its orbit.

ar yes

I always saw it as tech going TOO far. After all, some of the tech was used in a positive way, like when the time machine changes the future that would have been the Morloks destroying everything, or the Photonic telling stories to the kids at the end, essentially preserving the literature. hmmm... yes, Foolish use does not mean every use was foolish. ;)

Actually, the time traveler even states it out loud: "You were right, Philby... We did go too far."

But I think it was also a statement against conformtiy. The hero is one who stubornly refuses to conform to 1900s intellectual and cultural standards, and later in the future, he refuses to take Mara's kidnapping lying down and despite the objections of the other Eloi, goes off to rescue her. He is both haunted AND driven by the phrase "what if?"well, in most stories, the hero is a non-conformist. :p

I always thought his driven phrase was "Why?" as in Why couldn't he save his fiancee?

The book was the best, of course. Unfortunately, it caused me to temporarily become an insane Bushevik when I was at a young age. Don't ask me what caused it exactly, I just know this book was the cause. And that it's completely ridiculous.

Right. He stops at one point and meets a friend who is soon to go off and die in WWI. Later he stops again and it's a nuclear war. In the 2000 treatment, there's no war. In that one, the worldwide cataclysm results from the Moon breaking up after blasting for a lunar colony disrupted its orbit.
I thought there was a scene where he stops and there was some war going on... *shrugs*

oh and don't forget the most horrible event...

the Time Machine: The Musical! :p

BUT remember, that takes place in (I believe) 2037. Who knows what new wicked cool things we might develop for blowing stuff up will be before then. :cool:

They weren't blasting. They were mining and digging out the underside of the moon's surface to make room for colonization.

They weren't blasting. They were mining and digging out the underside of the moon's surface to make room for colonization.

Wow...I watched the movie and even I didn't remember that. So what happened? It "collapsed" on them? It set off some sort of explosion "inside"? Or something else equally stupid?

Wow...I watched the movie and even I didn't remember that. So what happened? It "collapsed" on them? It set off some sort of explosion "inside"? Or something else equally stupid?

Basically on the last stop before the catastrophe, there was an advertisement hologram showing sub-surface colonies on the moon and during the catastrophe itself, the MPs gave a brief rundown in that they overdid the expansions, destabilizing the moons structural integrity and it broke apart.

Sort of like a brick under constant stress but having acid eat away at its internals.

We won't invent something to blow up the moon within thirty years. :rolleyes:
Somehow, I don't think that many people of the year 1912 saw the Manhattan project coming, either.

I was thinking about the various incarnations of H.G. Wells' The Time Machine story. Each is very different from the ot hers and has a unique message.

The novel appeared to be focused on the evils of varying forms of Government. Specifically, the classism symbilozed by the Eloi and the Morlocks.


The first movie, directed by George Pal slightly altered that message, focusing instead on portraying capitalism as distasteful and exploitative by means of the friends of the Time Traveler and their desire to use his invention to make money.

The most recent, directed by Simon Wells, is the most unique instead using the condition of the Morloks and Eloi as symbolizing the negative effects of technology unchained as opposed to harmony with the Earth.

Which do you like best?

Also, Stephen Baxter wrote what is effectively a sequel to H.G. Wells novel called "The Time Ships"... I prefer wells novel over the movies, and Baxter did a pretty good continuation of Well's story.

Basically on the last stop before the catastrophe, there was an advertisement hologram showing sub-surface colonies on the moon and during the catastrophe itself, the MPs gave a brief rundown in that they overdid the expansions, destabilizing the moons structural integrity and it broke apart.

Sort of like a brick under constant stress but having acid eat away at its internals.
Wow...that's utterly ridiculous. It's not a freaking building, after all...sure, you would probably be able to cause some cave-ins, but it's not like you could possibly cause the entire moon to collapse. Ridiculous.

Somehow, I don't think that many people of the year 1912 saw the Manhattan project coming, either.
That's a little different, though. We're talking a huge difference in scale, mate. True, there was a HUGE difference between common explosives at the time and nuclear weaponry, but that's relative. On a planetary scale it's like the difference between a gnat bite and a mosquito bite.

Also, Stephen Baxter wrote what is effectively a sequel to H.G. Wells novel called "The Time Ships"... I prefer wells novel over the movies, and Baxter did a pretty good continuation of Well's story.

Yes, that spiritual sequel was excellent. Well worth the read by anyone who enjoyed the original book.

Wow...that's utterly ridiculous. It's not a freaking building, after all...sure, you would probably be able to cause some cave-ins, but it's not like you could possibly cause the entire moon to collapse. Ridiculous.

I'm not an astronomer, or a structural analyst, but if you remove sufficient mass near the core, wouldn't tidal forces and mass differences do the trick? Assuming you didn't reinforce anything.

