IMDb > "Timeless" (2016) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsepisode listepisodes castepisode ratings... by rating... by votes
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summaryplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
"Timeless" More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
Index 81 reviews in total 

67 out of 91 people found the following review useful:

Solid..... And it works

Author: A_Different_Drummer from North America
26 October 2016

Canada makes lite beer. Now it makes Lite Sci-Fi.

After recent hits like Eureka and some of the Stargate sagas, frankly I was expecting more. Not that Timeless is bad, it is simply not great.

Your humble reviewer remembers watching the series Time Tunnel in 1966 (IMDB it!) and now 50 years later this is the closest thing I have seen to a knockoff.

The irony is that the Frozen North has for many years specialized in "period" movies and TV -- a fact many viewers are not aware of - so someone figured out how to kill two birds with one stone. A show with a proved (if dusty) concept using sets and costumes that the Canadian warehouses are full of.

The writing is not spectacular, nor the acting, nor the special effects. On the other hand, I have been a fan of Abigail Spencer since she played Scotty in Suits and, generally, there are worse ways to spend an hour.

This is sci-fi ... lite. And it works.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Entertaining show despite technical flaws

Author: lynndicerbo
1 December 2016

Sorry, folks, but I watch TV to be entertained. Particularly when I am viewing Sci-Fi shows, I suspend reality and accept certain premises that may be technically flawed. By doing so, I'm not over-analyzing every nuance trying to figure out if it's consistent with current scientific knowledge.

With that said, I am apparently one of the few (along with my husband) who truly likes Timeless. Each week I look forward to the historical period in history where the characters will go. Besides that, there is the underlying story of Flynn-- who he is, why he's so protective of Abigail Spencer, what his true motives are (good? evil?) as well as who or what Rittenhouse is and why it wants to change the course of history.

I genuinely hope NBC gives this show a chance. There hasn't been a good time travel show for a while (I remember watching Time Tunnel as a kid!) Perhaps there's room to improve Timeless, and I think a lot of successful shows start out somewhat shaky, but I'm already a fan.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

Sadly it's logically flawed. Very flawed.

Author: buzzti from Austria
11 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A soldier, a historian and a technician are sent back in time to prevent a terrorist from changing history. When they are going back to the day of the Hindenburg catastrophe in the first episode, history is changed.

When they get back to the present, only the three time travellers remember what originally had happened to the Hindenburg. The historians mother now isn't sick anymore and she herself is engaged to somebody, in exchange her sister doesn't exist.

In this changed present, she was a different person, lived a different life and had different memories. What does this mean if we think about it for a second? This different person nonetheless, still got sent back by the same people as in the original timeline (as we can see when they are debriefed by the same government agents and scientists after arriving back in the present) to catch the same guy.

Let's think about it a little further: In this new, changed present, the terrorist now goes back to change the Hindenburg event, which he himself had influenced already. By the laws of time travel established in the first episode, this should be impossible. Furthermore, this must mean that the historian, soldier and technician that existed in the changed timeline who also got sent back, will probably also change this already changed version of the Hindenburg crash and then come back to a third timeline, which again would be a little different from this second timeline "our" protagonists arrived at. This happens over and over infinitely or at least as long as the changes to the past to not inhibit the invention of the time machine in one of the new timelines.

The most important outcome of logic applied to the concept of this series is however, that when the protagonists are coming back to a timeline (which is also changed itself again by their versions of this reality and so on) in the first episode, it is proved that each timeline exists simultaneously, and that the sending back and changing has no influence on the timeline from which it originates.

This of course, should have been clear from the very beginning, because if changes to the past would have affected the original timeline, those changes would have come to effect immediately when the antagonist stole the time machine. I mean why should there be a waiting period till changes of the past affect the present? From the moment the time machine was activated, the present would be changed, because the changes would have happened already in the past. This is really not so hard to realize.

This means that if they would have just stayed at home, nothing would have changed for them, because nothing changes for the timeline they live in. The terrorist would merely create a new timeline, to which he could come back to. His actions are irrelevant to our protagonists and everyone else in the old timeline. All this time travelling is totally unnecessary, the show is pointless really.

