Recensioni degli utenti

The possibilities of time travel make for complex science fiction. As one of Sci-Fi's great writers, Ray Bradbury saw the potential for making a point and used it to a frightening end. As a lame-duck director, Peter Hyams saw the opportunity to make one more project and maybe give his career some much-needed resuscitation. The misaligned dichotomy simply results in a mess.

In the mid-21st Century, Travis Ryer (Ed Burns) leads prehistoric hunting safaris, from which the Time Safari (groan) company earns its bread and butter. Having seized the time machine built by Sonia Rand (Catherine McCormack), Charles Hatton (Ben Kingsley) built up his company to overcharge the indulgent rich who seek to have a new experience. On a trek with a pair of thrill seeking buddies, a couple of things go wrong, and although everyone survives, the mistake causes changes in time and evolution. It is at this point where the noticeable deviation from Bradbury's story occurs. In the original tale, there was no going back to fix the problem, and the time travelers were left to face the horror of a world which had been subtly altered to permit ignorance, bigotry and fascism to be the dominant qualities of mankind. In the hands of these screenwriters, the mistake simply becomes a vehicle to generate a variety of creepy-crawly monsters that stalk the people of the story as they try to literally race against time and fix the mistake.

The script drags all the clichés out and leaves the actors to cover them. There is the greedy CEO, the disillusioned scientist, the noble hero, loyal sidekick and even a corrupt official. The scientist expresses her outrage at the corporate abuse of her invention to the hero who is a better man than she expected. All the actors do everything they can to rail against the pitfalls they are presented with. Ed Burns conveys an easy hero's swagger and knows that he'll get more mileage out of underplaying than by shouting. Catherine McCormack does a highly competent job of spouting endless reams of technobabble while managing to sound like she actually knows what she is talking about, but she and Burns simply have no romantic chemistry. How Academy Award Winner Ben Kingsley ended up as part of the production is anyone's guess, but the quirks that he piles into the carnival-mouthed "Charles Hatton" are the single best bit of entertainment.

Hyams fumbles the details to the point of insulting the audience. People make all sorts of irrational decisions just to forward the plot or introduce a set piece. When someone makes a mistake, they usually recheck their work. Here the tech drops a piece of equipment and visibly damages it. He re-stacks it and ignores it. Even the hero, at one point, declares that the party must go down into the dark, abandoned, unstable and partly flooded subway tunnels because "it's the only way". Presumably, it's better to have the odds stacked against you where you might run into bloodthirsty creatures instead of staying on stable ground where you might run into bloodthirsty creatures. Although there isn't any sort of racial subtext, the movie goes so far as to sacrifice the only major African-American character as a distraction to hungry monsters so the white people can run for their lives. It doesn't seem to be making any sort of real-world point, and the editor does struggle against this obviously outdated plot moment. However, it ultimately plays out badly and without dignity.

There is also no reason (other than it looks cool) to believe that changes in time would occur in visible waves of force that knock people and cars around, but not buildings or animals. One can imagine that this might have been at least fun in the hands of a militantly perfectionist filmmaker like Jim Cameron who beats even clichéd celluloid moments until they resound with the exact shape and feel he demands. In spite of making several films throughout the 90's and recent years, Hyams peaked with "2010: The Year We Make Contact" in 1984 - while standing on Stanley Kubrick's cinematic shoulders. Even taking the troubled production history of "A Sound of Thunder" into account, Hyams butchers the possibilities here.

The audience is denied the simple delight of watching special effects during a sci-fi adventure because of the shoddy craftsmanship and a lack of money. Several virtual sets were created to make a more complete city of the future, but they often look unrendered and more like a very good artist's drawing. However this is not a substitute for a good set, and it is painfully clear when actors are standing in front of a green screen. This was originally slated for a 2003 release, which would have put it ahead of the virtual productions of "Sky Captain" and "Sin City". Had things not been derailed by the original production company's bankruptcy (see the "Thunder" trivia section on IMDb.com), then maybe this would have been noteworthy in its attempt to push special effects boundaries. Unfortunately for the filmmakers, there were many times when the audience at this screening burst into laughter at some of the sights. The one thing that Hyams' FX team does get right is the gang of computer-generated creatures that should have been the design for the villain in his 1997 movie, "The Relic". As cool as the things look, it is 8 years and 3 movies past due.

