User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 190 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 13 out of 190

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Dec 12, 2014
    1
    About time is about a boy who can time travel. Extraordinary, don't you think, but not as extraordinary as having a father who lectures at university and owns a 3 million pound mansion, or young women working in publishing who can afford to rent city centre London apartments, or as extraordinary as an England that looks beautiful and benign in every single frame, or a struggling playwrightAbout time is about a boy who can time travel. Extraordinary, don't you think, but not as extraordinary as having a father who lectures at university and owns a 3 million pound mansion, or young women working in publishing who can afford to rent city centre London apartments, or as extraordinary as an England that looks beautiful and benign in every single frame, or a struggling playwright of crap melodramas who lives in a £2 million town house.

    Richard Curtis has Out-Richard Curtised himself here. Absolutely appalling film full of simpering little twerps and the usual quota of quirky friends we are suppose to think are charming.

    Will appeal to moron American's with their chocolate box ideas of olde England and its charmingly awkward chaps.

    Couldn't crowbar in a disabled person to signal your right on cred this time Rich? Or perhaps you did? I only watched the first 20 minutes before doing a bit of time travel myself and hitting the fast, fast, fast forward button.
    Expand
  2. Mar 1, 2014
    2
    This movie sucked. It was slow, dull, sappy, overly sentimental...I was so bored. I understand it was a romantic drama, and maybe that's just not my cup of tea, but I thought it needed more light hearted laughs to keep my interest. Not much happened, and it was mainly a real downer. I did like the actors, so that's one good thing, but I felt like this movie was a waste of moneyThis movie sucked. It was slow, dull, sappy, overly sentimental...I was so bored. I understand it was a romantic drama, and maybe that's just not my cup of tea, but I thought it needed more light hearted laughs to keep my interest. Not much happened, and it was mainly a real downer. I did like the actors, so that's one good thing, but I felt like this movie was a waste of money overall. I should have watched something else. Expand
  3. Jan 19, 2014
    1
    Very bad made movie. Old tricks, awful actings, long and boring "going-back-to-the-past" over and over again, not reflecting the truth of a real life (at least doesn't convince me). Totally a waste of my time. And it's definitely the worst movie I've seen in 2013.
  4. Jan 3, 2014
    0
    this a story of a guy who for some reason can not find a girlfriend while living in London. To get one this poor sod has to resort to time travel Sounds like it can be a funny movie except for it tries to be a drama and completely fails at that as no one in the right mind can take this story seriously nor is there any emotional attachment to any of the main characters.
  5. Nov 16, 2013
    2
    Just awful. I enjoyed the Time Traveler's Wife, and this was like that except lacking everything that made that movie interesting, with hardly any significant, interesting time travel and a boring, pathetic loser for a main character who never grows at all throughout the movie.

    The film doesn't make you care at all about ANY of the characters, in fact, because it never really tries to.
    Just awful. I enjoyed the Time Traveler's Wife, and this was like that except lacking everything that made that movie interesting, with hardly any significant, interesting time travel and a boring, pathetic loser for a main character who never grows at all throughout the movie.

    The film doesn't make you care at all about ANY of the characters, in fact, because it never really tries to. The only "tear jerking" that happens is because of the sappy music and the marriage and baby stuff that some women love to fawn over despite the lack of connection to any of the characters in the film.

    It drags on especially toward the end for no real apparent reason other than to add to the sap appeal for the characters that we have no connection whatsoever to because, again, none was ever developed.

    The reviews promised a chick flick that men could actually enjoy. It did not deliver whatsoever. I can't see anyone with taste enjoying this film.

    Rated 2 because the first 20 minutes were somewhat interesting.

    The only people who could enjoy this film past the 20 minute mark are, to put it bluntly, airhead girls and eunuchs.
    Expand
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 34
  2. Negative: 3 out of 34
  1. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Nov 8, 2013
    80
    Maybe it's a touch twee, but Curtis' film is far too uplifting, too life-affirming and too good-natured to do anything but embrace.
  2. Reviewed by: Joe Williams
    Nov 7, 2013
    63
    There’s a lot of comic and fantasy potential here, but much of it gets squandered.
  3. Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    Nov 6, 2013
    30
    What Rachel McAdams is doing in this nonsense is anyone's guess, but she must realize that the long journey from "Mean Girls" to Mary, with her mousy bangs and her timid pleas counts as a serious descent. [11 Nov. 2013, p.90]