Do you like time travel in a story?

[Gold Vanguard]

I say no because most of the time it leads to plot holes and unanswered questions. When done right though it's pretty good.

[Fruity Insanity]

Yup, I agree. Too many plotholes.

Plus, I believe that humans won't ever be able to discover time travel...

If they could, shouldn't something... weird have happened by now???

[NinjaMonkey]

As a fan of the TimeSpitters series, I'm compelled to say yes.

[Jedi]

When its done right like in Back to the Future, Timespliters, Sonic CD etc I love it. When done poorly the plot holes just get gigantic

[Klokinator]

It depends on which method of time travel we're talking about.

BTTF Method (Back to the Future Method):

Characterized by physically travelling through time any amount of time, instantly, and with no negative side effects on your own body. You can interact with the denizens of that time period and it will alter future events. Because of this, many paradoxes can occur, as described in the movies (Although the fact is, that even a slight disturbance in the flow of time would have greatly affected the past. The movies make it possible to "repair the damage", but really there would not be a way to do this.)

Let's give an example. By the time Marty met his mom, she had fallen in love with him. The fact that she saw him at all and felt emotional feelings for him means that her feelings for George could have dwindled a bit. Marty didn't disappear so he was still there for her to think about. When the "event" happens where George beats up Biff, what if doubts crept into her mind? George might suddenly seem violent, even if it was to protect her. Maybe she would have doubts later on, break up with George, then Marty would never have been born anyway, even if they did kiss at the dance. Even if she didn't have doubts, who's to say that on the one specific menstrual cycle when Marty's "egg" came along, because of the altered flow of time and George's sudden confidence in himself, he wasn't home and he was at some ritzy new job? Because of this, the egg cell with Marty in it might have died, and therefore either Marty would have died or he would have looked very different.

Naturally, the movie ignores all these points to be a good show, but Marty went back in time twice and somehow managed to repair irreperable damage. The point stands that this is a very bad time control device, even if it does make for an interesting plot narrative.

TTM Method (The 'Time Machine' Method):

At first, this method seems identical to the above, but it really isn't. In this method, you can interact with the past, but you cannot change the past. The flow of time will erase your actions and memories of you, making anything you do be invalidated. In the movie, the protagonist tries to go back in time to save his girlfriend's life. Everytime he goes back though, he prevents her from dying in one way, but then she dies another way, like being shot, stabbed, crushed by a horse, etc. This method is also used in the TV series "LOST", when Charlie learns he can see the future, but changing it only delays the inevitable. While it's the future he's trying to change and not the past, the idea is the same.

I personally like this theory. Mainly because, as a narrative, it's compelling as you watch the characters fail over and over again to right the wrongs that are coming but they keep coming, as fate is inevitable. However, the biggest complication is that there's no proof Time is a "living being" that can change itself. Therefore, this method, while compelling, is also very implausible.

Mental Travelling Method:

I haven't seen this specifically used in many movies, but here's the basic idea. When you travel forward or backward in time, you cannot travel past the span of your own life. This is primarily a "super power" method of travelling, not a device enabled method. The idea is that when you travel, you retain your brain's consciousness of whatever moment you decided to travel, and when you travel back, you can interact with and alter the past, but only events that you have control over at that period in time. As an example, the Butterfly Effect used this to explain Ashton Kutcher going back in time whenever he read the journals he wrote as a child. After altering the past, he would travel forward in time to the moment he started reading the journal, and history would be altered. Time would dynamically change, and suddenly thousands of memories rushed back to his head leaving him with a sort of mini brain aneurysm and blood pouring out his nose.

A similar method was also used in the movie "Frequency", where a man was able to contact his dead father (Dennis Quaid) by speaking over an old CB radio and some bullshit involving the Aurora Borealis fucking with time, it really had no scientific basis of course but it was still a cool concept. Everytime the man contacted his father and told him of future events, time would suddenly change as his father made changes in his life. Those changes happened suddenly, and only the man and his father were aware of those changes, everyone else changed dynamically. The movie concluded with Dennis Quaid giving up smoking and staying alive long enough to bust down the door and kill a man who had been hunting his son in the future. While riveting, again, it had zero scientific basis.

Another movie that used a method very similar to Frequency's method was called "The Lake House", where a woman communicates with a man in the past by passing notes through a magical mailbox. I mean, at least they TRIED to makeit sound sciencey with Frequency, but this was pretty much just a chick-flick with pseudo-scifi that you can watch with your girlfriend. Moving on.