Failures in effects and leaps of logic can be forgiven, but only up to a point. This is not a misfire form an otherwise successful director. This is a poor turn by a weak hand who refuses to respect his characters or the audience who has come to be entertained. Only the actors make the weak production bearable. "A Sound of Thunder" got a second chance to pull things together, but look into your own future and avoid watching this mistake.

2 out of 10

Another awful adaptation of a great short story, this movies had some great potential thanks to the story its based on but it took a very very wrong turn somewhere along the way. The actors don't live up to my expectations there performance is unbelievable they could have just phoned it in an saved all of us a loss of time and money..i really didn't like this movie, after the acting started to bore me to death of i thought the special effects would pay the ticket but forget it they suck most of all, a wast of a very good piece of literature..Bradbury would also say this movie really really doesn't live up to expectations for his fans

If there is any other option at the multiplex take it!!!!

Until I read about the catastrophes associated with "A Sound of Thunder," I was going to call it the cheesiest movie in recent memory. The adapted Ray Bradbury science fiction story about time travel suffered the great floods of 2002 in Prague and lack of money that delayed its release for 2 years. That Renny Harlin (Cutthroat Island) was originally scheduled to direct should have tipped me off to a lowbrow enterprise.

The rear projection is blatantly so; the futuristic city is often modeled; the autos are real toys in chase sequences. The characters who hire Ed Burns to take them back in time to hunt dinosaurs are frequently overacting; the set pieces distinctly function as scene breakers or time wasters, ending up giving nothing to dramatic flow and sequential logic.

I can't find anything good to say other than the butterfly effect is a sound premise that won't be heard in this vehicle. The idea that changing even a minute part of history would affect all subsequent history is worth exploring.

A Sound of Thunder is a whimper and should be sent back in time to the '50's, where poor production values were valued in B movies. In this film there is no satire of the genre, not anything to indicate the filmmakers were even making fun of themselves

Ray Bradbury, run and hide! This tacky film version of his short story from the 1950s about time travel and the effect it might have on de-evolution is not well known from the theatrical run (did it have one?) and exists now as a DVD on the shelves released during a slow week.

What looks to be a fancy sci-fi thriller form the opening scenes quickly fools us as the computer generated graphics are re-run unaltered throughout a film that is supposed to be about different 'trips' back in time where a major company sells macho guys in 2055 the chance to hunt dinosaurs by paying exorbitant fees to travel back in time to prehistoric jungles. One slip of the foot/butterfly while on one of these ventures and the course of evolution is altered with resultant time waves rolling over the planet changing everything to man-eating plants and beasties. Of course there is a pretty damsel who knows how to reverse the process and a hunky man to risk his life to act on her orders and everything is eventually OK.

Yes, that is the story...and the most surprising fact about this poorly scripted, abysmally acted mess of a film is that it attracted some fine talent to portray the comic book flat characters. Edward Burns (all buff and hunky) is our hero du jour, Ben Kingsley is the requisite bad corporate guy sporting a ridiculous white wig, Catherine McCormack is the know-it-all woman creator, and Wilfried Hochholdinger as an evil one - all are superb actors and should have known better than to align with this flop. And the saddest thing is that for those who like this genre of sci-fi monster thrillers the creative department sold out with some of the corniest animation to hit the screen in a long time. A must miss. Grady Harp

