Just watched the film, apart from it suffering from the bankruptcy of the studio and the flooding during filming I found the science a little difficult to go along with. Don't get me wrong i love sci fi films, but this one took some serious liberties and i found it quite nonsensical, surely the original story was more coherent?
shareThis is one of my favorite Bradbury short stories. I haven't seen the film yet but I will in a few days, I'll write more then!
This message has not yet been deleted by an administrator
I remember reading the story in high school, but I don't remember much about it. I don't even remember the title. I just recognized the plot line when they were told to stay on the path. Does anybody know what the title of the book was? Or was it the same? Please help me.
sharesame Title "A Sound Of Thunder"
shareIn the original short story, the cause of the change was the same, a crushed butterfly on the bottom of a boot, but there was none of the nonsense about "time waves" and "part reptile, part primate" creatures. In the original, the exploring party simply returned to a world that had changed subtly for the worse, with our country being run by neo-Fascists and the military. Certain important historical figures had never been born and the shape of human civilization was slightly, but terribly, altered. And then they discovered the butterfly on the sole of the boot. That was that. No possible way of altering the error was offered and the story ended on that very down and disturbing note.
sharesounds good...better than the film version (which I thought was pretty good)
shareYou know how a joke is ruined if you have to explain it?
That is how I feel about this movie.
It's not that simple, of course, I mean they added a bunch of stupid *beep* really elaborate answers to some of the questions you might have about how the short story worked. But basically that's it.
I mean...it's not BAD...and you still get the point. It's just totally lost its edge. I'm watching it on the Sci Fi channel right now...I just hope they preserve some semblance of the ending. (Won't spoil it, read the story. It's short.)
edit: The short story is like being kicked in the head. The movie is like being strangled.
edit2: I amend that. It is like being strangled TO DEATH.
They really should have ended it about 45 minutes earlier.
It's funny, I caught this when it was shown on cable when I was staying at a hotel one night when out of town once and wondered why it was so blasted by critics, as it followed the short story pretty close.
I mean they added a bunch of stupid *beep* really elaborate answers to some of the questions you might have about how the short story worked.
They really should have ended it about 45 minutes earlier.
You could film the original story as 30-minute Twilight Zone and have a totally different story. It would be coherent, too.
shareI thought the Ray Bradbuy Theatre episode was excellent. No need for Twilight Zone.
_______________________
"Don't argue with a fool. The spectators can't tell the difference."
Years ago, Topps did a comic series I believe called 'The Ray Bradbury Chronicles.' They did one story on 'A Sound of Thunder.' Though at the end of the comic, you also get a sense that the language has changed ever so slightly, given the written text on some signs. The guy who changed the past begins to panic and try to convince some others that maybe they can go back and stop the change, but it appears this is not possible, as one guy slowly pulls a gun and aims it at the 'offender's' head.
Keep in mind that's a comic adaptation, there most likely are embellishments.
It's me, your lovable dictator! Uh-oh. -Bender, Futurama
That sounds pretty close to the story as I remember it. The travelers return to discover that English has been altered enough that they have some difficulty understanding anyone. The hero is then shot by one of the guides, either out of anger or retaliation, with a hunting rifle -- the "sound of thunder" of the title.
shareNo no no - Travis didn't shoot Eckels!!
At the end of the short story, Eckels hears Travis' rifle click, followed by "a sound of thunder" - thus echoing
the same phrase used when the time travelers/hunters first encounter the T-Rex:
"The jungle was wide and full of twitterings, rustlings, murmurs, and sighs.
Suddenly it all ceased, as if someone had shut a door.
Silence.
A sound of thunder.
Out of the mist, one hundred yards away, came Tyrannosaurus Rex."
__________
SO: the same "sound of thunder" is heard at the end, when Eckels hears the rifle click:
"Eckels moaned. He dropped to his knees. He scrabbled at the golden butterfly with shaking fingers.
"Can't we," he pleaded to the world, to himself, to the officials, to the Machine, "can't we take it back,
can’t we make it alive again? Can't we start over? Can't we - "
He did not move. Eyes shut, he waited, shivering.
He heard Travis breathe loud in the room; he heard Travis shift his rifle, click the safety catch, and raise the weapon.
There was a sound of thunder.
The End."
__________
Now, it seems to *me* that what was happening in that final scene was that another T-Rex was making an appearance -
the species having survived into the future, apparently.
Right? yes? no?
I dunno; it seems ambiguous, huh.
Here is the original Ray Bradbury short story:
http://www.scaryforkids.com/a-sound-of-thunder/
:)
No,Travis shoots Eckels, he even threatens to do so as they are traveling back to 2055 after the failed safari.
Here:
They cleaned their hands and faces. They changed their caking shirts and pants. Eckels was up and around
again, not speaking. Travis glared at him for a full ten minutes.
"Don't look at me," cried Eckels. "I haven't done anything."
"Who can tell?"
"Just ran off the Path, that's all, a little mud on my shoes-what do you want me to do-get down and pray?"
"We might need it. I'm warning you, Eckels, I might kill you yet. I've got my gun ready."
"I'm innocent. I've done nothing!"
Indeed, the tv adaptation in the Ray Bradbury Theatre episode of the same name indicates as much. The thunder of Travis' gun is the last sound at the end.
I tend to believe that this was the intent by Ray Bradbury himself, he was the executive producers after all.
See for your self.
http://www.lasalle.edu/~didio/courses/hon462/hon462_assets/sound_of_thunder.htm
The original story is good. Not great. It has the usual Bradbury descriptive passages that make me awestruck with admiration of his writing abilities and serve to cover the logic chasms.
Morons of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your brains...
There was also a Simpsons episode that made fun of the whole thing, real funny.
shareAlso, in the Bradbury story, when they got back to the altered timeline, the 'changes' seemed perfectly normal to the people who hadn't traveled. Which makes perfect sense, in a way. But why didn't the same thing hold true in the movie? "Of course prehistoric plants burst up through the roads. They always have!"
shareThat one fact put me over the edge in deciding whether or not to watch it. Nope. Time Travel cardinal sin. Thank you!
Human beings are The Machines.
The title. That's what it had in common with the Bradbury story. Other than that...
"Any technology sufficiently advanced would be indistinguishable from Magic."