The first two films, in my opinion, looked easy, and the plot dragged into the whirlpool of interesting events. In the process of the trilogy, the authors managed to keep the viewer’s attention, preserving several intriguing facts until the last minutes.
However, the third part disappointed to the core. The writers superimposed a huge number of events on each other in order to give the audience a bright and unforgettable ending. But, unfortunately, they failed to maintain the logic of what is happening to the end. Jumping from one action to another, common sense in the actions of the actors was lost.
The last fifteen minutes of the film are very clear.
Without revealing the names, so as not to disappoint the viewer who has not yet met the film, I explain. The character from time A is sent during time C. According to the logic of the trilogy, the hero should return to A, but after doing his business, he returns during B, because the storyline seems most attractive from this point on. So, to sum up, we can conclude that heroes are able to choose the time of their residence. This is amazing.
Character A artificially receives a gift, whereas character B has this talent from birth. In order to get rid of the feature, B, using the paraphernalia A, does what he planned, arguing his actions with the expression ' the poison is the antidote' Attention, no poison B did not take, so why should the antidote work?
In summary, I can say that this work of cinematography deserves attention. But people who are fond of thought processes may have a lot of questions about the cause-and-effect relationships in the work.
Film search gave me Times several times in recommendations, but somehow there was no special craving to watch. And recently, twice accidentally came across the Emerald Book on TV, looked at excerpts, did not understand anything and decided to watch the entire trilogy from the beginning.
Again, some things have left me confused. I did, but I did not find an explanation for a number of situations and phrases. As a result, I read the books, now some details have fallen into place, but new questions have arisen. It's a closed circle. Apparently, it is worth accepting that both the book and the film adaptation are designed for teenagers who are not picky about informativeness, logic and validity of what is happening.
I perfectly understand the dissatisfaction of fans of the original work: it feels like the writers stuck random phrases out of the books and already built up the plots of films around them. Sometimes these phrases are completely incomprehensible in the context of the scene, which, surprisingly, only amused and warmed up my curiosity.
The atmosphere in all three films is very different. Perhaps the first part was the most organic, whole and balanced. In the second, according to the feeling, all the events revolve around the theme ' Love-does not like', well, the third became a collection of some action scenes. And for this, apparently, I had to completely twist the Emerald Book: if they shot everything exactly according to the text, I think the film would turn out insanely smooth and boring (it’s a pity only the ending, although I can’t decide for myself where it is more justified and plausible). Probably, from the same calculation, most of the characters of the secondary characters were initially changed, which, by the way, in the case of Charlotte, only pleases me.
Stamps in the movies really enough, but they are like a tick - told and forgotten. It is a pity that they spent screen time, which could be left for more interesting moments.
What in the book, that in the film I was pleased with a kind of humor. This is not sarcasm, not English subtle jokes, maybe something that is characteristic of Germans, but sounds / looks very elegant and funny. Although more often I laughed at some of the stupid inconsistencies of what is happening on the screen.
The acting was very enjoyable, and I probably don’t agree with those who claim that the third film was blown away. On the contrary, it seems to me that before that, Maria and Janis played school children, and then finally they got tired, and they took up business seriously, with unchildish drama. The only thing Mary in the Emerald Book stresses purely externally. It seems that in the interview of that time it looks quite good, and on the screen it takes 35 years. Given that the events of all three books take place literally in a week, these changes are especially eye-sharp.
Bottom line: the impressions of the entire trilogy are dual. I don’t know many bright, interesting, catchy moments, and analogies among fantasy, but to advise films to friends is kind of crazy. I will definitely save them for myself.
Almost six years ago, I first heard about Kerstin Gere’s Timeless trilogy. I watched the first two parts of the film trilogy. I have read all three books several times. And I can confidently call myself a devoted fan of the story of Gwendolyn and Gideon, their adventures and the mystery of the Twelve. It is a story of love and adventure in time. Pretty, huh? In the first two parts of the film - yes, but the third was a complete surprise to me, and, alas, not from the best side.
For four years, I’ve been thinking about how writers, directors, actors can finally complete the last and most important part of the trilogy, where all the secrets are revealed and the final fate of the characters is decided. I imagined it so grand and powerful that when my hopes were shattered it was very hurtful.