I love time travel movies - although it's probably fairer to say I love the idea of time travel movies because I am usually frustrated at how they are so frequently poorly done. I don't expect the filmmakers to posit ground-breaking theorems that would realistically explain HOW time travel works, I just expect them to be logical and careful as they play in the arena. I was shocked I had missed this film - based as it is on the seminal Bradbury short story that explored (and coined) the butterfly effect of alterations in the past having repercussions in the future. But this film is a blandly soggy mess; seemingly the product of some serious over-development as a clever short story was forced into all the "hit film" boxes the producers could check off. Part Sci Fi, part Indiana Jones, part Jurassic Park; but what they left out of the equation were logic and intelligence. A little research turned up the production problems that resulted in the horrible digital effects (basically just pre-viz or old video game quality) so I won't trash them further (although in ANY world the actors painfully "fake-walking" in place while the green screen image scrolls behind them would be laughable) but the blatantly stupid way the whole butterfly effect is dealt with ("Time Waves will look cool!" someone must have said) and having first rate actors spew third rate dialogue does nothing but condemn the film to the heap of Time-Travel failures. I bet the director and actors wish they had a time machine so they could go back and reconsider their involvement with this.

Well, there are so many other comments out there that hit the nail on the head I should not need to add to them.But....I had read this book in school 20 years back and was hugely looking forward to seeing this flick.Its a disaster..so many awful things.The effects are risible and yes...at one point, though you don't see it...you just know they are walking on a treadmill..honest!!If you've seen the movie , you'll know exactly what I am talking about.As for the token black dudes scene talking to himself...what the heck was that all about?And ben Kingsley was not the brilliant actor in this...folks are just saying that because he has a rep.He was just as tosh as the rest...only doing this mince to buy new wallpaper for his house or whatever. having said that, I have given it a 2.If you need something to pass 90 minutes or so and a physical beating is the alternative...you could watch this.

It is a real shame as A Sound of Thunder did have good potential with an interesting concept. The problem was that it executed it badly. I will say that Edward Burns is good in the lead role, but that is all there is that is good, the rest of the film is a mess. The rest of the acting is poor with a mix of overacting and underacting, on the most part the latter. The worst case was Ben Kingsley, which was all the more disappointing as he is a very talented actor(outstanding in Gandhi), but it is really embarrassing to see him overdo it so badly and struggling to give any credibility to his lines. I can kind of understand the last point though as the dialogue is absurd, it was difficult to not laugh out loud at how toe-curlingly cheesy a lot of the lines were, so it was no wonder that the actors couldn't do anything with it. As said also the story and concept could have been really interesting in the right hands, sadly however nothing excites and the concept is introduced and told in such an outlandish manner it doesn't even make sense. There is nothing whatsoever engaging about the characters, they only annoy or bore you here, and A Sound of Thunder is choppily edited and has some of the worst green screen and special effects I have ever seen. All in all, a film with potential that went completely pear-shaped. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Sometime in the future when time travel has become possible, a company led by a businessman named Charles Hatton (Ben Kingsley) arranges dinosaur hunting trips to the prehistoric era. Even though the company has taken precautions to not alter even the smallest things in the past in order to not affect their present time in unexpected ways, something goes wrong and strange "time waves" start destroying the society. A small group of time travel experts (notably played by Edward Burns and Catherine McCormack) begins a mission to set things straight again by making even more time jumps. Subsequently they must fight many monstrous creatures on their dangerous journey.

The interesting premise is based on a short story by the famous science fiction writer Ray Bradbury but something went horribly wrong with the film version: the movie fails on so many levels that it's not even funny. Most notably, for such a wannabe-spectacle film, the SFX are terrible. The CGI creatures and urban landscapes in the background couldn't possibly look any phonier. I feel like it's almost an insult to the audience to ask them to take such a pixel-fest seriously – if they didn't have the money or skills to make the effects look convincing, they could have just used the CGI more sparingly to enhance atmospheres and such; but no, they went for the in-your-face action direction.

Besides the effects, the writing is also poor. Since the movie never bothers to make the characters feel like real people and we get to learn very little about their pasts or personalities, how could we care about what happens to them? To me, they all were nothing but disposable monster food. The bland actors can't bring any life to the empty shells of people they're supposed to play either. The only exception could be the silly wig-wearing Ben Kingsley who gets to deliver a semi-funny rant to some disgruntled customers of his company.