That none of the characters are able to grasp that, is a dealbreaker for me. Seemingly no one working on producing this show did think of this, or even worse, care about it. I stopped watching after ep. 1 and hope that the other time travel shows of this season will be more consistent.

Was the above review useful to you?

27 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

Wasted Opportunity

Author: RockyMtnVideo from Evergreen, CO
9 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

**** Mentions plot details from the first 10-15 minutes of the 1st episode *** As a Sci-Fi fan, I really wanted this to be good. But the pilot devolved into lunacy almost from the beginning. It's no spoiler that it is about time travel. However, when you select a team (of three), for a time-travel mission to potentially "save the world", you would think that someone would take five minutes to provide them with minimal time-travel "rules of engagement" (even though someone with an IQ of 5, would probably not need to be schooled on the basics). Of course, rule #1 is: Take no action that might potentially alter the timeline. Yet, within minutes of arriving in the past, one of the three travelers (the requisite "military guy", sent to provide team security) proceeds to allow his libido to overrule any basic common sense, and suffice it to say, without giving away any of the plot details, nothing good comes from that initial, unnecessary, boneheaded move. All of this happens in the opening few minutes of the 1st episode.

With a plethora of television options these days, I want someone to engage my interest from the get-go, not just with an interesting premise, but also with some indication that the scripts are being written by someone who understands the genre for which they are writing. This just feels like it has been written for 12 year-olds, instead of adults. I suppose that, if "logical thought" is not an important criteria for the characters in your Sci-Fi entertainment, then this might be a series that would interest you. I guess that I just expect the bar to be set much higher, in an era when so many cable/streaming offerings are so well scripted, from the very beginning. There's not enough "bandwidth" to waste time on mediocre efforts, "hoping" that they will "eventually" have some sort of reasonable story line.

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 50 people found the following review useful:

Oh Network Television

Author: nickdabbs101 from Covenant College, Lookout Mountain, GA
4 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In the age of Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones and wonderfully crafted Netflix originals, network television continues to hold its title for generating the most mediocre, almost-there content that can be imagined. Debuting last night, the latest installment of network mediocrity, Timeless, sought to ride the coattails of what is perhaps the latest trend in film, shows, and even books (a la the latest Harry Potter work) - time travel. It was this element alone that inspired me to fire up the pilot (the next day, it wasn't worth missing Monday Night Football over) and see what it had to offer.

Oh network television.

I'd like to spend some time talking about the show's hook and introductory sequences. I've entitled this particular commentary:

"The First Ten Minutes Of A Pilot Are Everything And If You Screw It up, You Will (For Sure) Ruin The Whole Show.*

The show's hook depicts the tragic explosion of the Hindenburg (with incredibly dated CG). And while it wasn't the best hook I've ever seen, I was, for a second, intrigued about what they were setting up. The problem with this show (and all shows similar) is that in merely 10 minutes after this sequence, ALL three main characters are introduced, characterized, given the mission rundown (which dictates and orients the events of the ENTIRE show) and sent off back in time to the afore-set-up Hindenburg explosion. In TEN MINUTES, they accomplished what the entire 1st season of Breaking Bad did. That is a huge problem. As a viewer, after being rushed through these "introductory sequences," I was not able to in way sympathize, empathize or relate to any of the main characters. If they all died, who cares? Not me!

The Rundown:

1. Premise: A- 2. Script: C+ 3. Acting: C+ 4. Cinematography: B 5. Effects: C+ 6. Desire to continue watching? Barely.

Conclusion: 5 out of 10 stars.

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

Great Scotty !!! Another typical Sci-Fi-ish adventure...!!!

Author: Dr_Sagan from the Edge of the Cosmos
5 October 2016

Ah! Time travel! So many movies and TV series about it. You can do a lot of things with it BUT there are also rules! A lot of things that you can't do. And in the end you are always messing things up. And you must go back and try to fix them, usually to make things even worst!

So. Timeless is another light Sci-Fi-ish TV series about time traveling. As it is expected, the show skips the science and goes straight to the formation of an unlikely team and their first mission: Stopping a group of rogue agents who want to change history.

There are sooo many wrong things with this concept, yet many movies and series pulled it off, by having interesting plot elements, surprising twists and funny dialogues. Time traveling is (for now at least) just a vehicle for entertainment.

