Somewhere is Time is a 1980 film directed by Jeannot Szwarc starring Christopher Reeve as playwright Richard Collier and Jane Seymour as Victorian actress Elise McKenna. The film is based on a 1975 novel by Richard Matheson entitled Bid Time Return. The film deviates from the book in some small ways by setting the time travel at different years and at the Hotel del Coronado rather than at the Grand Hotel. Two interesting changes, however, are that in the novel Collier is dying from a brain tumor and raises the question of the time travel being entirely a figment of his imagination, and the old woman giving Collier the watch does not make an appearance in the novel.

Check out the trailer:

In the beginning, an old woman hands Collier a watch. This pocket watch is a significant object in this film because of the ontological paradox it introduces. Remember Danny and his infamous timebelt? At the end of the readings, we never know how the timebelt was created or how it existed. He received it from his Uncle who turned out to be his older self. It is simply an artifact Danny has always had. This is an example of an ontological paradox.

Ontology is the study of "being" and "existence", consequently as a branch of metaphysics has implications on conceptions of reality. In no way do I intend to fully digress into a lengthy discussion of metaphysics, however, it is important to note that with time travel the origins of objects through time can be affected or expunged. For example, in this film the old woman hands Collier the watch, now he has it. By the end of the film we realize that Collier gave this same woman the watch at a different time. SO where did the watch come from originally? Who made the first watch? That is the paradox. It is also known as the bootstrap paradox since it is referenced in a well-known science fiction story by Robert A. Heinlein called By His Bootstraps (which I recommend if you have an interest in exploring more time travel fiction.) 

Nevertheless, the timeline in Somewhere in Time is unaffected by such paradoxes.

Pay attention to William Fawcett Robinson, played by Christopher Plummer, who acts as Elise's manager. He appears to have this innate ability to recognize the threat Collier plays to Elise's career as well as seeing Collier does not belong. Why does Robinson hate Collier without even knowing him? One alternate theory:

"The justification for this theory is two-fold. In one scene, Elise claims that he knew many things about how her career would develop and predicted that a man would one day appear who would change her life forever. The second comment is by Robinson himself when he says to Richard "Collier, I know who you are. Ever since you came here, I've known from the start. You came to destroy her." In one of the early scenes in the movie, Elise's housekeeper Laura Roberts tells Richard that in 1912 something happened to Elise that caused her to fade from public view, thus effectively "destroying" her career" (author unknown). 

The above cannot be proved one way or the other but certainly the hints are there for interpretation. And this is part of the fun when dealing with time travel and all its paradoxes - the speculation!

SPOILER!

Don't read the following until after you have watched the film!

The very end sequence we see Collier and McKenna reunited beyond the realm of the living, from life into death. This is a popular way of offering a hopeful end to tragic love, the reunion of love after death. Any Titanic fans? The last scene waiting for Rose by the clock on the staircase is another example. This device pervades literature, drama, song and cinema and is at the heart of many forms of tragedy. But why may you ask? The lovers are destroyed but to perhaps believe in love, in the concept of such perfect love, we must believe that its existence can transcend life. To witness reunited lovers in the great beyond is to reawaken hope and triumph in the wake of seeming defeat and tragedy. Entire courses are held on this subject alone.

Continue on to your blog prompt >>>