Speaking of gravity, that's the explanation given to the logic of where and when he appears in time. He is pulled by a "gravitational force" to events that are emotionally significant for him. For example, he appears over and over again at the death of his mother by car crash. *Spoiler warning for the rest of this paragraph. Skip to the next paragraph to avoid. As described, he appears like an apparition to plant the proverbial seed of love in Clare Abshire as a little girl, and even after his death he appears to his own daughter on a school outing to offer comfort and wisdom. There's a lot of potential here to probe the emotional depths. The relationship that forms between the two time traveling members of the family — without the knowledge of the time-static Clare, and her subsequent feelings of being left out; or the infidelity of Claire as she cheats on Henry with a younger version of himself because the married Henry has gotten a vasectomy, an interesting statement on the inevitable decline of a man's virility. It's all fertile soil for drama, but nothing gets fleshed out. The scenes just keep coming without any reflection. As for the metaphysical can of worms that arises from the notion of multiple Eric Banas running around, these sorts of issues are sidestepped. Which is okay because you don't really miss them.
So are these two lovers meant to? Is there pairing an inevitability of fate? And is the end of love at the hands of death equally inevitable? Read the book and find out.
Article comments
1 - Lisa K
I know this sounds so trite but the book was excellent. I remember reading it and thinking that I hoped Hollywood wouldn't attempt to churn it up and spit it back out as a movie. Alas, good ol' movie industry, they never disappoint (in matters of money anyway). Thanks for the review.
2 - Ann
Your review definitely reveals that you haven't read the book, since you have misstated the original written intent of pretty much every scene you mention here. So it makes for a strange review, sorry to say. Maybe the movie is truly bad. It certainly did not convey the story to you, or you did not catch it *at all*, one or the other. I would prefer movie reviews of books-turned-into-movies to include some adequate understanding of the original story, in order to really evaluate the movie version. I am sure I will see it anyway, the book was fantastic and deeply moving.
3 - Ted
Ann, I was reviewing the movie not the book. For book reviews check out the book section. However, if the dialogue was lifted directly from the original text, then that means Niffenegger sucks at writing it.
4 - Nemo
Don't worry, Ted: Ms. Niffenegger sucks at writing pretty much everything else in this crude, pretentious, misogynistic book, too.
5 - Beans
Yes, I agree. The writing in the book is the worst I've ever read - hugely pretentious and cringeworthy. Steer well clear of it.
6 - lynn
Read the book and loved it. Don't like the film though..didn't capture anything impt.
nice review of the book!