Where is Timeless stands in this group? Too soon to tell. The pilot has high production values i.e. good visuals including an OK representation of the 30s (cars, shop, clothes etc.) and a CGI Hindenburg destined to explode. The script though is boringly typical and on the hasty side, also trying to make an impression with phrases like "wait to see Michael Jordan dunk, and Michael Jackson dance". There are numerous plot holes too. The cast also is a mixed bag. I like Spencer's acting but I would change some of the other actors.

Overall: Another typical Sci-Fi-ish adventure. Light on the Science, more heavy on the fiction. Lots of plot holes. Didn't hate it, didn't loved it. The plot is sub-par but there are hints for a deeper mystery that might get somehow interesting. I'll keep watching ...for now.

P.S.// If you wonder about my "Great Scotty !!!" title, it is a fusion of Christopher Lloyd's iconic exclamation "Great Scott!" (for Back to the Future) and Abigail Spencer's character in "Suits" ...Scotty!

Was the above review useful to you?

34 out of 60 people found the following review useful:

Has Potential BUT

Author: RoswellFan from United States
4 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a series about time travel.

The pilot episode sets up the premise. A scientist unknown to the US government invents a time travel machine. It is hijacked by a group bent on changing history for their own ends which will likely be revealed in future episodes.

Fortunately, a prototype exists so a team can be sent back in time to stop them. A professor of history, a member of Delta Force, and one of the scientists are recruited. They go back to 1937, the time of the Hindenburg disaster. The villains delay the destruction so others can die with the original victims, but their plan is thwarted and lives saved. This, however, changes the present for the history professor.

Viewers also learn that the professor has some kind of tie to the main antagonist and to events, which hopefully will be also revealed.

The pilot ends with her receiving a phone call that she and the rest of the team are needed to stop another attempt to change history.

This is a good story at this point, but the writers had to overdo the social commentary. One expects some social or political comment nowadays in movies and TV series, but beating the drum at least three times is excessive. In everything today, one is inundated with so much propaganda that it quickly wears thin.

Also, while the writers had the black character mention famous blacks, they should not have had him say that O.J. Simpson getting away with brutal murders was OK. That is not only in bad taste, but offensive and racist. What if Goldman's parents were watching? It's like having a white character saying that the police shootings of black men are OK.

Which brings up the scene where the cops go to beat the black man, NBC is apparently trying to capitalize on the news stories regarding the police shootings. This is irresponsible. It can only fan the flames of hate and violence.

Sometimes, series take different directions than those outlined in the pilot. So, I will wait and see and check out the episodes that follow. Hopefully, the writers will concentrate more on story and less on preaching.


I watched the second episode last night, hoping that it would be better than the pilot. It was not.

Episode two dealt with Flynn going back in time to change the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Flynn apparently wants to expand the number of people killed to include General Grant and the vice president.

The story was simple with only a shootout and Rufus being seen as not being a soldier. More certainly could have been done to make the story interesting.

Needless to say, they maintain history with only some minor changes occurring, and this episode reveals why Lucy's sister no longer exists.

Now, there were some things that the writers botched. For one, Wyatt gets shot in the midsection, at least badly enough that Rufus has to perform emergency surgery on him, yet we later see Wyatt getting into a fight without opening the wound. For another, Lucy states that with Lincoln, the vice president, and Grant all being assassinated, the Confederacy could rise back up. For a historian, she should know better; the South and its army were decimated to the point of being unable to fight.

Also in this episode, the writers continued to preach on their apparently favorite subject.

If anyone wants to watch a good story on time travel and the Lincoln assassination, they should watch the old "Twilight Zone" episode. It is one of the most thoughtful and well written stories on the subject.

As for time travel series, it is better to watch the old series: "The Time Tunnel" or "Voyagers", both more creative and better written.

I doubt if I will watch this series any further, so I am reducing my rating to one star, from five.

Was the above review useful to you?

53 out of 98 people found the following review useful:

A decent show spoiled in the usual way.