Even if the characters and effects are lousy, there could still be a little sense of adventure and suspense in the mix, but no luck on that front either. There's no feel of tensions rising, time running out or danger lurking around the corner. The pseudo-scientific babbling about the Heisenberg principle and zero-tolerance provide no food for thought for any fan of hard sci-fi, so I'm really struggling to think of any group of people who I could recommend this film to. Only the most undemanding action-adventure fans might like it for light entertainment; for anyone else it's just depressingly disappointing.

I'm not sure how they got big league actors to star in this film but it was like a fourth year student won a lottery and decided to finance his own film... Who approved this script? I want names !!! Don't bother seeing this... Then again what could you expect from a director of Timecop, End of Days, Sudden Death, etc... People who invested in this film, this is to all of you... you want a good story, write me, ask me, email me... Don't just produce any piece of crap you see... Why the hell do they make these comments 10 lines long??? All I have to say is I'm glad I didn't have to pay to see this movie. If you you can do the same... Here's my 7th line....

... yet not bad enough to be "good." I loved the short story. I even liked the old "Ray Bradbury Presents..." short that was done of the story back in the 80's. There is great potential for a real thinker's "time travel paradox" movie.

This doesn't do it.

As others have commented, the absolutely pathetic effects are one of the first things that grab your attention. While I tried to grit my teeth through them, they are simply too distracting and completely prevent you from suspending disbelief.

I can understand that the screenwriters would take some liberties with the concept of how a time travel paradox might unfold -- after all, who really knows? -- but the lack of basic logic compounded with an appalling butchery of high school evolution was appalling. For a movie which pretends to play the role of "science" fiction it falls decidedly short.

He "stepped on evolution" indeed...

Poor Ray Bradbury. He must be turning over in his grave (or his ethereal spirit must be zooming around in a dither, totally at a loss to explain how or why this movie was made). The plot was horrible - totally unrealistic, even for a Sci-Fi film. Added to that, the "special effects" (if you can call them that) were tawdry and cheap. The premise of "waves" of evolutionary change every 24 hours makes absolutely no sense. I assume that the noise accompanying those waves must have been the inspiration for the film's title (which indicates how lost the writers and producers were in coming up with any meaningful label to identify this totally disjointed, silly celluloid canard). Or, perhaps, the producers realized how bad the film really was and, as a joke, used the title to prompt the theater audience to create "A Sound of Thunder" by stampeding en mass to the exits. Don't waste your money renting this DVD. Save it instead to buy some popcorn when you rent something truly worth seeing. This film does not fit that category.

A Sound of Thunder (2005) directed by Peter Hyams is like if you took every bad attribute from every movie ever, and threw it into one big dysfunctional smoothie. Not only did it have the worst CGI effects I've ever seen, but it managed to have a terrible plot and a cheesy script, like pick a struggle... I'm going to guess that if they had not run out of money while filming and producing this monstrosity, it would have turned out better than the sad excuse for a Sci-Fi movie that "A Sound of Thunder" is.

In the short story version of "A Sound of Thunder" (the enjoyable version), from Ray Bradbury, the characters actually have some depth to them and they are fairly intriguing. Travis, played by Edward Burns, was putting me to sleep with his so- called "acting". There was not a single actor in this movie that entertained me, I'm almost positive that the cast aren't even actual people, they seem like robots. The actors had zero sincere emotion in anything they said, it was almost like Siri and Alexa were the main characters of the film.

Let's break down this already decomposing and rotten plot some more, shall we? The film depicts a bunch of fat rich people paying for top-of-the-line entertainment, a prehistoric safari, sound familiar? In these safaris, the clients/customers pay to go in and hunt down dangerous, predatory dinosaurs with liquid nitrogen bullets? But when they are returning from the expedition something isn't right, Travis Ryer (Edward Burns) suspects that something is wrong, so he goes to consult Dr. Sonia Rand (Catherine McCormack) for some explanation. The two figure out that something had to have been brought back from the safari, thus altering the present. The real action happens when these "time waves" start to hit, these horrendously CGI rendered "time waves" cause changes to occur in the present day, turning the present back to the past. The goal of the Geek Squad was to go back into the past and prevent the change to set things right and return the present back to normal.