Time Skipping Method:

This method was used in various ways in a range of movies, the most notable of which was "The Fisherman's Wife". In this movie, a man experiences random time skips that affect his body. Whether it's being in a time period for a few minutes or a few months, he has no way to control it. He falls in love with a girl (Seriously what a pedophile) when she's around 19 years old, then goes back in time randomly and meets her as a young girl, then goes forward, it's all completely random for him, but for her he's stably there, at random ages, for most of her life. This movie, while being a nice romance movie and an interesting way of thinking of time travel, also has zero logical or scientific. Still, I would recommend watching it just because the directors use it rather interestingly, with the girl even blaming the man and saying she had no choice but to fall in love with him because he had told her as a girl that she would and therefore she believed it.

This brings up another point. If you convince someone that you're a time traveler, you can pretty much make them believe anything can't you? He tells the girl that she will fall in love with him, and therefore she does. From his perspective, he met her the first time in her late teens and they fell in love, so telling her as a young girl that they would fall in love seemed logical for him, but from her perspective of time, she met him already as a young girl, then met him again as a young woman, so it was already in her head when she met him that she was supposed to fall in love with him. It's really an interesting paradox, one that few film makers fully explore, but they way they used it in this movie specifically was very convincing,in my opinion.

Anyway, I know many other methods that were used in movies as it's a hobby of mine to find all the methods out, but this should suffice for now.

Edited February 22, 2013 by Klok

[secondworld]

Time travel is like magic, there needs to be rules about how it works in a story otherwise massive plot-holes and continuty errors will occur.

[Rehab]

Depends. Honestly, I think it depends more for me on whether it's the story is following an interesting person to interesting places with which they react well, than how much sense the time travel makes, unless the whole story is actually about exploring the feasibility of time travel, or unless the plost holes/inconsistencies get past a certain level of obnoxious. Basically, I figure my head's going to hurt by the end of the experience whenever I think about the mechanics of the time travel anyway. Although that might be a bit intellectually disinterested of me and maybe I should try to change that but ar

For example, I've been playing Radiant Historia (DS), and I basically don't understand how the hell its time travel makes sense (though I'm in the middle of the game, so there's a lot of things that have been given the "... we can't tell you. ........[yet.]" explanation), but I'm still enjoying the story that the game is telling, thanks to the characters, and what I assume to be above-average writing in general. (spoilers but not really to come)

Long story short, the main character already looked kinda like he had shellshock/might've been a little dead inside when the game started (just look at this thousand-yard stare. this is the expression he wears 24/7.), and so far throughout the game he's been trying to avert the world's destruction by using this ability to go back to certain key decisions he makes if they turned out to be the wrong one, but he has to watch everything play out until he knows for sure a decision that he made (and so is ultimately responsible for) doomed everyone, so just by the middle of the game he has already probably seen everybody he knows die like ten times at least, certainly if you're trying to "collect all the bad ends" like I've been doing. I find this image of a dude who, being the top agent of the CIA equivalent of this country which is basically constantly at war, probably already has something of a dirty conscience or a sociopathic streak, now just being forced to watch everybody die, and in response go "Fuck, okay, let's try that again." dozens of times, while concealing this power from anybody else (part of Da Rules as they apply here) and making everybody think he's just doing his job, to be a pretty interesting one. Basically in that it gets better the more put-upon (and possibly traumatized < ) I imagine him to be.

So I guess I also find the subject of how time travel might change someone to be interesting.

Also Dr. Who is fun

Edited February 23, 2013 by Rehab

[eclipse]

I see literary time travel like romance - used way too often, and very rarely done right. If time travel follows a set of world-defined laws, and isn't used to screw with the plot continually ("hey, bad guy jumped into a time warp to escape certain death, ten pages later, the hero does the same thing" sort of deal), I don't mind.

[Narga_Rocks]

I second Doctor Who. Time is a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff. All the so called plotholes make perfect sense from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint.

Also I first Chrono Trigger, assuming I read right and nobody said it.

[Jedi]

I second Doctor Who. Time is a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff. All the so called plotholes make perfect sense from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint.

Also I first Chrono Trigger, assuming I read right and nobody said it.

I agree with both of these and am ashamed with myself for not mentioning Chrono Trigger

[Sunwoo]

Nope. Time traveling as a concept is difficult to fully understand and comprehend the consequences that doing so can have on the present ... and like people have said ... inconsistencies. It really sucks when people hand-wave inconsistencies away by saying "oh but they traveled through time".

Also, I heard that time traveling has been officially disproved. In scientific literature.

[Constable Reggie]

Inspector SpaceTime absolutely masters time travel as a plot device, a narrative soliloquy, a spectacle arc, and a conflictory exposition. A shame it's crappy knockoffs like Doctor Who couldn't reach Spacetime's expert use of time travel.

