Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

"A Sound of Thunder" Movie This Summer

Posted by Hemos on from the producing-the-stories dept.

Syberghost writes "Ray Bradbury's classic short story "A Sound of Thunder" is being released thus summer as a movie. It's directed by Peter Hyams, who's done the time travel thing before, but it appears that some of the major characters from the Bradbury story aren't in the credits."

60 of 273 comments (clear)

  1. A whole movie? by mikeophile · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's what the Man himself has to say.

    1. Re:A whole movie? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Check the date. It's August 29, 2002. I wonder what he thinks about it now -- after seeing all the changes and the last script version.

    2. Re:A whole movie? by ozzy_cow · · Score: 5, Informative

      Currently my film "A Sound of Thunder" is being filmed in Czechoslovakia

      Out of all the people that still think that Czechoslovakia is still one country, I would not expect Ray Bradbury be one of them... I mean cmon! They separated in 1993! Czech Republic and Slovakia godamn it! Two very different countries with different languages, goverments and culture.

    3. Re:A whole movie? by SEE · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, yes, sure, Czechosolvakia ceased to exist . . . in this timeline. Who knew stepping on a snail would have such an effect?

    4. Re:A whole movie? by castlec · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wouldn't exactly say they have two seperate languages. Officially, yes they have two seperate languages, but in actuality, most of Eastern Europe is the same language with different dialects. It's no different than someone from the midwestern US compared to a deep southerner, mild difference in usage, mild difference in vocabulary, and mild difference in pronunciation.

      --
      When I tell an object to delete this, am I killing it or telling it to kill me?
    5. Re:A whole movie? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Funny


      Heh! I used to go out with a girl from the Czech Republic. Believe me, the first time I accidentally called it Czechoslovakia was the last time I accidentally called it Czechoslovakia.

      Not something Americans need to worry about. Everyone can tell where they're from. *Ahem*

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    6. Re:A whole movie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wouldn't exactly say they have two seperate languages. Officially, yes they have two seperate languages, but in actuality, most of Eastern Europe is the same language with different dialects.
      And where are you from, you smartass? Yes, Czech and Slovak are quite similar but Czech and Polish, (I speak both, but that's different matter), Rusian, Serbian are quite different, the differences are like say between Spanish and Italian. Would you say that both are just dialects of latin? There are many similarities but dialects...come on.

    7. Re:A whole movie? by Eponymous+Mallard · · Score: 2, Funny

      Shouldn't that be the GNU/Czech Republic?

      -The Eponymous Mallard-

  2. I hope... by HughDario · · Score: 4, Funny

    they don't accidently harm any animals in the making, wouldn't that be a shame?

    1. Re:I hope... by Wavicle · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sure nobody would really notice if they killed a butterfly...

      --
      Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
      Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
  3. Cool! by isNaN · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yes!

    This is awesome! I have been waiting for a sci-fi remake of Sound of Music! Finaly!

    --
    No, i don't like sigs...
  4. Is this Really the Same Story? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I just read the synopsis in the link.

    To me, the original story was a great short. The ending was perfect and there was a great timing to everything.

    But to make it movie length, it sounds like the bulk of the plot in the movie takes place after the ending of the story. If you want to make a story about time travel changing the present, why ruin a great short by turning it into a preface to another story? Why not just come up with a simple reason history is changed and THEN tell the story about dealing with the changes?

    I love Ray Bradbury's stories. There's a wonderful sense of timing, rhythm, playfulness, poetry, horror, and fun. It sounds like some of the most important elements of what makes a Bradbury story so good are being ignored here.

    Maybe, instead of wasting the time and money to see this, I'll find a DVD of Francois Truffaut's adaption of Farheinheit 451 and watch that instead.

    1. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe the language change would change more, maybe not. It's a short story.

      I read it for the first time in 8th grade and hadn't re-read it for decades (not that I avoided it, but I'm not much on re-reading -- except for Shakespeare). It had such a strong impact on me I that I remembered most of it, almost scene-by-scene.

      To me that's effective. If it weren't, I'd have forgotten it like I did most of the stories in that anthology, but this story made such a strong impression I remembered many parts of it clearly for decades.

      I write myself, and I would feel that any story I wrote that had that strong an impact on a reader was a definite success. Maybe some technical details were wrong (who knows -- we don't have the experiece to be sure), but any story that can leave an impression that lasts for decades is worth recognition.