This movie is just bad, it doesn't deserve the attention that I am giving it by writing this review, which turned out to be quite lengthy... What can I say? There's a lot to complain about.

this movie is boorring!!!.i could not get through the whole thing.the whole movie is miscast.no one is convincing.the story is lame.i think it was based on a story by ray bradbury.his estate sold the right to the story.i hope they got a lot of money for it,or else i'm sure they regret it.ben kingsley is a very talented actor,bit his talents are wasted on this bomb.he just looks ridiculous,along with the rest of the cast.from what i watched,they all just phoned there performances in.the special effects were a yawn and poorly executed.this movie is like the colour beige i.e bland.don't waste your time.if you want to see ben kingsley in a movie worthy of his immense talent,check out "house of sand and fog".as for this movie...peeeyeeww. 1.75*

Usually, when a sci-fi/horror film is incredibly bad, I am able to derive some kind of enjoyment from its sheer awfulness. A Sound of Thunder manages to be such a festering heap of mouldering cinematic tripe, that even the sight of a pack of lizard baboons chasing the good guys didn't make me smirk.

This absolute stink-fest is directed by Peter Hyams who is occasionally capable of producing a watchable movie; however, A Sound of Thunder, based on a Ray Bradbury short story, is quite possibly the worst film on his CV. The preposterous plot follows a team of time travelling hunters (led by the bland Edward Burns) who inadvertently cause a ripple in time which alters the course of evolution. The script is lacklustre (apart from the occasional humorous line from Ben Kingsley's character), the direction awfully dull, and the special effects pathetic.

Apparently, the original production company went bankrupt during post-production and many scenes were left unfinished—and, boy, does it show! The movie boasts some of the most laughable CGI I have had the misfortune to witness (check out the scenes in which characters unconvincingly 'walk' through the awful cityscapes).

Don't be tempted by the interesting sounding premise—this one is a stinker from start to finish.

I think is the most expensive movie (besides "Pluto Nash") to ever be released. If I remember right it cost $80 million. It had been finished for years, and kept being pushed back & back until people like Edward Burns had at least a couple movies released before this was. I think another record it broke was the most theaters while averaging some amazingly bad average. It's opening weekend was less than a $1 million opening! Anyway it is a terrible movie. Edward Burns must have gotten a decent paycheck to be a part of this travesty of a film. I liked the "Braveheart" gal in this, but she was way too good to be a part of this. If you love the short, don't watch this at all.

Well, anything would have improved it and I am happy I did not spend any money on it. But here is a simple three step plan:

1. Instead of the butterfly, use something that wouldn't have been killed by the volcano anyway.

2. The core facility should have be protected against time waves via a force field. The force field would not protect against physical beings entering the facility, so all the silly "shoot monsters in increasing panic" - effects could have been kept. But the city outside would change after each wave.

3. At the end, just before everything is restored, a fantastic culture, in every way surpassing ours, would be shown.

Despite a great premise (based upon a superb short story by Ray Bradbury), this film is simply dreadful. On the plus side, it's so bad, it's actually fun to sit back and laugh at the horrible acting (only Ben Kingsley's turn as a sleazy CEO in blond hairpiece is notable), the crappy FX and the storyline that has holes large enough for a pack of the films' "Baboonasaurs" to leap through. Don't waste any $$ on this, but if you've got some time to sacrifice, pour a healthy adult beverage, sit back w/ friends, and enjoy ripping into it. Who came up with the "time waves" - and how come they make no sense? Why is the British scientist, who's supposed to be the hot love interest to the hero, why is she such a stick in the mud? Was the wooden dialog written by some off-the-shelf crappy screenplay writing program? Do we care?

I rented this because the story itself sounded pretty cool.. people travel back to prehistoric times and an event that occurs during the trip alters the future. Basic sci-fi.

There are two problems with this film. The first is that the computer graphic effects are down right laughable. The second is that there are some serious leaps in logic going on. (Granted, I realize we are talking about time travel here) The last half hour or so is spent wrapping up all the loose ends so quickly that all logic goes out the window. I will not spoil for anyone wishing to watch. We're all entitled to our own opinions, right? But, if you asked me, I'd say don't waste your time.