# A Sound Of Thunder (2005)



## Dave (Apr 13, 2002)

*A Sound of Thunder.*

Thunder To Shoot In Prague 

A Sound of Thunder, a time-travel movie based on Ray Bradbury's classic short story of the same name, will shoot this summer in Prague under director Peter Hyams, Variety reported. Moshe Diamant is producing the independent film, with Yoram Barzilai as line producer.

Filming begins June 24 in Prague for seven weeks, followed by an additional seven weeks in Luxembourg, the trade paper reported.

There is more on the book and film here:
http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=9117


----------



## Dave (Jun 28, 2002)

*OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:*

"A SOUND OF THUNDER is a sci-fi action adventure based on a short story by Ray Bradbury. The film is set in the future where a travel agency, Time Safari Inc. (run by Sir Ben Kingsley's character), is in the business of hunting trips for wealthy customers...back in time. All clients travel to the Jurassic Age to hunt dinosaurs with seasoned scout Dr. Travis Ryer (Ed Burns). The one rule the travelers must obey is they cannot step off the Time Safari catwalk for fear of destroying the natural habitat and, in turn, changing the course of evolution. However, in one time-altering jump a nervous hunter steps off the trail, killing a butterfly. The death of a single butterfly, compounded by millions of years of effects, leaves the hunters to return to a future that is not quite the one they came from. Now, Travis must team up with the inventor (Catherine McCormack) of the time machine technology to stop the "time waves" that are rippling up from this event, threatening to erase humanity. A SOUND OF THUNDER is expected to be rated PG-13"

That is close to the original short story. At one point one of the possible Directors was quoted as wanting to get rid of the Butterfly. As that would have pretty much spoiled the whole story, it can only be a good thing.

http://uk.imdb.com/Title?0318081

Credited cast overview: 
Edward Burns ....  Eckels  
Ben Kingsley   ....  Travis  
Catherine McCormack  ....  Inventor 

2003 release date.


----------



## Dave (Mar 27, 2003)

*Spring 2004*



> _from SciFi Wire_
> Edward Burns, star of the upcoming SF film A Sound of Thunder, told SCI FI Wire that he considered the time-travel movie an unlikely project for himself, as he'd never read the Ray Bradbury short story on which it's based. But though Burns said he wasn't much of a literary SF fan, "it was one of those genres that I like as a moviegoer. So when the opportunity came up to be in the film and to work with Ben Kingsleyâ€”and because people had told me that the short story was one of Bradbury's bestâ€”I thought, 'Huh, all right.' ... And it turned out to be a great experience."
> 
> Burns plays Dr. Travis Ryer, a guide with Time Safari Inc., a company owned by Charles Hatton (Kingsley), which uses time-travel technology to enable its clientele to hunt for dinosaurs in the past. When rules are broken and the future is altered, Ryer must team with Sonia Rand (Catherine McCormack), creator of the time-travel technology, to save the day.
> ...



This may be better than I first thought. It seems like they've kept the original short story, but added on a solution to the problem which will give it a 'Jurassic Park' ending.

I still remember seeing this filmed before for TV. It must have been an original Outer Limits or Twilight Zone, or more probably The Ray Bradbury Theatre.


----------



## sweetbabe (Mar 29, 2003)

hmmmm not sure i like the sound of it but i will probably see it when it comes out


----------



## Dave (Sep 2, 2003)

I loved the original story which I read at school, and the TV version, whatever show it was on, but I just read this....



> from_SciFi Wire_
> Hyams Expands Thunder
> 
> Peter Hyamsâ€”who is directing the SF film A Sound of Thunder, based on Ray Bradbury's short storyâ€”told SCI FI Wire that the movie will greatly expand the slim premise of Bradbury's original time-travel tale, with the legendary writer's blessing. "We took it a great deal farther, actually," Hyams said in an interview at Bradbury's 83rd birthday celebration at the Planetary Society in Pasadena, Calif.
> ...



....they seem unable not to mess around with the story in some way. I realise that it needs padding to become a film, but just the changing of a hunter to a genetic researcher alone is too much for me. If you are running a business taking people into the past you need to take $$$$$. People would pay to go hunting Dinosaurs whether it is politically correct or not. Who would pay for this weird genetic research?

How old is Ray Bradbury now anyway? Does he even care anymore if he is having his pension paid for by some trashy film? I get the picture of Peter Hyams visiting him and pestering him about his brilliant changes to the plot.


----------



## Dave (Apr 22, 2004)

Even stranger still, there is another time travel film being released this summer (2004) called 'The Butterfly Effect'. I assumed that it was the same film; that they had changed the title (even though it kind of gives away the entire plot) but it is an entirely different time travel film. In this one someone makes continued trips into the past to put the future right, only making it more messed up. I hope Ray Bradbury gets some kind of credit for the title at least, (although apparently the films introduction gives another reason for the title -- concerning chaos theory.)


----------



## Dawes (Oct 10, 2004)

*"A Sound Of Thunder"*

http://asoundofthunder.warnerbros.com/

This one's due out in 2005. It's actually been sitting on the shelf for a couple years.


----------



## Dave (Oct 10, 2004)

It has, I started a thread on it ages ago. I wonder why they haven't released it yet?

edit: I hope you don't mind me merging these threads. I think that the reason they may have shelved this for two years could have been the other film 'The Butterfly Effect'. 