    2. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by mm0mm · · Score: 4, Interesting
      When the Hollywood picks up a novel and makes a film based on it, the film version becomes a separate entity from the novel. Keep in mind that the director will make the film according to HIS interpretations of the same story we've read. In addition the studio, producers and director will alter the settings and the story line in the way they want to so that the film becomes more suitable for their targeted audiences. It is extremely rare for a director to have enough (political) power during the development stage to maintain the authenticity of the novel. As a result, the finished film will be losely resembling to the book.

      The author of the original novel is usually credited ambiguously as "story by" or "based on." Actual writing for the film is done by an army of screenwriters and script doctors, who will receive little credits (if they are lucky!). The only reason the studio gives credit to the author of the novel is so that they won't be involved in legal troubles. Well-known writers with a household name also have added value for the marketing of the film.

      When you see a film based on a novel, don't expect to see what you read in the original novel --because no film director can beat what your imagination can create. Films hit your vision. Novels speak to your heart.

    3. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 4, Informative

      The credits "story by" and "based on" are two entirely DIFFERENT credits, with different meanings. "Based on" means the script (or outline) is based on a story, novel, poem or other work that was pre-existing and (except in a few cases) was written for it's own sake, and not intended to be part of the process of making a movie. If I write a novel, even if I am hoping it will be turned into a movie, and a producer buys rights and someone else does all the writing form then on, I'd get a "based on" credit.

      "Story by" means someone wrote the story for the screenplay under contract. I'll use ST: Next Gen as an example (I'd doing this because I came very close to selling to them and had essentially an open door to pitch to them until G.R. died and some things got reshuffled -- it's a TV show, not a movie, but the points are the same). When I pitched a story to Trek, if they bought it, they would likely pay me for the story. I'd write up a story (NOT a screenplay), broken down into acts to give the general outline of the story, along with some sense of the timing of the plot. If I'm lucky, and they think I can do it, THEN they'd offer me the chance to write the script. If you look at the credits on ST:TNG (and many TV shows), often there is a credit "Story by" -- that means that writer wrote the story, but (in most cases) someone else took that story (or outline) and actually wrote the script.

      It'd be possible for one person (called Author) write a novel, a producer to buy rights, and assign a writer (called Adaptor) to write a story outline to base a script on, and to pay yet another writer (called ScreenWriter) to write the script. In true Hollywood style, they'd probably hire yet another writer (called Rewriter) to re-write the script (whether it needed or not). The credits would be something like:

      Based on the novel by Author.

      Story by Adaptor.

      Written by
      ScreenWriter
      And
      ReWriter

      I can't remember for sure, but I think "&" was used to indicate to writers working together (like "Jane & John Doe") and "and" was used to distingiush between writers that worked on different drafts.

    4. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you're interested in some good background on Hollywood from a writer's perspective, read up on J. Michael Straczynski's posts in r.a.s.t.b5.moderated or any of the other archives. JMS is the brain behind Babylon 5 (for those that don't know). He points out the many ways writers are screwed over, but he also demonstrated, by his own career, how that can be overcome.

      Actually, it's not that producers regard the credits lightly, it's that they don't want to give them out. I remember a discussion on the 'net once about how someone said they'd be eager to write something for nothing more than credit. They didn't realize that credit is a big thing to Screenwriters beyond just getting their name on the screen. For example, to get in the Writers Guild of America, you need to have done a certain amount of "professional" work. I forgot the details, but I think it could be 2 scripts of 1 hour TV length, or 1 feature film. Since much of the industry runs on fear (and the need to outdo everyone else), people can be very stingy on letting people get credit. It can be used later in negotiations and to help one advance in a career. If you're a Hollywood producer, you don't want a write to move up, otherwise you'll pay them more the next time, and might have to make other concessions.

      All this mess is a big reason why, after Trek shifted, I gave up on trying to write for TV or film out there. While the Trek people were pretty cool and not as weird as others, that was an isolated situation. Instead I busted my butt for years and will soon have my own production company (built on the company I have now). I'll be able to write my scripts and produce and direct them on my own terms. They won't be on the big screen (at least for a while), but they'll be what I want and there won't be a team of writers/producers/directors 2nd guessing everything I write. There'll be no test screenings to force re-editing and the whole cast and crew will focus on nothing but making the best production possible. When it's done, we distribute it on DVD.

