sign in
register
Watch
Amazon Prime Video MGM Plus fuboTV
+9
Timeline
Timeline
+9
JustWatch
Your probable score
?
Timeline

Timeline

2003
Sci-fi, Fantasy
1h 56m
A group of archaeological students become trapped in the past when they go there to retrieve their professor. The group must survive in 14th century France long enough to be rescued. (imdb)

Directed by:

Richard Donner

Screenwriter:

Michael Crichton, George Nolfi, Jeff Maguire

Starring:

Frances O'Connor, Gerard Butler, Billy Connolly, Michael Sheen, Ethan Embry, Lambert Wilson, Anna Friel, Paul Walker, David Thewlis, Neal McDonough, Rossif Sutherland, Patrick Sabongui

Genres:

Sci-fi, Fantasy, Action, Adventure

Country:

USA

Languages:

English, French
imdb IMDb
Update history
Suggest edit

Timeline

2003
Sci-fi, Fantasy
1h 56m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 24.49% from 1110 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(1114)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
kojilessKojiless
Rated 04 May 2012
14
14th
A movie about a group of scientists who find a temporal plothole and pass through it so many times that the genetic makeup of their script becomes fractured beyond repair.
Rated 04 May 2012
cselstoncselston
Rated 01 May 2008
10
12th
Richard Donner and Michael Crichton got together and made their worst film. Congratulations, heavy hitters!
Rated 01 May 2008
peaceanarchyPeaceAnarchy
Rated 22 Oct 2007
53
8th
An interesting concept but the acting is terrible and the story, while occasionally fun, is all over the place.
Rated 22 Oct 2007
ytadelYtadel
Rated 14 Aug 2007
2
14th
Tried to hop on the epic train but fell off somewhere along the way. I love medieval warfare, but not like this... not like this. :-(
Rated 14 Aug 2007
mistersplicemistersplice
Rated 12 May 2007
35
10th
+ not worth your time :: unrealized potential :: This was a book...and it should have stayed that way. Everything interesting and fun about the story was left out or changed. The main character was never really defined.
Rated 12 May 2007
nobambanobamba
Rated 19 Aug 2022
30
15th
It wasn't that bad, really, just a lot of missed potential given the budget they had. The scope is sadly too small and we spend most of our time in a tiny village, or in a lab with a B-plot I don't care for. Butler would be dead in a week from an infection in his ear wound, but I guess Anna Friel is worth being in the 14th century. The other characters, including Paul Walker, were sadly forgettable. Fav scenes: LOL at the time travel faces.
Rated 19 Aug 2022
margustaMargusTa
Rated 01 Feb 2021
22
8th
If to watch all that cast list and crew, this film should have been at least mediocre fantasy movie. Instead we got lousy time travel adventure what makes one wish that time travel is possible and have a change to skip this movie completely.
Rated 01 Feb 2021
orcunyondemorcunyondem
Rated 12 Aug 2019
37
27th
Aand another time travel movie with a lot of plot holes and mistakes. I believe it's not even historically accurate. It has too many stupid dialogues and unconvincing acting despite its big casting. It's a total loss of money and production for a bad movie.
Rated 12 Aug 2019
metalhankmetalhank
Rated 06 Jan 2018
68
71st
Pretty good as long as you don't try and over think the science aspect of the film and insist on comparing it to the novel it is based on like, remember 'based' on. The action scenes are well made and exciting, it's always cool seeing trébuchet in action, and the acting is overall quite good.
Rated 06 Jan 2018
gkfilmgkfilm
Rated 12 Jun 2015
55
37th
Entertainment: 4/4. Spirit: 1/3. Sustainability: 0.5/3
Rated 12 Jun 2015
bionicninjasBionicNinjas
Rated 23 Apr 2015
20
8th
Film adaptations of Crichton novels have been mostly terrible outside of Jurassic Park. This one, however, was so bad that Crichton finally said "Fuck you, Hollywood, you can't have any more of my stories".
Rated 23 Apr 2015
ninebreakerninebreaker
Rated 17 Mar 2014
70
10th
does the book zero justice
Rated 17 Mar 2014
chmulcr0nchmul_cr0n
Rated 16 Dec 2013
68
50th
How good is Anna Friel in this?
Rated 16 Dec 2013
mohkoMohko
Rated 24 Sep 2013
10
6th
Well that was disappointing. I was hoping Timeline would be a fun and trashy film but it was just bad and boring.
Rated 24 Sep 2013
mattorama12mattorama12
Rated 19 Feb 2013
39
6th
It seems that other than Jurassic Park, Crichton's incredibly fun and imaginative stories are destined to disappoint on the silver screen.