On a serious note, I couldn't give two shits about plotholes or inconsistencies if time travel elevates the narrative to the nth degree. Radiant Historia's use of time travel is so fucking badassingly awesome that anyone who nitpicks about plotholes in that game should probably repeatedly hit their head with blunt objects.

edit: damnit someone already mentioned radiant historia

Another good example of excellent use of time travel is Looper. It's used in a really cool fashion, and the minor plot holes about the whole thing (there's one big one in particular) is insignificant, because the narrative and story is just so excellently well done. At one point the movie even basically tells the audience "Stop thinking deeply about this time travel crap and just enjoy the movie".

Edited February 23, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Agro]

Time Skipping Method:

This method was used in various ways in a range of movies, the most notable of which was "The Fisherman's Wife".

It was called the Time Traveller's Wife, not the Fisherman's Wife. It was also based on a novel so the directors had absolutely no part in dictating the time travel law.

Anyway I think time travel is usually done pretty well, although it tends to be screwed up in television because of the fact that the poor writers can't plan around it very easily. Where it's done best is in movies and video games where a complex narrative is able to be weaved from it. I'll take Primer as an example of a time travel story that works incredibly well, if a little confusing. But then, what time travel story isn't? Ever17 and the Zero Escape series also handle time travel incredibly well by first building up a very strong lore beforehand, but some of that writer's tricks are starting to grow a little old, I think.

Chrono Trigger when viewed objectively actually handled time travel very poorly, but it's a fun game so I can forgive that.

I will avoid talking about a certain game because by merely mentioning it in this topic it becomes a spoiler.

Also, I heard that time traveling has been officially disproved. In scientific literature.

So have all mythological creatures, magic, and telekinesis, but that doesn't stop them from being part of interesting and engaging narratives. Time travel is part of science fiction for a reason, after all. It's not about how realistic you can make it, it's how you can weave a story that isn't unnecessarily convoluted but also intriguing from it.

This method is also used in the TV series "LOST", when Charlie learns he can see the future, but changing it only delays the inevitable. While it's the future he's trying to change and not the past, the idea is the same.

That wasn't time travel; those were premonitions. Charlie never time traveled at any point; he died before he could do any of that. Time travel did, however, happen in the traditional sense when they started jumping around through time because of the Island, but it was kind of acceptable because their actions didn't change the outcome of any events. In fact, they caused the very event they were trying to avoid.

Another good example of excellent use of time travel is Looper. It's used in a really cool fashion, and the minor plot holes about the whole thing (there's one big one in particular) is insignificant, because the narrative and story is just so excellently well done. At one point the movie even basically tells the audience "Stop thinking deeply about this time travel crap and just enjoy the movie".

I found Looper to be a bit of a cop-out, to be honest. The time-travel part didn't seem to have as much significance as the telekinesis part (really it just became about stopping a kid from being a telepathic psychopath... or a psychopathic telepath) and I felt like the time travel element didn't really fit in, in the end.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Agro

[Constable Reggie]

The time travel thing was really just an instrument used to contrast a person who lived through two different lifestyles, and how it affects them as people. In Looper, it's used basically to set up the two main characters (which are just two different versions of one character). The kids and the telekinesis was just an obstacle needed for the plot. What was far more important was how two radically different versions of one person acted in situations and played off each other. And in that regard, I think the time travel bit (yes there are plot holes regarding it, but who cares) was used excellently. It wasn't over-indulgent or was the focus of the movie because it didn't need to be.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Ike-Mike]

Too bad, I'm going

BACK TO THE FUTURE.

*poof*

[sunshineYON]

Chrono Trigger

So... yes.

[Life]

On a whole, I don't back either time-travelling or its oft-forgotten cousin in the matter, parallel universes. However, there are some cases where these ideas can work.

The best example I can think of is The Subtle Knife (His Dark Materials trilogy) where the idea of parallel universes work because it's looked at like two townhouses where you can hole a hole into the middle and crawl into the other one. And these universe aren't mirror copies at all.

[Nightmare]

I guess I'll just say the usual "if it's handled well, yes" and etc.

But I really enjoyed Back to the Future, Terminator and Chrono Trigger, so I guess that's a total yes.

Chrono Trigger when viewed objectively actually handled time travel very poorly, but it's a fun game so I can forgive that.

I thought it was actually very solid. What do you think was done poorly?

Edited February 23, 2013 by Nightmare

[Klokinator]

It was called the Time Traveller's Wife, not the Fisherman's Wife. It was also based on a novel so the directors had absolutely no part in dictating the time travel law.

I realized that typo a couple hours after I posted that message, but I didn't have internet access so I couldn't fix it.