Author: John Webb from Worcester, England
4 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I know nothing new exists in this world when it comes to Sci-Fi and many of us very much enjoy the usual tropes that come with the genre. I am no exception to that and lapped up the first 20 minutes. What spoiled the show was the Delta force guy. Why the writers decided that the teams "protection" guy should be an utter halfwit is beyond me. I know it's a fantasy show but the idea that a world changing event would be entrusted to a guy that thought it would be fine to bring a Glock back to 1937 when plenty of perfectly good firearms already existed at that time and to then try and save the first good looking girl he sees from a preordained death is stupid in the extreme. Does Delta Force are highly trained professionals and know how to follow orders. Sure some of them might not be ultra bright but it is insulting to portray one as being utterly stupid. I hope that this is a one off and the show settles down as apart from this issue the show was fine.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Not very good history

Author: jayef0503 from United States
11 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I wanted to enjoy this show. It is about history (my college major) and it is science fiction, which I've always liked. The villain Garcia Flynn and I share a last name, so I thought that was cool. I wondered how a Croatian like Goran Visnjic managed to get a Spanish first name and an Irish last name, but wasn't going to let a little thing like that stop me from liking the show. However, the show is so poorly written and so poorly researched that I cannot keep watching it.

Why are the time traveling heroes sent back unprepared? They have a time machine and can go back in time when they want. Why not spend some time preparing, creating character dossiers, etc.? Why do they have to give false names? They are going to a time when they had not yet been born. No one would know who they were (or would be), so what would be the harm in giving their real names?

My biggest problem is with the history. In the Lincoln episode on October 10, the writers made several serious errors with the history: 1. The Grants did not go to the theater with the Lincolns because Julia Grant could not stand Mary Lincoln. Mrs. Lincoln could be a difficult person to get along with and Mrs. Grant didn't want to deal with her and made General Grant make an excuse. 2. Andrew Johnson was never really in any danger. George Atzenrodt was one of Booth's conspirators. He was in on Booth's original plan to kidnap Lincoln and hold him for ransom, but wanted no part in killing anyone. He reluctantly agreed to go to Johnson's hotel and shoot him, but soon changed his mind. He went to the hotel bar, had several drinks, and went home. Furthermore, Atzenrodt was supposed to knock on Johnson's door, force his way in the VP's room, and kill him there. Nothing was supposed to happen in the lobby. 3. The attempt on William Seward's life was completely botched by the writers. In the real history, Seward had been in a carriage accident a few days before the assassination attempt. He was bedridden with several broken bones, including his jaw. He was sedated and under a doctor's care. To make a long story short, Lewis Powell forced his way into the Seward home, assaulted several members of the Seward household, cracked open the skull of Frederick Seward (the Secretary's young adult son), and attempted to stab William Seward to death. The Secretary's life was saved by the brace on his neck, but he was badly injured. In the show our hero fights Powell in the vestibule of the Seward home, somehow without alerting the family for about a minute, before shooting Powell twice in the stomach, presumably killing him. Only then did a young woman and Seward come to the top of the stairs. Seward had a daughter who was at home at the time of the real assassination attempt, so I'm sure this young woman was supposed to be her. But there is no way Seward could have come to the top of the stairs even if he had heard the commotion in his house. 4. They had Lincoln die on the night of the shooting. In reality, he died the next morning.

It would have taken a few minutes research on the writers' part to make the episode historically accurate. This is lazy writing. The show is not a documentary and I do not expect historical perfection. But if they are going to make a show that deals with history and historical figures, they should research a little so they present a realistic depiction of the actual events.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

good show but technical flaws

Author: captfred from Amarillo, TX
10 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a good show overall. However, the technical flaws really put me off. When the Hindenburg comes in, the sparks are supposedly caused by the dangling ropes being WET preventing a good ground for the static electricity. This is nuts. Nothing makes a better ground than water except for a rod driven in to the ground.

Later they discover a bomb they try to disarm it in 5 minutes and 5 seconds. This is also nuts! Why wouldn't they just throw it out the window?? The ship was already airborne and moving fast (for a dirigible). There was no one on the ground and no one would have been hurt! Instead they try to force the crew to land the ship so they can evacuate the ship. Again, this is nuts!! How long would it take to land and dis-embark everyone?? Are you kidding me? Hopefully the writers will try to fix dumb errors like this or this show is doomed!!

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Ratings External reviews Official site
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history