1/4  The Sound of a Thud
An insipid science-fiction adventure with plotholes that could swallow suns: the more primitive the world gets, the more cutting-edge the technology becomes; if they kept going back in time to the same spot, wouldn't they keep bumping in... (read full)

1.5/4  A Sound of Thunder Quick Review
Based on a great story, A Sound of Thunder fails in nearly every aspect: acting, dialogue, special effects all underwhelm. Skip this movie, stick to the original.

3/5 Fun Movie If You Don't Take It Too Seriously
  by M. Newton (Dallas, TX USA)
I have not read the Ray Bradbury short story, so I can't speak as to how the movie compares to it. Taken as an individual work, this film is not bad at all. The key is to not take everything so seriously. There's a lot of action to enjoy and much of it is very creative. The film is basically clean and probably should have been rated PG.

For those of you who like to take your films seriously, I have several warnings.

1) The effects are not great, and in some scenes downright poor. The scenes in which the characters travel along Chicago streets in 2055 are very weak, but the scenes of the various "animals" are pretty decent.

2) The acting is not very good. Ben Kingsly does well as the evil rich guy, but Edward Burns seems to have been given poor lines and direction. The female lead, Catherine McCormick, is completely unlikeable throughout the film as an angry radical.

3) The time travel logic doesn't really make sense. The concept of the butterfly effect is that some minor change in the past can lead to major changes in the future. However, in this film things just don't add up.

Still, I watched this film with no expectation of it being good, and I ended up having a fun time watching it. I just ignored the 3 points I mentioned above. I enjoyed seeing the characters trying to overcome their challenges to defeat the various "animals" they encountered. There was quite a bit of action and suspense that was fun.

If you enjoy sci-fi films, but aren't too much of a purist, you'll probably have fun with this. Don't expect any special features, because all you have are the 2 trailers.

3/5 Not as bad as some reviewers opinioned
  by Chris (Centerville, Utah)
I know the Ray Bradbury story quite well. It is a creative twist on the ol' Time Travel idea.

The movie, sadly, feels "incomplete." It does have its moments. The "time waves," in particular, are rather creative. Of course, the mixed results (partial changes, etc.) from the time waves is impossible (scientifically), but this is Hollywood. Since when has there been a sci-fi film that is 100% true to science? (That's why it's science-fiction, not science-fact!)

Probably the film's weakest features are the obviously fake special effects and some bad acting moments.

CGI-effects have been vastly improved in the movie industry, way beyond what we see here in "A Sound of Thunder," so it was disappointing to see most effects done on the cheap side.

Another gripe I have is that the ending is too quick, too "easy." But then again, if the timeline is altered back to its original state, there isn't much of a "bang" ending anymore, so probably that couldn't be helped.

Nevertheless, it is not a one-star movie. If you like "B-movie" entertainment with an interesting sci-fi plot that is loosely based on a great sci-fi short story, then this does fit the bill.

You could do worse, far worse, than this movie. This isn't half-bad. It's a "popcorn" movie, where you just enjoy the half-baked plot, hammy acting, and occasional moments of suspense.

3/5 One Wrong Step...
  by K. Fontenot (The Bayou State)
I like "A Sound of Thunder." I can't pin down exactly why, but I do. Having no prior knowledge of the Ray Bradbury short story this is based on, I went into this film intrigued by the plot: Hunters from the future make a seemingly minor mistake in the past and turn evolution upside down. Sir Ben Kingsley plays Charles Hatton, an opportunistic man in the year 2055 who uses time travel as a way to promote "safari" hunts throughout time. The team that takes high paying customers on these hunts is headed up by Travis Ryer (Edward Burns), a well-meaning scientist who uses Hatton's money to further his own private research. When the group goes back on one particular hunt, a group member steps off of the designated path for a brief second and alters history forever. As time "waves" literally speed up evolution to make up for lost time, a bizarre array of plant life, animals, and temperature changes appear that turn normal life into chaos. The team members try to determine exactly who made the mistake and then how to go back in time to fix it. The only problem is that as each twenty-four hour period occurs since the original mistake was made, a new "wave" evolves everything, providing new dangers and new trials for the group.