1. Voice.
For me, voice acting is almost more important than the film/series/cartoon, etc. It's a very important part. I'm not going to watch a big, brutal boogie speak in a squeaky voice. No, of course not. The first two films were well sounded. But, the third film, apparently, was voiced by another company, which spoiled the very first impression of the film.
2. Plot.
I understand that it is impossible to make a film entirely from the book, but it can definitely be closer to the original. It wasn't even there. Completely left and boring moments were added, and the best ones were removed. As they say, happiness is in small things. It's the same here.
3. Actors.
Play actors significantly, so on 60 percent, different from the other two parts. Here I did not see all the sincerity, skill with which these same people played a couple of years ago.
4. The end.
From the middle of the movie, I just sat with my hand over my eyes so I wouldn’t see it all. My indignation was caused by the fact that a huge piece of the middle was simply cut out of the book and sculpted something of their own. “Hmm, let’s show off and show that we were able to come up with the plot for this film ourselves, and not everyone was written off the book.” It's better that way! etc. No better. We were shown a moment without which to do, where she, briefly, escapes for a day, and then returns. What was the point of that, writers? You wanted to show me a cool car? Okay, we appreciate that. You wanted to show us how much money and connections this family has? Okay. But you could easily do without it. Although, there is one tiny plus: a certain secret about our favorite butler is revealed, which, by the way, was not in the book.
Well, it upset me the most, even, to be more precise, finished the film. God, I would forgive and close my eyes to all of the above, but the writers decided to change the most important thing in this incredible story, its highlight, its happy ending. No, everyone's alive, don't worry. The book raises the question of immortality. This is what we were led to from the beginning, what Kerstin Gere told us, but we didn’t understand it at the time. But the film changed everything to the opposite.
Result: I didn't like the movie at all. I expected a lot more. But they ruined the entire trilogy of films. For me, the logical end is the third part of the book. The final part of the trilogy of films does not exist for me.
That's what it's all about. All evening in green colors!!
I couldn’t get in: what kind of movie is this called “The Emerald Book”? Well, in the first part, it is immediately clear that Gwendolin is the Rubin. So the Ruby Book. I don’t want to spoil the second part, but in the end it becomes clear why the film is called “Sapphire Book”. And I do not hesitate to take into account: what is it for the sake of suddenly the final final chord is called exactly as it is called?
That's all. This story is over. This film is from the category of those who are “good that I saw”, “good that it is in the past already”. The film ... past ... This is often about the past.
It's a trilogy. Everything was mixed up in the first part. The second one developed. And here we are. I must say that those two films were not good either. And then it got worse.
It's either a fairy tale or a fantasy. With the lion's share of soap snot. I swear, even in Twilight, there were fewer of these veal tendernesses. Maybe I'm just tired of this whole story. No way. It felt like I had to get really excited, knowing that I would never go back to this humiliating universe. Not at all.
Count - the main disturber - here acts so primitively that he immediately wastes his charm. After that, the picture loses its already blurred outlines.
But Charlotte became an interesting character.
There's some dualism here. The story has been simplified - it's not a bad thing. The writers stopped confusing and confusing the viewer. But the way history has simplified has impoverished everything.
There were some good scenes. When the age of the future appeared.
And it's not bad. It's not very. What I don’t know is that I haven’t mentioned the word “good” anywhere. What a "good" thing. To be honest, I want to forget this movie.
I love melodrama-adventure and fantastic stories for and about teenagers. Therefore, it is not surprising that the trilogy “Timeless” did not remain without my attention.
I watched the first two films a long time ago, and I had a rather vague impression right after the first viewing. However, after a while, reviewing the films, they did not seem so hopeless. I used to be skeptical of German cinema, but a couple of other films convinced me that Germany, as well as the beloved US, deserves attention.
Timeless 3: The Emerald Book is the final part of a trilogy of German books of the same name. I don’t want to talk about the first two film adaptations, but, as I mentioned earlier, the films came out worthy in their genre. But the third part, as it is often the case, a little “uplifted” and has already lost the charm of all the magic of reincarnations and travel through time. No, the general idea and concept of the film is also present, but everything is somehow more crumpled and not as bright, in my opinion, as in the previous parts.
