A Sound Of Thunder (2005)

Dave

Non Bio
Staff member
Joined
Jan 5, 2001
Messages
23,200
Location
Way on Down South, London Town
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
 
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.
 
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 Kingsley—and because people had told me that the short story was one of Bradbury's best—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.

"The short story ends when the group comes back and realizes they've screwed with evolution," Burns said. "So now 2038 Chicago is something of a rain forest. Basically, that's the end of the movie's first act, and the next hour is spent trying to fix the wrongs that we've done."

Burns said he spent four months acting in front of a blue screen. "It was a very, very different experience for me," he said. "It was one of those things where I can't wait to see the movie in order to see the environment they've created around us." Peter Hyams (TimeCop) directed A Sound of Thunder, which is tentatively scheduled for release in spring 2004.

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.
 
hmmmm not sure i like the sound of it but i will probably see it when it comes out :D
 
I loved the original story which I read at school, and the TV version, whatever show it was on, but I just read this....

fromSciFi Wire
Hyams Expands Thunder

Peter Hyams—who is directing the SF film A Sound of Thunder, based on Ray Bradbury's short story—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.

Hyams (Timecop, 2010) said that the script, by Clement Enlatarne, takes off from Bradbury's story, about a big-game hunter who goes back in time to hunt a dinosaur and inadvertently changes the future. Hyams, who is no fan of hunting, has changed the character (played by Edward Burns) into a genetic researcher who is going back in time to take DNA readings in an effort to reconstitute wildlife that has vanished from the Earth in the future. "And when they come back from one of these [time trips], things begin to change, and they don't know why things begin to change," Hyams said. "And the changes escalate." After a number of subsequent time trips, Hyams said, "the city is actually turned into a primordial jungle. What you're basically seeing is evolution gone berserk, so the few people that are left are in fact the prey. And what is hunting them are things that no one's ever seen before."

Hyams added that he has been a big fan of Bradbury's since the director was a boy, and that he consulted with Bradbury throughout the development of the script. "He was involved in the sense that I kept on saying, 'Is this OK with you? Is this OK with you? Is this OK with you?'" Hyams said. "He's Ray Bradbury. If he didn't like something, I wouldn't do it." Hyams added, "He's been unhappy with a lot of things that have been done based on his work. And I did not feel like joining that group. I want to be the founding member of the other club. I want to make a film that he adores." A Sound of Thunder, which also stars Ben Kingsley and Catherine McCormack, is currently in production, with an eye to a 2004 release.

....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.
 
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.)
 
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.
 
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.
 
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/
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. :D
 
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.

First, a little background: "A Sound of Thunder" is a 1952 short story written by legendary fantasist Ray Bradbury. In it, a company uses a time machine to send wealthy clients back into prehistory to shoot dinosaurs. They're aware of the possible consequences of altering the timeline, so they ensure the customer's "kill" a beast that was going to die soon anyway, and they provide a levitating pathway to ensure the hunters don't so much as step on a bug. Who knows what might happen to the future if someone accidentally squashed, say, a butterfly?

You can, of course, guess what happens next. Somebody does indeed step on a bug, and the timeline is instantaneously changed, but only the hunters (who bypass time via their machine) sense that something has gone amiss. In "A Sound of Thunder", that means English spelling comes out a little odd, and a different guy gets elected president of the United States.

Bradbury's story can easily be digested in ten minutes, and it's a relatively straightforward depiction of the traditional, cautionary cause-and-effect tale. It hardly seems possible that it could be effectively adapted for the screen, but in 1989 it became a reasonably decent 30-minute episode of Ray Bradbury Theater, an anthology series along the lines of The Twilight Zone.

But now moviegoers and Bradbury fans can subject themselves to a full two-hour feature film version, not so much based on as loosely inspired by, Bradbury's celebrated vignette. It's a textbook example of Hollywood hubris and the seemingly irresistible impulse of the movie industry to reinvent, reimagine, augment and beef-up something that was perfectly fine as-is.

Starring Edward Burns and Ben Kingsley, A Sound of Thunder is a nonsensical ramble of a film that tosses in everything but the kitchen sink: anti-time-travel activists, swarms of killer ants, sentient vines, creepy baboon-dino-possum thingies, and worst of all, some sort of "time wave" that selectively evolves various creatures each time it strikes. Another bit of non-scientific balderdash: the screenwriters operate under the delusion that human beings were the last creatures to evolve upon the earth (granted, we're relative newcomers, but evolution didn't exact put itself on hold after the arrival of homo sapiens).

So much of this story relies on sheer stupidity to move the narrative forward. How about a guard rail on that levitating sidewalk? How about a little training for those nervous clients? (Heck, even the Russkies make their space tourists go through months of training before putting them inside a rocket!) And what possible difference could it make to the timeline to step on a butterfly that's about to be vaporized by the pyroclastic flow from an erupting volcano anyway?

The special effects in A Sound of Thunder look like off-the-shelf CGI that could have been produced for a TV show a decade ago. There are several sequences of obvious green-screen work, and the dinosaurs and other creatures have that shiny, plastic look of unpolished digitization.

Ed Burns sleepwalks through his role as a scientist who makes money on time-tour duty so he can save all the animals that became extinct in the 21st century (it's 2055 in this time-bomb). Ben Kingsley is a comic-book capitalist with a fluffy white pompadour and pinstripe suit.

Peter Hyams gained a reputation as the competent director of middling sci-fi films (Capricorn One, Outland, 2010, Timecop, End of Days), but A Sound of Thunder isn't just middling - it's easily the most craptastic science fiction movie of 2005. It rivals Battlefield Earth as one of the most laughably godawful efforts in recent years, a film that shouldn't be as bad as it is considering the money spent to create it.

The only reason to see this film in the theatre would be to form an MST3K conga line on the front row to heap derision upon it, to bask in the glory of its ineptitude. If you're not that mean-spirited, just stay home and re-read The Martian Chronicles.
It's a pity, that original Ray Bradbury story is really very good.
 
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.
 
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. )
 
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.(y)
 

Similar threads


Back
Top