      It's not the level of fame and money I'd get from a studio, but it means I'll be one of the few writers alive who can write what they want and make sure it gets put on screen the way it was intended, not the way it'll be after a dozen people piss on the script like a dog does on a tree to say, "I'm here, look at me!"

    5. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by Angostura · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All it would have taken for US written English to have changed would have been for 1. Someone else other than Caxton to have popularized mass printed literature (of for Caxton to make different choices about the spellings he chose 2. Chambers to have made different choices about his reform of US spelling, or someone else to have done the job. I suspect we are already in the alternative timeline. No-one here would ever vote for someone called President Keith.

    6. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by B'Trey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think there are much bigger weaknesses than that only the winner of the election changes. The changes that occur come about because Eckel steps off the path and kills a butterfly. However, if changes that small affect things, then the entire safari would change things. An animal sees the metal path they errected and changes its course to get around it. It escapes death (or alternately, find it) because it's in a different location when a predator comes by. The T. rex sees the hunters and charges toward them. It altered its path and steps on a butterfly or mouse that it otherwise would not have. When the shoot the T. rex, it falls in a slightly different location and takes out a tree branch that it otherwise would not have struck. There's a birds nest full of eggs on that branch that tumble to the ground and never hatch.

      In short, the idea that staying on a path and killing an animal that's about to die would change nothing but simply stepping off the path would alter things doesn't hold water. Any intrusion into the environment is almost guaranteed to change things.

      That being said, it's still a great story.

      --

      "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

    7. Re:Is this Really the Same Story? by B'Trey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The point of good SciFi is to tell a good story. Period. Otherwise, it's simply propoganda.

      Good SciFi, like all literature, should explore the human condition. That may very well include expositions about the dangers of certain technologies or social trends. But those are side effects - a property of the story rather than the purpose for it.

      Second, science fiction must be as accurate and technically feasible as possible. Otherwise, it isn't SciFi - it's fantasy.

      --

      "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

  5. oh wonderful by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering what they did to I, Robot, I've got a bad feeling about this.

    1. Re:oh wonderful by nomadic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There have been very, very few. Francois Truffaut's Fahrenheit 451 for example. 2001 for another (even if you don't consider it "based" on the 2001 novel, it was based on the short story "The Sentinel").

      And actually I don't even mind them changing the story, as long as they do a good job. Like I think Blade Runner is an amazing movie. Yes, it's a completely different story than the book, but I don't think the story in the book would have translated into a movie that well. But the recent fad to turn brilliant, intellectual science fiction novels into action movies is just depressing.

    2. Re:oh wonderful by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good luck finding people to criticize Blade Runner. Most adaptations of books definately take liberties with characters, plot points, theme, tone, etc. because you're creating a different work of art (art is used in its loosest terms here :) What you're seeing on the screen is often the collaborative vision of a bunch of people (screenwriters, directors, actors, producers, art directors, cinematagrophers, special effects artists, and more) of what the book can realize on the big screen.

      A lot of time the realities of the process can mess stuff up a lot, and often times commercial, moral, or political interests can REALLY mess stuff up. But there have been some good adaptations out there, even in sci-fi. I doubt many would argue 2001: A Space Oddessy is a terrible movie. The latest Lord of the Rings accomplished an excellent rendering of the story to the screen and probably saw the biggest jump in Tolkien's readership. There have been many successful conversions that have convinced me to pick up the book, and discover new authors. Sci-fi definately has its troubles because serious sci-fi loses a lot of its social commentary in favor of action and aliens. The fact is though nothing in a movie can take away from the original book (aside from a gaudy tie-in book cover), so if you don't like it, don't watch it and recommend others read the book instead.

      I guess to summarize, you never really get a 1:1 translation of book to movie, and there are varying degrees of raping and pillaging to be done to a story. Sometimes (GASP) the movie version even cleans some things up and improves on where the book is.

  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. Hi! I'm a butterfly! by Emot · · Score: 5, Funny
    Stoming on me will destroy the future. Probably. See, we don't really know one way or another if stomping on me while you're out romping around in the mesozoic forest ranges and shooting teerexes in their big dumb heads an attosecond before they die of way-natural causes will undo the entire space-time continuum or if things will just go on as they were before you put your inexpensive, Chinese-made knockoff Jungle Boots onto my delicate, fragile little exoskeleton.

    See there friend, if you flatten me silly, there will be absolutely no way to tell if you've changed the future irreparably! As the changes you've wrought have taken place way way way long time ago in the superpast, well before you and the rest of your crazy civilization were concieved and born, these changes existed before you went back in time to stomp on me and maybe change the entire history of forever!