The actors remained in their role, and the acting is probably the only thing that 100% will not let the viewer down. I really liked the dramatic component of the plot, as a person who has not read books, it surprised me.
I assume that all people who have watched this film adaptation will be divided into two camps: the first will compare the film with a book and already start from the well-known plot, and the second, who have not read books, will just witness a new film about teenagers and a fantastic world.
In general, I belong to the second category of people, so my opinion will be separate from the book and based only on the film. It's easy to put...
The first two films were much more interesting. And here it's crumpled, compressed, pulled. It's not pretty. Maybe it’s a low budget... It doesn’t seem like a good half of the movie. I have read for a long time and don’t remember much. But what part was invented is for sure. I remember how excited I was to read the third book to see what was next. And the first films sometimes review, recently on TV hooked “Ruby book”, could not come off.
I have no complaints about the young actors, but the Count of St. Germain in this part is very expressionless. Although it would seem to be the main villain.
Ximerius was a bit small, sorry, interesting character.
It was all about love, death, and suffering. And a wonderful salvation - we are time travelers, we can fix it! I don't remember Gwendolyn owning her time travels in the book. I have to read it again. And Lucy and Paul are beautiful, especially Lucy. Like that time! I liked Charlotte in that part. To be honest, I don’t remember her acting that way in books either. And a sudden friendship with Gweni... Weird. But in the film it was appropriate.
We wanted to do something exciting, but something was missing. However, I did see through to the end. I've been waiting so long for the movie. He finally came out with us, read unflattering reviews, and postponed the viewing for another year. I watched it to finish with the trilogy.
The final part of the franchise, which was partially underestimated by distributors and some critics. The film, unfortunately, was not released as its two ancestors (although in some places in the box office was generally only the first part), so the audience coverage was very small.
It can be assumed that the share of negative perception by a wide (but not enough) audience (although the rating of the first two parts after the hire was kept at around 6.5, which is not the worst indicator) is associated with the original story, which adults may seem too fabulous, too unimaginable, and, as a result, unworthy of three serial almost six-hour screen epic. Surprisingly, the quality of the picture is no less than worthy and requires a certain level of praise. Those who could discover some “handicraft” may only have been influenced by the little fame of the film and its absence at the box office.
The quality of filming can always be compared with the Death Weapon, more “artificial” of which among this kind of film adaptations to find something very difficult. Excellent graphics, a thoughtful change of time and centuries, authentic costumes and scenery - all this indicates a professional approach that was demonstrated by little-known directors who worked on the franchise in a pair.
Actors can almost always be condemned, and here, most likely, the condemnation will not be unreasonable, because in some situations it would be possible to play better. It was interesting to watch the growth and professional development of the leading actors. Maria Erich was not 20 years old at the time of filming the first part, and together with the film and Jannis Nievener, they have grown up by about three years, and you can see how during this time they gained experience in filming, and we can only hope that the development will continue and we will be able to see these actors not only in local German films.
Summing up the assessment of the team that worked on the film, we can note a high level of responsibility, dedication and creativity, perhaps there was not enough experience, but this is not critical. There was no advertising or promotion.
The plot is built entirely on the Kerstin Gere series of books, and is closely intertwined with the author’s original story. As mentioned above, the story of a fabulous nature, in some places, may be too childish, but at the same time interesting and exciting. As the novel Kerstin Gere is very easy to read, and the film looks in one breath, do not want to be distracted, do not want to fall asleep, all the time wondering what will happen next. Undoubtedly, there are gaps in the plot, if you analyze everything in detail, then after viewing there may be many questions that, alas, it is impossible to find answers, since this does not imply the original story of the trilogy.
The film is ideal for family viewing, and can prove controversial for those who expect to see science fiction or a dystopian masterpiece.