The story feels like one of those old Saturday matinee cliffhangers from long ago. The hero of the tale, Ryer, always seems to be in danger, but never seems to be entirely done for. Something always reminds you that he's the hero and he'll make it out alive no matter what happens. Also, as people begin to die, the viewer knows that once Ryer "fixes" time, everthing will go back to normal. In short, this is a sci-fi horror that's really not that scary. It's more popcorn fluff than anything else.

Still, I can't deny how much I enjoyed this film. From the fake-looking CGI cities to the cheesy scene where Ryer and Jenny (Jemima Rooper) are obviously walking in front of a blue screen on a stationary tread of some sort, this movie relishes in its campness. While most of the actors and actresses play their roles straight, there's always a light air about the dark situation. This movie would almost make a decent cartoon series from the 80's. Also, as another reviewer pointed out, there's a definite "Land of the Lost" feel to everything.

With a decent cast and a throwback tale to the cliffhangers of classic cinema, I recommend "A Sound of Thunder" to anyone who enjoyed those old films. While I'm quite aware that this movie isn't that great, it is highly likeable in my opinion, and it deserves at least a rental from most sci-fi fans.

4/5 Equal to Bradbury's version!
  by E. Tello (Maine USA)
As an English teacher, I have taught the short story version of "A Sound of Thunder" before, but wasn't aware of the movie interpretation, which expands on the storyline. Rarely do I find movies to be as entertaining and as captivating as the print version, but this was a delightful exception. The rating is appropriate, the special effects are fun, and the plot is great. I recommend this to anyone who wants to be entertained, especially about time travel and all of its intricacies.

3/5 Enjoyable throwback to 50s B-movies best viewed with no expectations
  by Trevor Willsmer (London, England)
Ray Bradbury's classic short story A Sound of Thunder popularised the Butterfly Effect theory as time-travelling dinosaur hunters inadvertently change the future by unwittingly bringing something back from the past only to find it impossible to go back and change things before they become extinct - the kind of pitch that sounds like it was made in high concept movie heaven. So how can an idea that good turn into a fiasco that sits on the shelf for three years before escaping to a handful of theaters? Well, the fact that the poster alone boasts 13 producers credits and nine production companies and the trailer credits two writers who aren't billed among the three on the finished film, it's pretty obvious that too many chefs have been working on this primordial strew. Then there are the endless production problems - the sets being flooded in Czechoslovakia, the company going bankrupt after a series of financial scandals and lawsuits, the lack of money to complete the special effects which are a few passes away from being finished but still acceptable if you're in a forgiving B-movie mood (the biggest problem is the poor integration with backgrounds), the departure of Renny Harlin and Pierce Brosnan in favor of the even less inspiring Peter Hyams and Edward Burns... this one never stood a chance.

But the weirdest thing? It's a really enjoyable movie. Not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly a fun one. It's best to think of it as a modern 50s sci-fi B-movie, the kind of thing that Ray Harryhausen might have worked on in his black and white days had Sam Katzman ever bothered with a halfway decent script. Had this come along around the time of Jurassic Park, it probably would have been embraced, but since then a mixture of dino and cgi overkill has moved it to the bottom of the food chain. Yes, the effects are variable to put it mildly and the ending a little underpowered (and the attempt at humor there spectacularly flat) and it could have benefited from a more charismatic star than the adequate but uninspiring Edward Burns to carry it. Still, Ben Kingsley - sorry, Sir Ben Kingsley, as the cast list reads - is enjoyably hammy before his character disappears, there's a nice little Capricorn One joke in there as well and it's all certainly much more fun than Hyams' previous creature feature The Relic. And it has man-eating Baboonosaurs! How can you not love a film with man-eating Baboonosaurs?

Warners' DVD is fittingly bare bones - an acceptable 2.35:1 transfer with only two theatrical trailers as extras.