Rated 19 Feb 2013
pursusPursus
Rated 06 Feb 2013
69
46th
I don't understand the hatred for this movie. It's not a brilliant work of art or anything, but it's still above the watchable line for me, and that's saying a lot considering I read the book before the movie was released. A bit of harmless fun, no more, no less.
Rated 06 Feb 2013
orangeamelOrangeAmel
Rated 20 Aug 2012
67
47th
An idea of time travels didn't become confusing here(like,e.g., in Back to the Future)but it's up to a viewer to decide whether that's a good or a bad thing.Personally,I think it would be better to add some spice.You won't hear technical details because of the storyline so it kind of defends itself-another thing to like or not.It surprised me several times with the flow of events.Generally, if you like history,archaeology or time travelling issues,it will be ok,and maybe even enjoyable to watch.
Rated 20 Aug 2012
ribcageribcage
Rated 17 Jan 2012
50
25th
This movie is just flat. There's nothing here to really entertain that hasn't been done before. The storyline flows rather awkwardly, and the acting is wretched.
Rated 17 Jan 2012
omgfridgeomgfridge
Rated 04 Jan 2012
1
8th
Rediciously stupid.
Rated 04 Jan 2012
karakandKarakand
Rated 14 Oct 2011
10
14th
I don't know how anyone kept a straight face acting alongside P-Dub in this.
Rated 14 Oct 2011
naurunauru
Rated 09 Aug 2011
23
17th
The acting and script are awful. But the set design and original music are impressive. The scene with the trebuchets adds significantly to the my score, and actually, if you can endure over an hour of really bad cinema to get there, almost makes this film worth watching -- if you like trebuchets that is.
Rated 09 Aug 2011
last_requestlast request
Rated 25 Jul 2011
64
42nd
Better than Blade Runner.
Rated 25 Jul 2011
slantmagSlantMag
Rated 08 Nov 2010
25
61st
"The attempt to stay true to a historically minded adventure by maintaining a strangely subdued tone in terms of action just doesn't work." - Joshua Vasquez
Rated 08 Nov 2010
hellboy76hellboy76
Rated 22 Sep 2010
38
10th
Terrible script and acting ruin what could have been a halfway interesting movie.
Rated 22 Sep 2010
jkathrensjkathrens
Rated 31 Aug 2010
30
9th
Terrible adaptation. Avoid.
Rated 31 Aug 2010
martrynmartryn
Rated 19 Mar 2010
39
8th
A massive fumbling of Michael Crichton's decent book. The entire plot is contrived and ridiculous (i.e. Crichton), but that should still make a passable movie, especially with this budget. Hated Paul Walker in this film, which isn't a surprise as I hate Paul Walker. The only character you can get behind is Gerard Butler and that shit was cheesy as hell, even though you had to sit through an hour of film knowing that scene was inevitable. Meh.
Rated 19 Mar 2010
gritGrit
Rated 05 Mar 2010
15
12th
It's a totally ridiculous, warped and plot-hole ridden mess in every respect, but maybe that's just because it strives so damn hard to be exactly like Billy fuckin' Connolly.
Rated 05 Mar 2010
okkervilOkkervil
Rated 06 Sep 2009
10
8th
Frankly a stupid and very boring movie. An awful cast and a script and plot that seems to have been cobbled together by a room full of chimpanzees make for a excriusiating couple of hours. I'm quite fond of Richard Donner and many of his films, but this is total rubbish.
Rated 06 Sep 2009
unccomp15unccomp15
Rated 29 Aug 2009
55
0th
I'm not comfortable writing reviews about comedies, but I'll attempt to review Timeline. Timeline is so bad it is funny. From broken, incoherent dialogue to obvious, gaping plot holes it is laughable. Timeline is listed as a Sci-fi/Adventure genre but Comedy fits it fine. Paul Walker's performance as an archeologist's son is somewhat believable, but his supposed Scottish ancestry is not. I have never read the book, but I bet this movie does not do it justice. Do not waste your time on this film.
Rated 29 Aug 2009
delirium9Delirium9
Rated 10 Jul 2009
70
16th
Its only redeeming quality is Gerard Butler.
Rated 10 Jul 2009
johnshaftjohnshaft
Rated 02 Jul 2009
40
6th
Very goofy. The only good stuff here is unintentional humor. The night arrows cracks me up.
Rated 02 Jul 2009
melvin_smifMelvin Smif
Rated 11 Feb 2009
15
19th
Not a good adaptation of the book, and the book wasn't that good either now that I think on it.
Rated 11 Feb 2009
tathieltathiel
Rated 03 Feb 2009
26
2nd
Not comparable to the novel
Rated 03 Feb 2009