Even before watching the last part of the film, I saw a lot of unflattering comments about this film, so for a long time I could not decide whether to watch it or not, so as not to waste my time. In the end, I still decided to give up on other people's nagging and immerse myself in a 2-hour viewing. The film turned out to be what I expected. Like the previous installments, Timeless 3 seems a bit damp and rough, but the overall impression remained positive. Here, from the first minutes, we meet with a slightly odd, but so funny James (Kostya Ullman), who easily lifts the mood of the viewer. The action of the film unfolds quite slowly, but what is happening is clear, so by the end of the film all the questions have answers.
As for the main actors, it became a little more convincing. Perhaps because they have two films and an increased cinematic experience. But that doesn’t mean their game is good. Maria Erich and Yannis Nievener have a lot to learn to really shine on the screen.
There are moments in Emerald that seem ridiculous. Evil laughter "squirrels" or sudden friendship Gwendolyn and Charlotte, but let's not forget that the film is designed for a teenage audience and shot by a German team that did not want to concede to the famous American tapes in this genre. Therefore, there is also “nedo”, there is also “too much”. I wish creative success to the filmmakers. Let them shoot first of all with a soul and without looking at American stamps.
I would like to express my special gratitude to the filmmakers for Gwendolyn’s parents. Josephine Preuss is simply magnificent. She's so light and soulful in her role. It was a pleasure to look at her. Florian Bartholomaya, although there were not very many replicas, but this was his fatherly essence (in life at first the mother climbs on embrasure, but in a critical situation the father saves the situation). It's great that we saw the contrast of time: Gwendolyn's young and old parents. It makes you think about the transience of life.
Well, the movie is pretty dynamic. It talks about love, friendship, conspiracies, punishment and death. It is certainly not superficial, but it has its drawbacks. In fact, you can listen to the ratings. On IMDb he was rated at 6.30, while the Russian-speaking audience awarded him 5.73 on Kinopoisk. Probably, our people had excessive demands for the “big final”, as the German slogan says, and their expectations alas were not met.
I will give my modest assessment and recommend the film to those who love stories about adventure, love and, of course, time travel.
7 out of 10
Kerstin Gere's book is finished. I'm waiting for the movie.
Miracle doesn't happen. Of course, the perception of film adaptation is always a big question. Books are always a priori more interesting, perhaps because each person is unique and presents the read history in their own way. But this film is a very unfortunate example of the embodiment of the book.
Pros. Beautiful, picturesque views of the island of Skye in Scotland.
Some of my favorite dialogues between Leslie and Gwendolyn are preserved.
The actors' play is good, reliable, conscientious - I note Maria Erich, Kostya Ullman, Yannis Nivenir.
“The Rise of the Eagle” in the film is played more interesting, more accurate from a realistic point of view than in the book.
Also more strongly revealed is Mr. Bernhard's character. After reading, I had some questions. And Paula and Lucy's old house - I was curious to see it.
Cons.
So where's my "green party"?! (many write about it), but for me, "Timeless" is a story of time travel, beautiful weird costumes and dresses, a tale of love, mystery and intrigue. And the sheer disregard for the important points of the third book is annoying.
Yes, we know that the storyline is different – since the first films did depart from the original source, but everything was within the main storyline. Incompleteness, incompleteness, excessive chaotic independence of the Emerald Book brought harm to the trilogy.
And Charlotte — she was in a different book — why did she have to spend a lot of screen time, and also completely changed her character? Yes, her behavior became more logical, and the image of the character of actress Laura Berlin became fuller, more interesting, more alive. But this is a completely different Charlotte Montrose.
And why even those hints of the relationship between Leslie and Raphael disappeared.
There was absolutely no point in making Gwendolyn Shepherd a "super spy." It looks inappropriate and even stupid. These moments make the third film somewhat “stupid” “surface”, “hurried”, too much the creators wanted to fit in screen time, and too much important did not consider it necessary to include. After all, the first two films were kept within the framework of a teenage love fantasy novel.
For the sake of interest, fans of the Timeless series can get acquainted once and forget about its existence. People who have not read the books may not understand certain moments or conversations between characters. Too many "nots" for one movie.
About a year ago I read books from a trilogy of precious stones with burning eyes. Everything fascinated: the love story of the main characters, intrigues, secrets, temporary zigzags and stories of extraordinary people - time travelers, what roles they played in each other's lives. This trilogy is on my list of favorite books.