    Who knows! All I know is that I'm a butterfly and that I like nectar. Yum nectar!

    (effa why eye, Mozart in Mirrorshades was better)

    --

    ALL HAIL THE BEAST THAT ASCENDETH FROM THE PIT WITH HIS CUTE WIDDLE NOSE =^o.o^=

  8. Heh, I remember hearing about this one... by Erik+Fish · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ray Bradbury has shed light on the situation that resulted in Renny Harlin departing from the A SOUND OF THUNDER movie project.

    "The original story is about a man who travels back in time to look upon dinosaurs, only to be ran off the safe designated path by one of them. There, he steps upon a butterfly, altering the entire timeline to come. [Harlin said,] 'Why don't we take the butterfly out of SOUND OF THUNDER?' Can you believe that? When I heard it, I whooped with laughter. I said, 'Oh my God,... if you wanted to be accurate about being stupid, this was it.' So they fired him, and we've got a new director now."

    Smart move, but I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement...

    My money is on the upcoming "Fahrenheit 451" directed by Frank Darabont.

    1. Re:Heh, I remember hearing about this one... by nomadic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My money is on the upcoming "Fahrenheit 451" directed by Frank Darabont.

      Mine isn't. What the hell's the point of making a new Fahrenheit 451? I mean, I like to think Truffaut's version was pretty damn adequate.

    2. Re:Heh, I remember hearing about this one... by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2, Insightful

      " I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement"

      Yeah... and by applying that logic you could say that the guy that directed Bad Taste and Meet the Feelbes probably wasn't the best pick to direct LOTR...

      I'd give the guy a chance... some people just make the pictures they can get signed on for, for all you know this guy's just been waiting for a decent screenplay with the right producers to make his "masterpiece".

    3. Re:Heh, I remember hearing about this one... by incubusnb · · Score: 2, Interesting
      actually, My Money would be on the upcoming "Ender's Game"

      if done right it could very well generate a best selling Movie. although i still havn't figured out how they're gonna create a convincing Battle room

      back on Topic, Timecop and Sudden Death where great for what they where meant for, Summer action movies with lots of explosions and special effects. but your right about the Director being a Bad choice for what should have less of an emphasis on action and more of an emphasis on story

      --
      /. is overrun by bed-wetting elitist nerds
      let it be known, for anything other than servers, a *nix OS sucks
  9. For those who don't want to read the story: by {8_8} · · Score: 5, Informative

    Quick summary: Story takes place in 2055 where time travel is possible and occurs on a daily, regulated basis. Time Safari Inc. offers hunting safaris to any point in the past. You pick an animal, they give you big guns, send you back in time and you shoot your animal dead. Hunters are kept on anti-gravity paths in order to prevent them from changing history through the so-called butterfly effect (stomping on a blade of grass may wipe out Texas in the future, etc.)

    The actual story is simple. A hunter goes back on a T-Rex safari, panics and runs off the path. He kills a butterfly in the process. The safari returns and finds the future changed for the worse. The end.

    1. Re:For those who don't want to read the story: by Soko · · Score: 4, Funny

      AGhhh! You've just fucked up my timeline, as I was supposed to read the whole story from the link! Think before you post about the future!

      Soko

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    2. Re:For those who don't want to read the story: by SEE · · Score: 2, Informative

      The original story goes to some length about the change-minimization efforts they go to. The central precaution is that the hunted animal is killed where and moments before when it would have died anyway.

      Implicitly, it assumes that while time is fragile, under the normal elaborate precautions it's resilient enough that any changes don't reach the point of being noticed by anybody coming back.

      Explicitly, it's far more concerned about damage to animals than to plants (so no blade of grass is a bit of an overstatement; the path is more to save the insects that might be crushed underfoot).

  10. In this case, so what if it's changed? by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wasn't the original story rather unsound in its time travel mechanics?

    It's the one where they go hunting the dinosaur, right? And one guy crushes a butterfly and changes history. They get back to the future and the written language is completely changed, but the result of an election merely flips, as if the written language could changed, and there'd even BE an election, much less with the same two candidates.

    I even recall an interview with Bradbury where he admitted the ending was not very well thought out.

    There's a much better short story (I forget who wrote it) where they send a spherical probe back in time, and a project scientists is talking to reporters. The probe bounces back and forth in history, and each time we go back to the press conference, the people slowly change from humans to weird alien creatures. At the end of the experiement, the speaker declares, "See? Nothing is chnaged!"