I'm not an astronomer, or a structural analyst, but if you remove sufficient mass near the core, wouldn't tidal forces and mass differences do the trick? Assuming you didn't reinforce anything.

Sure.(I think.) Problem is, the sufficient mass would be far more than would ever need to be removed and would probably be well beyond our capabilities for the next century, let alone thirty years.

Besides, what makes it even stupider is that no one bothered to check if that sort of thing was going to happen. Apparently there was absolutely no oversight on such a thing. Yeah, like that's realistic. :rolleyes:

Besides, what makes it even stupider is that no one bothered to check if that sort of thing was going to happen. Apparently there was absolutely no oversight on such a thing. Yeah, like that's realistic. :rolleyes:

Maybe the engineers of that project were the descendants of the guys who built the Tacoma Narrows bridge?

I liked the book. The George Pal version of the movie was also good. But frankly, I found the latest version an unwatchable travesty without value or point.

Besides, what makes it even stupider is that no one bothered to check if that sort of thing was going to happen. Apparently there was absolutely no oversight on such a thing. Yeah, like that's realistic. :rolleyes:

It sure is. Here, government contracts get subcontracted out about 20 times until the eventual builders get something like 5% of the original budget. Of course the government doesn't care because all their buddies are getting rich and the one who gets the end product? Eh, it'll be fine.

We had some cases of apartment blocks being put up on grounds known for landslides. They did a slipshod reinforcement job and a year or two later, it all came down with only a handful of survivors. The end state contractor got the blame of course, but not the ones who had the original bid.

I don't see why the same greed and corruption shouldn't occur for moon development.

It sure is. Here, government contracts get subcontracted out about 20 times until the eventual builders get something like 5% of the original budget. Of course the government doesn't care because all their buddies are getting rich and the one who gets the end product? Eh, it'll be fine.

We had some cases of apartment blocks being put up on grounds known for landslides. They did a slipshod reinforcement job and a year or two later, it all came down with only a handful of survivors. The end state contractor got the blame of course, but not the ones who had the original bid.

I don't see why the same greed and corruption shouldn't occur for moon development.
Okay, I'll grant you that.

But it would still be a ridiculous amount. I have absolutely no idea what the math would be, but I'll bet you it's somewhere around fifty-percent of the Moon's entire interior tonnage. Do you know how much that is? Do you know how pointless it would be to excavate all of that? There wouldn't be any profit in it, and profit is the main reason companies will bypass regulations.

Accidents would probably happen, yes, but the Moon would NOT collapse in on itself. It's bad science pure and simple, and it's just not believable. I can set aside my disbelief of the Time Machine itself, but a story has to be really good to make me accept something as ridiculous as the Moon collapsing in on itself, and the story was not anywhere near good enough.

But it would still be a ridiculous amount. I have absolutely no idea what the math would be, but I'll bet you it's somewhere around fifty-percent of the Moon's entire interior tonnage. Do you know how much that is? Do you know how pointless it would be to excavate all of that? There wouldn't be any profit in it, and profit is the main reason companies will bypass regulations.


Depends on what the primary composition of the moon is and what can be done with it after processing. If it's mostly iron, I imagine the excavation could feed steel industries for centuries. And since there's massive development going along in the plot, said steel would be always in demand unless they start building the colonies out of something non-ferrous based.


Accidents would probably happen, yes, but the Moon would NOT collapse in on itself. It's bad science pure and simple, and it's just not believable.

Not quite collapse I think. It broke apart.

But in either case, it's not really plausible in a 30 year time frame. Maybe a century or more, but not 30 years.

Depends on what the primary composition of the moon is and what can be done with it after processing. If it's mostly iron, I imagine the excavation could feed steel industries for centuries. And since there's massive development going along in the plot, said steel would be always in demand unless they start building the colonies out of something non-ferrous based.
True. However, there is an essentially unlimited source of iron in our entire solar system. Relying upon just the Moon would be silly, especially mining it to that point. It would be an unnecessary risk for those excavating for colonies because they would lose huge amounts of money if colonies were destroyed.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean anything by itself given how companies eagerly ignore global warming...



Not quite collapse I think. It broke apart.

Even less plausible.

But in either case, it's not really plausible in a 30 year time frame. Maybe a century or more, but not 30 years.
I'd give it a century and a half even with our ridiculously increasing pace of technology personally.

Vetalia? What do you think?

It would be an unnecessary risk for those excavating for colonies because they would lose huge amounts of money if colonies were destroyed.

Pfft, like the Bhopal incident actually thought Union Carbide anything. Besides, if they can shift the blame, said industries would still be in high demand because of the cleanup contracts that would be farmed out.


Even less plausible.


How so? Keep in mind that we have to take into account gravitational differences and that overall, the moon would be losing mass.


I'd give it a century and a half even with our ridiculously increasing pace of technology personally.


Depends really. Especially on the possibility of a technological singularity. Like a fully working free ranging AI for one.