A Sound of Thunder



Ridiculous at every level. Save your money.
  • Review Date: November 28, 2006
  • Rated: PG-13
  • Genre: Science Fiction
  • Release Year: 2005
  • Running Time: 101 minutes

What parents need to know

Positive messages

Sheer stupidity, corporate greed, what amounts to unnamed male prostitution.


Wholly ridiculous, including battling with badly digitized creatures (dinosaurs, monkey creatures, bat creatures), shooting at prey, a suicide shoots himself in the head (not explicit, but obvious).


Before and after Edward Burns "services" a woman client offscreen, he appears in boxers.


Multiple uses of "ass."


Starbucks-looking coffee shop.

Drinking, drugs, & smoking

Drinking, smoking.

Parents Need to Know

Parents need to know that this movie is dismally inept: the special effects are laughably bad and the plot is incoherent. What's more, it features violence in various forms: Time travelers shoot and kill dinosaurs, and they're menaced by variously mutated creatures (half primate/half reptile, flying batlike monsters, large roach-like insects). These scenes -- in the dark among trees, in a dark and flooded subway tunnel -- might be frightening for younger viewers. A couple's one-night stand is indicated by his emergence from the bedroom in his boxers, while she appears only partly covered. One character shoots himself in the head (not graphically, but obviously), and another sacrifices himself to a herd of creatures in order to save his friends.

What's the story?

In A SOUND OF THUNDER, ultimate corporate villain Charles Hatton (Ben Kingsley) owns Time Safari Inc., an agency that sends rich folks back 63 million years so that they can shoot allosauruses. Based very loosely on a short story by Ray Bradbury, the movie's premise is that killing these mighty reptiles does not affect the future, but that the smooshing of a single butterfly causes havoc in 2055, the movie's present. Go-back team leader and scientist Travis Ryer (Edward Burns) shows his distaste for the scheme, but goes along for the ride anyway. When a time travel "jump" goes wrong, Chicago's winter days are suddenly balmy, trees grow through walls, pavement cracks, power goes out, and the city is devoid of people. Travis meets with Sonia Rand (Catherine McCormack), the angry scientist who invented the technology, who explains that more changes will come via "time waves," wavy-shadowy effects that wash over the city. Sonia jerry-rigs a power supply to send Travis back. Travis, Sonia, and tech officer Payne (David Oyelowo) must make their way through flooded subway tunnels and battle a gigantic, anaconda-like mutated eel. Will Travis will be able to get back in time and erase all of the devastation?

Is it any good?


Ridiculous at every level, A Sound of Thunder has a weak premise, an absurd plot, and is riddled with clichés. Characters are standard one-dimensional -- Travis is the reluctantly macho hero, Sonia is the brains, and the black guy -- tech officer Payne (David Oyelowo) -- sacrifices himself so the rest of the team can reach their destination (this with the promise that Travis will be able to get back in time and "fix it," meaning that all this devastation will be erased. If only the same might be done for A Sound of Thunder.

Families can talk about...

  • Families can talk about the poor planning by the time-traveling, so-called scientists: how can they imagine their hunting of prehistoric creatures won't affect the future (their present) in some way? How does Travis recover his sense of self-confidence and -respect by saving the world?

Movie details

Theatrical release date:September 2, 2005
DVD release date:March 28, 2006
Cast:Ben Kingsley, Catherine McCormack, Edward Burns
Director:Peter Hyams
Studio:Warner Bros.
Genre:Science Fiction
Run time:101 minutes
MPAA rating:PG-13
MPAA explanation:sci-fi violence, partial nudity and language

This review of A Sound of Thunder was written by

Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are conducted by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners.


Our star rating assesses the media's overall quality.

Find out more

Learning ratings

  • Best: Really engaging; great learning approach.
  • Very Good: Engaging; good learning approach.
  • Good: Pretty engaging; good learning approach.
  • Fair: Somewhat engaging; OK learning approach.
  • Not for Learning: Not recommended for learning.
  • Not for Kids: Not age-appropriate for kids; not recommended for learning.

Find out more

About our buy links

When you use our links to make a purchase, Common Sense Media earns a small affiliate fee from Amazon or iTunes. As a nonprofit organization, these funds help us continue providing independent, ad-free services for educators, families, and kids while the price you pay remains the same. Thank you for your support.
Read more

See more about how we rate and review.

About Our Rating System

The age displayed for each title is the minimum one for which it's developmentally appropriate. We recently updated all of our reviews to show only this age, rather than the multi-color "slider." Get more information about our ratings.

Great handpicked alternatives

  • Terrifyingly realistic dinos run amok in sci-fi landmark.
  • Terrific sci-fi action, but too violent for some.

What parents and kids say

See all user reviews

Share your thoughts with other parents and kids Write a user review

A safe community is important to us. Please observe our guidelines

Adult Written byturtle April 9, 2008

Pure fantasy

This was a great action film...based on fantasy. We totally loved the ending. Our 13yr old daughter thought it was fun.
Kid, 11 years old April 9, 2008

Pretty good

pretty good not the worst movie in the world but not the best, for sure
Teen, 15 years old Written byVivian_L December 5, 2009

It's been awhile, but...

I saw this movie about three or four years ago, and can now remember only small portions of it and a few details. I only remember watching it at all because we just read the short story of the same name by Ray Bradbury. (which was pretty good) I remember it as pretty cheesy, but it apparently had enough action to keep an eleven-year-old entertained during the entire movie. I'd definitely recommend the short story over the movie, but the movie wasn't bad, and I'll probably watch it again someday soon.


Did our review help you make an informed decision about this product?

Star Wars Guide