eric_janeric-jan
Rated 29 Jan 2009
70
54th
Great story. Bad acting.
Rated 29 Jan 2009
isobelmoonIsobelmoon
Rated 28 Dec 2008
23
23rd
G. Butler is cute but not to make this film worthy.
Rated 28 Dec 2008
teeceeteecee
Rated 05 Dec 2008
20
15th
Eventyrfilm skal være pompøse, fantasifulde og for alt i verden godt lavet, for ellers bliver de nemt tomme udstyrsstykker der ikke virker. Når arkæologerne nu sendes til Middelalderen, så kunne det have været sjov at det havde lignet middelalderen - frem for en klicheverden a al film fra 40'erne. Den holder ganske enkelt ikke - dårlig dårlig
Rated 05 Dec 2008
chinsterchinster
Rated 16 Jun 2008
48
8th
No, no, no. This is not how you make movies. Terrible script and unbelievable characters. Fail
Rated 16 Jun 2008
haydnhaydn
Rated 02 May 2008
72
23rd
A poor rendition of a marvelous book that is full of good science, excitement and humour.
Rated 02 May 2008
therevTheRev
Rated 31 Mar 2008
30
13th
if you read the book, don't watch this movie
Rated 31 Mar 2008
spaceflohspacefloh
Rated 27 Feb 2008
61
68th
ger; mit einem quantencomputer geraten mehrere archäologen in das 13. jahrhundert
Rated 27 Feb 2008
mchiassonmchiasson
Rated 14 Feb 2008
60
1st
The book was incredible, but this adaptation was lacking.
Rated 14 Feb 2008
fudgiebfudgieb
Rated 21 Nov 2007
50
14th
Pretty horrible. How can they take a novel as theoretically believable as the ones that Crichton writes and make it this unbelievable and downright stupid on the bigscreen.
Rated 21 Nov 2007
strangepantsstrangepants
Rated 18 Oct 2007
65
53rd
A good diversion. Billy Connelly should act more.
Rated 18 Oct 2007
stflyst_fly
Rated 22 Aug 2007
39
39th
ok
Rated 22 Aug 2007
fyngyrzfyngyrz
Rated 20 Aug 2007
8
24th
Not too bad. Time travel is difficult to do, and this was a good try try. Bring popcorn.
Rated 20 Aug 2007
grimsoothgrimsooth
Rated 14 Aug 2007
22
6th
The book by Michael Crichton was so awsome that it makes this movie watchable. If you haven't read it though (and a few years haven't passed since your reading) you should avoid this one.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
vince_leoVince Leo
Rated 14 Aug 2007
60
36th
If you can accept the comic book style presentation, you'll most likely find it an interesting diversion, giving just enough thrills, romance, intrigue, and adventure to justify spending your money on.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
agentsnipeAgentSnipe
Rated 14 Aug 2007
21
1st
Very, very bland. In most time travel movies, there are "rules" to the science fiction methods that allow the characters to travel through time. In this movie, the rules seemed arbitrary to serve the plot.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
amosmike95amosmike95
Rated 14 Aug 2007
74
65th
Didn't like the movie deviated so much from the book. Gerard Butler was the best thing about the movie and he really held it together. Paul Walker ruined it.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
slrsoapboxSlrSoapbox
Rated 20 Jul 2007
70
41st
Blatant historical inaccuracy issues and bad acting aside, I enjoyed this film in spite of myself.
Rated 20 Jul 2007
big_lemonsBig Lemons
Rated 08 Jul 2007
45
1st
Read the M.C. book instead.
Rated 08 Jul 2007
jeanie72Jeanie72
Rated 10 Jun 2007
77
37th
Not up to par with the book. The cast was all wrong. But if you haven't read the book, the movie was "ok".
Rated 10 Jun 2007
mikeparasolmikeparasol
Rated 07 May 2007
50
13th
I don't know what to say, I love watching this film. Paul Walker's performance is like watching a DaDa film it is surreal, its like every scene he's acting in a different film. It's ridiculous, but for some reason it's ridiculously enjoyable.
Rated 07 May 2007
spidercrusoeSpiderCrusoe
Rated 03 May 2007
33
18th
It wasn't terrible, and it was somewhat enjoyable. Missing lots of depth that the book had, though.
Rated 03 May 2007
murravenerMurravener
Rated 09 Mar 2007
60
6th
A very dull thriller in which Walker displays his obvious inability to act, and it blows a semi intriguing plot in this case.
Rated 09 Mar 2007
doctor7doctor7
Rated 24 Feb 2007
31
18th
Pretty bland and boring movie. Even Billy Connolly doesn't have a interesting character. Plot holes and problems with historical facts are pretty evident. Still kind of neat to see knights in armor but that's about it. Pass on this one.
Rated 24 Feb 2007

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...