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
    1. Re:In this case, so what if it's changed? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey, it's just a short story.

      And Ray Bradbury has always been more interested in the "poetry" of what he writes. It has a wonderful impact and is a good story. Do you want to mess up all that (the timing, the pacing, the setup, theme, and everything else), but insisting he spend more time on making it perfect?

      If it was a matter of physics, that's one thing, but when you consider that we don't even know WHAT effects changing a timeline would really have, is it really necessary to pick on details like that?

    2. Re:In this case, so what if it's changed? by ghostlibrary · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's "Brooklyn Project" by William Tenn, aka Philip Klass, anthologized in "The Road to Science Fiction" Volume 1 or 2 or 3 (I forget which), and probably anthologized elsewhere.

      This post brought to you by Insomnia[tm].

      --
      A.
    3. Re:In this case, so what if it's changed? by Snuggly_Soft · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's Vol. 3. http://users.ev1.net/~homeville/isfac/t126.htm#A27 07 It's got Dick's "We can remember it for you wholesale" in there...sweet.

  11. Clue number one by Earlybird · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

  12. Re:hey, wait a second by SEE · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ah, you see, you saw that PR piece in the other timeline, the one where Czechosolvakia ceased to exist on the first of January, 1993 .

  13. Good Twilight Zone by martinX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I always thought it would maje a good (or great) Twilight Zone story, but there would have to be some big padding to make a whole movie.

    It may end up like the "Running Man" by Richard Bachman (aka Stephen King), in that the written story was good, the movie was good but they didn't actually have much in common. Bit like Blade Runner really...

    --
    When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  14. Re:Time Travel in Movies by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, the first Terminator was pretty good with time travel, the best part being where Reese has some cheesy Polaroid of her, and talks about wondering what she was thinking when the shot was taken, and we find later, when the picture is taken, she was thinking of him (OK, so mushy, but still consistent). Terminator II had no problem destroying the timeline, creating a paradox where in the present, they destory the inspiration for teh future, which would send them to the present. I never saw Terminator III, even the thought of a naked Terminatrix couldn't bring me to rent it, so don't know how it's handled.

  15. I think it made an impression on most people. by khasim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From that one story you have hosts of other authors refering to "butterfly effects" and "quantum butterflys".

    That's not a simple accomplishment given the length of the story. But then, I like a lot of his stuff.

    1. Re:I think it made an impression on most people. by ScottMaxwell · · Score: 3, Informative
      From that one story you have hosts of other authors refering to "butterfly effects" and "quantum butterflys".

      The term "butterfly effect" derives from the work of Edward Lorenz, a meteorologist who was an early researcher into chaos theory. (In a way, Lorenz was the first chaos theorist -- James Gleick's excellent book Chaos: Making a New Science tells the story in detail.)

      Lorenz has said his choice of metaphor was not influenced by Bradbury's story (he hadn't read it). Indeed, he first phrased the idea using a seagull, not a butterfly.

      So the term oughta refer to Bradbury's story, but it doesn't. :-)

      --

      ``Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators.'' -- Richard Dawkins
    2. Re:I think it made an impression on most people. by ttocs_47 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Lorenz has said his choice of metaphor was not influenced by Bradbury's story (he hadn't read it). Indeed, he first phrased the idea using a seagull, not a butterfly.

      But the Lorenz Attractor looks like a butterfly from certain angles, and not at all like a seagull!

  16. they ruined the story by Temsi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Has anyone read up on this?

    Not only have they completely missed the point of the story, they've come up with some lame ass idea in order to make an action film out of it.
    The story additions don't make any sense - he wipes out humanity, so they must go back to fix it? Well, if he wiped out humanity, who is it that's going to go back exactly? And if he wiped out humanity, that's a paradox! He would have to exist in order to go back and screw up the timeline.
    Of course, they solve this by using a "time wave" which hasn't caught up with our time yet (then, how did were they able to travel back?).
    But if it hasn't caught up, how come their reality is "markedly different"?
    This is a classic screenwriting short cut. This is the writer forcing the story to serve his master (director, producer or simply his own ego) rather than letting the story play itself out based on the setup and the characters. This is just a plot device not meant to be thought about too much... well, that's fine in a Britney Spears movie, but we're talking Bradbury here. This is a science fiction story. Science fiction stories are meant to be thought about. That's the whole point! They're not about ray-guns and futuristic technology. They're metaphors for things in OUR lives. They're about people, not technology. The technology is just a tool.