I'm still not sure about the origin of the term 'The Butterfly Effect' as used in chaos theory. I'm sure it must come from 'A Sound of Thunder'. According to Bradbury, the short story has been on the reading list of almost every American school for the last 40 years.


----------



## Kanazaka (Feb 18, 2005)

I'm looking forward to seeing this, but I'll wait to read the reviews.  Is it me, or does the image of a giant mandrill-like creature resemble something out of *The Future is Wild* ?  Anyway, I really enjoyed the short story when I first read it, and I hope that the movie at least remains faithful to the spirit and overall tone of Bradbury's tale.  Plot changes don't matter so much to me in this case.


----------



## stencyl (Aug 16, 2005)

*Sound of Thunder*

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0318081/

I can remember reading the short story when I was in high school. I'm not sure how I feel about the film. When I first saw that it was making it's way to the big screen, I thought that there coulnd't be enough there for a full movie. It looks like they added a bunch that looks a bit hollywood.

On a similar note, is it just me or has Hollywood not been very kind to Bradbury. I mean, his novels are great, and they have the potential for great films but they never seem to turn out that way.

**edit**

It looks like they are remaking Fahrenheit 451, too:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0360556/


----------



## Ash (Aug 16, 2005)

*Re: Sound of Thunder*

There was a remake of this as a TV show on recently. Might of been Outer Limits or something like this. It was pretty bad, but no where near as bad as this movie looks.

The problem is, as I see it, that Hollywood looks to the classics for movies. I don't think there is anything wrong with that in principle. But... in Science Fiction as a genre a lot of the classics are either short stories or shorter novels that are a lot more idea driven than character driven. A fairly faithful and literal adaptation often won't make a particularly good movie. So they need to add all the Holywood elements to make it so.


----------



## ravenus (Aug 16, 2005)

*Re: Sound of Thunder*



> On a similar note, is it just me or has Hollywood not been very kind to Bradbury. I mean, his novels are great, and they have the potential for great films but they never seem to turn out that way.


I disagree. Bradbury's prose derives a lot of its appeal from the feel of the written word. Put the same story in plainer lines and it's not really as appealing.
Not everything needs to be adapted on to film.


----------



## stencyl (Aug 16, 2005)

*Re: Sound of Thunder*



> Bradbury's prose derives a lot of its appeal from the feel of the written word. Put the same story in plainer lines and it's not really as appealing.


 
I'd agree with that. However, don't you think that a novel like _Fahrenheit 451_ has a great plot as well? It's just that the film comes no where near a fair treatment of the material. I guess I see that a true of most of Bradbury's stuff.



> Not everything needs to be adapted on to film.


 
Actually, I'd agree with the above, too--especially if the work in question is going to be butchered.


----------



## Dave (Sep 22, 2005)

*Re: "A Sound Of Thunder"*



> _Originally posted by Dawes _
> *This one's due out in 2005. It's actually been sitting on the shelf for a couple years. *


Now we know why it's been sitting on the shelf so long. I guess it will be straight to DVD in the UK. Or just delete it entirely. This reviewer suggests they go back in time and prevent it being made at all.





> _from SCIFI Dimensions_
> 
> It's too bad Warner Bros. can't spend $80 million to go back in time to make sure A Sound of Thunder never got made.  At least then, they'd break even.  As it stands, it seems doubtful this copralite of a flick will crack $3 million at the US box office.  And for good reason.
> 
> ...


It's a pity, that original Ray Bradbury story is really very good.


----------



## steve12553 (Aug 19, 2006)

I wouldn't have been that harsh on it but coming from such an inovative, original short story I think we have the right to expect something better.


----------



## Metryq (Apr 18, 2011)

The SciFi Dimensions review told it like it is. And I could add to it. For example, we see several dino safaris go back in time to shoot_ the exact same dinosaur_. What happened to the previous groups? This is the sort of nonsense that only works in stories that imagine time "happens again" just because someone is time traveling.

I won't let the original Bradbury story off the hook, either. It posits that the tiniest little change (the pop-science notion of "the butterfly effect") will continue to snowball and change everything into the future the longer the change has to run. (By that reasoning I could change the course of a river by deflecting a few drops of water on the edge nearest me, and the deflection will continue to cascade all the way across.) So why doesn't a pathway—even a floating pathway—alter the movement patterns of animals, etc.? The short story is also the sort of "throw-away" writing with no thought behind it. Why is it that time travelers are exempt from changes made to their own origins _just because they're time travelers_? One can't logically base a story on causality (changes have consequences) and also side-step it whenever convenient.

Sorry, but this story is a stinker in all its forms. Bradbury has written some great stuff, but this wasn't one of them.


----------



## biodroid (Apr 18, 2011)

Never heard of this movie, looks interesting.


----------



## J Riff (Aug 8, 2014)

Duh. Well I searched this on the forum, but that never seems to work, so I posted a review of it it. Now I read this thread and see how out-of-touch I really am.
And how silly this flick really is. But, IS there a timeTravel epic that isn't ridiculous at some level? Maybe, in the future... no forget it. )


----------



## BAYLOR (Jun 28, 2015)

I read the  original Ray Bradbury story and rather liked it.  The film when it came out got panned by everybody. The first time I saw, it didn't impress , but , after seeing it a few more times , It's actually not a bad science fiction film.


----------

