5.6/10
55,323
460 user 123 critic

Timeline (2003)

A group of archaeologists become trapped in the past when they go there to retrieve a friend. The group must survive in 14th century France before they can escape back to the 21st Century.

Director:

Writers:

(novel), (screenplay) | 1 more credit »
Reviews
Popularity
4,545 ( 373)

Watch Now

From $2.99 (SD) on Amazon Video

ON DISC

Videos

Photos

Edit

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Baker
...
Arnaut's Deputy
Edit

Storyline

In this case, a group of archaeologists and combat experts led by Paul Walker and Frances O'Connor use a "3-D fax machine" (so much for technobabble!) to time-travel back to France in 1357, in hopes of retrieving Walker's father and returning safely to the present. No such luck! Fending for themselves against marauding hordes of medieval French warriors at war with the invading British, these semi-intrepid travelers find their body count rising, and the deadline for their return home is rapidly approaching. Written by Anthony Pereyra {hypersonic91@yahoo.com}

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis

Taglines:

This fall you're history See more »


Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated PG-13 for intense battle sequences and brief language | See all certifications »

Parents Guide:

 »
Edit

Details

Official Sites:

|

Country:

Language:

|

Release Date:

26 November 2003 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Prisonniers du temps  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Edit

Box Office

Budget:

$80,000,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA:

$8,440,629, 30 November 2003, Wide Release

Gross USA:

$19,481,943

Cumulative Worldwide Gross:

$24,453,820
See more on IMDbPro »

Company Credits

Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

|

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

2.35 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

During the siege of the Castle at La Roque, you can briefly see a full moon in the sky. April 4, 1357 was indeed the night of a full moon. See more »

Goofs

The film completely misrepresents the languages being spoken at the time. In 1357, when the film takes place, neither modern French nor modern English would have been spoken. The English would have been speaking Middle English (a language closer in pronunciation and vocabulary to Old English) and the French would have been speaking Occitan - a combination of Middle French and Latin. Certain members of both sides would have spoken Latin, especially the clergy. Michael Crichton details these languages in his book but the film ignores them. See more »

Quotes

Lord Oliver: My God, it's a miracle, a quiet Frenchman.
See more »

Connections

Featured in The Textures of 'Timeline' (2004) See more »

Soundtracks

Just A Little Bad
Written and Performed by Vikkie Rae Jordan
Courtesy of Marc Ferrari/MasterSource
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

See more (Spoiler Alert!) »

User Reviews

 
Is this supposed to be like the book?
16 April 2004 | by See all my reviews

TimeLine the book is probably one of my most favourite books. I have read it countless times and have enjoyed it every single time. So I was very happy when I saw a preview a long while back that there was going to be a movie about the book.

I wish that when people decided to make a movie out of a book they would make the movie just like the book. Don't change the plot, don't change the characters or their relationships, just leave it intact. They never do. I have been disappointed every time a book that I enjoy has been brought to the screen. I really don't know why I keep getting excited.

Ok, I understand somewhat that you can't re-create everything from a book. It just wouldn't be feasible. But they changed entire genders of people, removed some more interesting moments, changed character relationships slightly, and totally bombed at all the stuff dealing with the ITC, time travel and the vileness of both bad guys.

If you have read the book and seen the movie, you know what I am talking about. Some of the more exciting parts of the book were just not in the movie, like the struggle between the crazed man at the chapel, the fight at the mill and the entire tournament.

I mean I was confused with the whole thing. One of Donnigers right hand men is supposed to be a woman, Chris is NOT the professors son (in the book he is father figure), the French guy that gets killed in the movie does not exist in the book, Marek is supposed to be fluent in all aspects of time period including the languages.

I could go on about all the differences between the book and the movie, but there is no point. I would have to use up an entire screen just to point them out. It was a interesting movie if you had NOT read the book. However, if you have read the book and enjoyed it, a lot of great stuff was left out or warped into something different. I would say that the movie is very loosely based on the book, VERY loosely.

Overall I say I was disappointed. I did enjoy Gerard Butler as Marek, Ethan Embry as David Stern and Paul Walker as Chris. The females leads (Frances O'Connor as Kate and Anna Friel as Lady Claire) could have been better. And I suppose Billy Connoly did an ok job as the professor, although I just didn't quite believe that he was a professor for some reason.

I think I'll go re-read the book.


103 of 160 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?
Review this title | See all 460 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page

Best of 2017: Our Favorite Movie and TV Stills

Take a look at our favorite movie and TV stills from the past year. Spot any of your faves?

Browse the Best of 2017