    Of course, having seen the horrible Timecop, I know just how much Peter Hyams cares about logic and people in his movies, so this is not a particularly surprising turn of events.

    However, I will not be spending a dime to see this movie. This is something I will download and proudly announce to the world that I did so just to protest the butchering of the story.

    I would gladly shell out $10 to see this story on the big screen, if it was done by ANYONE other than Hyams, who seems to have a particular fetish for destroying Science Fiction as a genre (Capricorn One, Outland, 2010, Timecop, The Relic, End of Days). This guy hasn't made a single tolerable SciFi movie, and THIS is the guy filming one of the great sci-fi short stories of all time?

    --
    -- This sig for rent.
    1. Re:they ruined the story by Temsi · · Score: 2, Funny

      And in that you are correct.
      However, if it branches out, then your timeline (the one you came from) would remain intact.
      Here that is clearly not the case.
      Which is why the idea of a "time wave" which catches up with your timeline a little bit... just enough to make you notice that it's different, but not enough to completely wipe out humanity, thereby giving you "time" (isn't that ironic) to undo the damage, before the "time wave" fully catches up wit you. No doubt the scientists in the film will be able to calculate exactly when that happens, just so they can give us the suspenseful third act leading to the climax, when a scientist has to disable a device, right before the counter reaches zero, by cutting either the red or the green wire - but it's dark and he only has night vision goggles which makes them look the same.

      The branching theory is a nice alternative in order to "fix" the grandfather paradox. In fact, evidence exists suggesting parallel universes, so if we assume for sake of argument, that you could go back in time, and you killed your own grandfather before your father was conceived, thereby erasing your existance and creating the paradox, then YOUR universe might not be the one affected... you could in fact have enabled events taking place in a parallel universe, not your own... but I'm just speculating now...

      Of course, the universe wouldn't self destruct if a paradox occurred. Rather, "nature" would prevent you from causing a paradox. Thereby, you wouldn't be able to kill your grandfather, for whatever reason. Nature would see to it.
      If the nature of the universe allows for timetravel, then I'm sure there are limitations as to what effect it can have on the rest of the universe.

      --
      -- This sig for rent.
  17. Hollywood Vs. Books by edoc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Someone needs to go back in time and stop all these Hollywood production companies from picking up the rights to every book/classic movie on the planet and making dry/predictable over budgeted remakes/sequels. I will obviously have to see the movie too make a final judgment however I would say the majority of remakes/sequels lately have been pretty poor quality.

  18. Time Paradox's by GrpA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From my childhood reading of science fiction, I always remember Sound of Thunder(Bradbury) and Let the Ants Try(Pohl). Both had a profound effect on my way of thinking.

    I spent many days as a young kid wondering if it would be possible to change history - after all if you changed the future, would the future you have gone back into the past at all?

    I learned the answer many years later in electronics. In electronics, it's called "Negative Feedback"... ie, take the output signal and feed in back into the input... The output affects the input, but the signal still continues.

    Now I wonder on how such a simple well thought out story can possibly change the future by altering the way people think and view the world.

    Still many of Ray Bradbury's original stories still occupy parts of my idle thoughts even this much later.

    That this man's writing has affected my thinking for so long and has permeated my thoughts enough to consider things I may have never considered otherwise is reason enough to see how the movie turns out...

    GrpA.

    --
    Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
  19. R is for Rocket by dylan.ucd · · Score: 3, Informative

    for anyone else who enjoyed this story, check out the book that it was published in: R is for Rocket.

    although 'A Sound of Thunder' is one of my favorite Bradbury stories, right up there with 'There Will Come Soft Rains' -- I think that the entire 'Maritian Chronicals' will forever be my favorite.

  20. Re:Mirrors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Could you PLEASE stop stealing bandwidth from Akamai customers? Remember, customer 1601 is PAYING for that. Your little website redirect is fooling no one (except the moderators, apparently).

    Your prior bandwidth theft, in just the last 24 hours:

    karmatic - thief and karma whore....
  21. About the "Credits" by gbulmash · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...it appears that some of the major characters from the Bradbury story aren't in the credits.

    Don't imagine that because a character isn't listed on IMDb 4.5 months before release, the character isn't in the film. IMDb rarely has complete credits this far before release. I'm surprised the Slashdot editors let such a silly claim through.