The third book was the denouement of the whole action, the culmination of the trilogy, but the film on it is simply terrible. Everything is crumpled, crumpled and thrown into the urn. It seems that the creators of the film did not want to shoot it at all and dreamed only to get rid of the annoying and protracted project faster. The mystery is not sustained, there is no intrigue and the viewer is not at all interested in knowing how the story will end, since already at the 40th minute of watching the film it becomes terribly boring and I want it to end as soon as possible. How can this be done and why do it? Where is the incredible love story between Gideon and Gwendolyn? If you have not read the book, it is impossible to understand how deep these feelings were, since in the film they are not given even 15 minutes.
Sister Gwendolyn, who had previously tried to harm her, suddenly becomes kind and runs to help. There is no rational explanation for what made Charlotte change. During the viewing, the impression was created that the actors themselves are not happy to star in this film and pull out every scene in their last breath, as long as this torment ends as soon as possible.
I won’t hide the fact that I was very enthusiastic about this film. I searched the internet all summer because there was no cinema premiere. I can say that the hope of seeing a beautiful ending with all the ensuing explanations to the previous events of the trilogy and the long wait for the release of the film warmed my interest to the limit. Perhaps that’s why it’s so disappointing.
The story described in the book is beautiful and magical. The film is not interesting, without colors, without emotions and with a huge semantic hole.
3 out of 10
About “Timeless” I learned, accidentally seeing the “Ruby Book” on TV. I was interested and quickly read the books. When I finished reading The Emerald Book, I immediately rushed to watch the movie. To say that I am disappointed is too weak. The whole movie felt like I was watching something amateur based on bad fan fiction. Everything looked fake and unnatural. I'd like to change the little things, like Leslie from a freckled blonde became, uh, African-English. But from the very beginning, they revealed all the intrigue, completely changed the character of almost all the characters. I wanted to watch the green party and the heroine dresses. And what horror they did instead. What the hell did they all wear? And the rest is everything: what is the chronograph security system, what is the "superheroine" Gwen... The whole movie was just one question: “What is...?” That's why they treated the book so hard. Everything in the book was logical, everything fit together, in the end everything fell into place. I’ve seen the Sapphire Book in part, and now I’m afraid to review it.
And more. In the books so touching was shown the personal relationship of the characters, and here all ... simplified, or something. And you don't believe them.
What the filmmakers hoped for is not clear. Pity the actors, probably they had a contract for all 3 parts, and they could not refuse.
Still, I didn’t wait and watched the French version, as we had been waiting for two years and couldn’t stand it. And so I think I understood why the rental was not in Russia.
Let's start at the beginning.
I love the Timeless trilogy of precious stones. I have read and reread many times. The books are written interestingly, freshly and with a special German charm.
The first two films were made very well. Beautiful actors, beautiful scenery. Fantasy-action tricks and romance of that century - in general, everything is in place.
But what about the third movie? Why are you with all the fans of the books and the whole story? Where is the third film?
Seriously, it feels like something else. Of course, I understood and expected that the film would not be exactly based on the book, but it is beyond fantasy in the bad sense of the word.
I have nothing to say about the film itself, because as such, I did not see the adaptation of the Emerald Book, I saw something based on the same caste, but this is not the third part at all.
There's no explanation for Gwen's past jumps, no explanation for Paul and Lucy and the gorgeous Lady Tilney, almost no reunion scenes with Gideon. Nothing at all.
There is a semi-fighter with a strange plot without a love affair (and this is the main line and even the motto of this story), only Jackie Chan is missing as Sensei Gwen.
Actors Maria Erich and Yannis Nievener were good at pressing and not retreating, but it was clear how sick they were.
In the third book of the apogees of their relationship, as all dots on the “and” were to be placed, and all the secrets were revealed, but in this “screen adaptation” they had about 5 common scenes and one nervous kiss.
I don’t want to spoil it, but the scenes with Charlotte ("Laura Berlin") tripled and she was the same time as the main characters, and maybe more. And it was the brightest and most beautiful.
With the greatest disappointment and indignation, Emerald Book is recognized by me as a huge “flop bubble” and a mockery of fans!
3 out of 10