That wasn't time travel; those were premonitions. Charlie never time traveled at any point; he died before he could do any of that. Time travel did, however, happen in the traditional sense when they started jumping around through time because of the Island, but it was kind of acceptable because their actions didn't change the outcome of any events. In fact, they caused the very event they were trying to avoid.

Actually, as I was stating in the specific topic, he did time travel, mentally. There are two other examples of time travelling on LOST, including when Kate (Or was it Sawyer?) gets almost blown up by the atomic bomb and somehow flies back in time. Or wait, maybe that was that one redhead... ugh it's been 6 years since I saw the show, gimme a break. The other example was Desmond when he was experiencing the time jumps. Oh and yeah, then when the entire cast is skipping around, but LOST really incorporated a lot of time travel methods into its narrative, that's why the later seasons got so interesting.

[Mew]

Seconding what many have said: generally I don't like it, but exceptions exist in places where I think it has been done well. I'd like to add that amnesia is a similar over-used device that fails more often than it thrives, as well as that whole 3/4th of the way through the story revelation that the main character is actually psychotic in some way, though perhaps this one is not as often used

(shutter island/perfect blue/black swan lol)

This is kind of silly but I thought I'd bring up the temporal paradox in the Decision 3012 episode of the newest Futurama season. I liked it. I thought it was clever--to sum it up real quick,

basically Richard Nixon being president leads Bender to captain the Matrix-style downfall of humanity, and someone gets sent back to the past to win the election. The guy from the future wins, yet his win means that he never has a reason to go back to the past to fix the future, thus he never does it and disappears as soon as he wins, and nothing ends up changing.

Are there any other movies/games/anything with a similar ending? I'm sure there are. The idea amuses me because it actually kind of makes sense

Oh and Time Traveller's Wife did it well imo. The book, not necessarily the movie.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Mewiyev

[Phoenix]

Not a big fan of time travel in plots, myself. I've never once seen a convincing version of it.

But I can easily deal with it for the sake of a little parent and child bonding. Ilu FE13~

[Agro]

I thought it was actually very solid. What do you think was done poorly?

Just the time travel law that it used: the fact that they could jump into the past and change something and then have an altered present; the fact that you can beat Lavos in one time period but then he actually shows up in another; the list goes on. It's not that it was a bad game or anything, it's just that the time travel didn't actually make sense.

Actually, as I was stating in the specific topic, he did time travel, mentally.

No, he didn't. Desmond had premonitions of Charlie getting himself killed and so tried to stop all of it from happening, but realised that his death was imminent. At no point did Charlie ever jump through time, even mentally: that was all Desmond.

There are two other examples of time travelling on LOST, including when Kate (Or was it Sawyer?) gets almost blown up by the atomic bomb and somehow flies back in time. Or wait, maybe that was that one redhead... ugh it's been 6 years since I saw the show, gimme a break.

Given that Lost ended in 2010, and you've obviously seen the ending, it's been a great deal less than 6 years... I think you're thinking of Juliet, but she propels them forward in time with the atom bomb.

Oh and yeah, then when the entire cast is skipping around, but LOST really incorporated a lot of time travel methods into its narrative, that's why the later seasons got so interesting.

Well, at least we can agree on something.

[Junkhead]

I refuse to answer it as a simple Yes/No question.

It very much depends on how the time-traveling is executed in the plot. For example, like you said, it may introduce plot holes and "unanswered questions".

My favorite example for what you meant, and what I have in mind for my own answer is the Legacy of Kain series. Time-travel, plot holes/twists are a huge thing there, but that's the whole beauty of it.

[Narga_Rocks]

I liked the way DBZ and Back to the Future handled the aspects of changing events.

There was a scene in BttF2 where Doc was explaining what happened to time when Biff went back to the 50s to give his younger self the sports almanac about how time "split" or whatever. There was one line and back at 1955 it diverged into "original" time line and "new" time line. It's still a plot hole because old biff never should've been able to jump back to the original timeline in order to give back the car before they noticed it missing, but the attempt was nice.

In DBZ, they had a similar structure where they just created alternate timelines and the original timelines still existed. Trunks' future where androids 17 and 18 killed everyone was still there, Trunks could go back to it and kill them, but the alternate timeline that the series mostly followed existed alongside it. Sadly, I believe there is again no explanation to why Trunks can jump forward into the original timeline instead of jumping into the alternate future he created.

[Lord Raven]

Sadly, I believe there is again no explanation to why Trunks can jump forward into the original timeline instead of jumping into the alternate future he created.

Isn't "that's the way timelines work in this universe" inherently the explanation for this?