    I'm sure the folks at IMDb appreciate that you take their listings so literally, but they try to get a title into the database as soon as it's confirmed that the film is actually greenlighted. That initial listing may have nothing more than the studio, writer, director and one or two stars. Then they add more credits and other info as they become available.

    I know people there. They won't have "full" / "official" credits until they get them from a studio source (a month or two before release), a press kit (a week or two before release), or if the studio is still afraid of the Internet (and some are), they get the full credits after the film is released, usually from dedicated users who sat through the credits in theaters, scribbling furiously.

    - Greg

    --
    Start a happiness pandemic
  22. Talent, baby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    One of the producers is Moshe Diamant who not only produced but also wrote Simon Sez, a film with Dennis Rodman as male lead. let that sink in.

    Moshe knows quality.

    No one I trust more than Moshe to do justice
    to a Ray Bradbury classic..

  23. First link in article is to a copyright violation? by Bob+Cat+-+NYMPHS · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, Harlan Ellison wouldn't like it at all!
    But at least I could read it again.From the story:

    TYME SEFARI INC.
    SEFARIS TU ANY YEER EN THE PAST.
    YU NAIM THE ANIMALL.
    WEE TAEK YU THAIR.
    YU SHOOT ITT.

    Wow! Bradbury predicted IRC!

    --
    The latest Slashdot meme.
  24. feh. by Jamie+Zawinski · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I guess I'm the only one here who thinks the original story was just not very good at all? Not only doesn't it follow its own internal rules about time travel in any logical way, I also don't think the writing is any good.

    Given that, the "Time Cop" guy probably wasn't an inappropriate choice.

  25. Positive: It's been on TV already!! by Kulilin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here!!

    It seems it was not The Twilight Zone or The Outer Limits after all.. It was on Ray Bradbury Theater .

  26. Well, yes, but -- no. by uhlume · · Score: 2, Informative

    Much as I love and respect Ray Bradbury's writing, and much as I wish your claim were true, it simply isn't: most of those references to "butterfly effects" you cite actually relate to Chaos Theory, and apparently are attributable to none other than Lorenz (of Attractor fame) in the title of a 1972 talk entitled "Predictability: Does the Flap of a Butterfly's Wings in Brazil set off a Tornado in Texas?"

    --
    SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
  27. Fahrenheit 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    He's also annoyed that Michael Moore is playing off his title:

    "He can't have my title," said Bradbury. "We've got an important film coming out, the book's having its 50th anniversary in October. If he wants his movie to be an homage to me, why not title it, 'Bradbury, where the hell are you now that we need you?'"

  28. Re:Time Travel in Movies by vidarh · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Twelve Monkeys definitively definitively did not make use of a time loop. A time loop refers to time repeating for one or more individuals, but in twelve monkeys, the main character doesn't loop - he is purposefully sent back to different times and places, and his earlier selves are still there (at the end, for instance, when we see him seeing himself). It doesn't match the Wikipedia entry you refer to.

    The thing with Twelve Monkeys is that we get to know so little about the future/present/whatever, that we don't really know whether anything gets changed, and so there is very little basis for saying anything about it's tretment of time travel.

  29. Problem with the story by idesofmarch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Couldn't the fact that the dinosaur was killed in a different spot on the ground affect history just as much? Who knows how many butterflies it crushed when it fell, and how many other butterflies it failed to crush a few yards away? I cannot believe he safari company did not think of this, as they went to extremes to preserve history in every other way. Things like this really bother me, as you can tell.

  30. Flawed story, Flawed movie by darkjohnson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I almost worked on this - the script was AWFUL and way weaker than the short story. There is no logic to the premise and they successfully transferred that to the script. But..with the right amount of effects and marketing it'll probably break even.

  31. A Gun For Dinosaur by Cruciform · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If anyone is familiar with the works of L. Sprague de Camp, he also penned a classic story of going back in time to hunt dinosaur, and what happens when one of the hunters decides to kill his expedition.

    Bradbury's story was published in 1952's 'R is for Rocket', while de Camp's published in Galaxy Science Fiction in 1956.

    I wonder if the similarities were intentional or accidental, seeing as both were well known in the "sci-fi" genre at the time.

  32. October, Not Summer by filmguru · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to the IMDb (the alpha and the omega of movie sites) the film is slated for an October release in the US, not summer as originally reported. --FilmGuru