Metascore
28

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 32
  2. Negative: 17 out of 32
  1. There's something light and insubstantial about this movie. It almost floats away as you watch it.
  2. Glorious so-bad-it's-good entertainment.
  3. 50
    I felt too much of the movie consisted of groups of characters I didn't care about, running down passageways and fighting off enemies and trying to get back to the present before the window of time slams shut.
  4. Reviewed by: Carla Meyer
    50
    Clunky adventure story.
  5. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    50
    You'll be checking your watch a lot during Timeline. Though most of the cast is strong and the movie has moments of suspense, ultimately the mystery in this action thriller is so far-fetched it's ludicrous.
  6. Plays out like a 1950s B-movie with a fat special-effects budget. Brain-numbing dialogue, incoherent action and glaring improbabilities aside, it's a bearable combination of sci-fi paranoia and historical fantasy that drags modern viewers, and the robotic hero of "The Fast and the Furious" movies, Paul Walker, back to the centre of the Hundred Years War.
  7. Reviewed by: Scott Brown
    50
    Special kudos go to Walker, for his dead-on impression of a time-traveling 2x4, and the perpetually hysterical O'Connor, who delivers one of the most grating performances in history.
  8. Reviewed by: Ed Park
    50
    Crudely written, haphazardly acted, and improbably fun.
  9. There's a modicum of charm to Timeline, since its eager, earnest tone harks back to Donner's work from the '80s, particularly "The Goonies" and "Ladyhawke."
  10. Reviewed by: Alan Morrison
    40
    Timeline takes the most ridiculous movie plot ever imagined and multiplies it by ten.
  11. 40
    Scenes stop and start abruptly, and the sub–"Lord of the Rings" action is more dulling than rousing -- and yet it can be funny.
  12. Reviewed by: Robert Koehler
    40
    Lacks the consistent tone, pace and point of view for either a science fiction thriller or medieval war adventure.
  13. 40
    This big-budget adventure is based on a recent Michael Crichton thriller, though its premise is too stale to instill the sense of wonder critical to great sci-fi.
  14. Director Richard Donner finds a few startling images for bloody battle scenes, but awful dialogue prevents the actors from giving performances of any depth.
  15. Donner's most calamitous mistake, however, was forgetting to light the screenplay on fire and catapult it from the nearest trebuchet.
  16. Doesn't have a genuinely human moment.
  17. 30
    One part historical drama and one part futuristic adventure, Timeline resembles a "Star Trek" episode by way of "Scooby-Doo."
  18. Reviewed by: Richard Harrington
    30
    Time travels, but it sure doesn't fly by in this debacle.
  19. 25
    Timeline gives Gigli serious competition for worst film of the year honors.
  20. An instant contender for cult status on the midnight-movie circuit, where lines like "Do we look like quantum wormhole specialists?" will be given the respect they deserve.
  21. 25
    The trouble with the movie is basically everything. It's long, sloppy, and -- to both the quantum-physics ignorant and informed -- steadily implausible, never exciting in either its skill or its ludicrousness.
  22. 25
    Timeline lacks potency, drive, wit and personality -- all the things that make escapism worthwhile.
  23. 25
    Compare it with the book, and it stinks. Look at the film on its own, and it still stinks.
  24. 20
    This dreary science-fiction/historical-action hybrid is a misfire of staggering proportions.
  25. Reviewed by: Bryan Curtis
    20
    This isn't a movie of hoary Sherwood Forest clichés. It manages, through sheer artistic force, to stoop below cliché--to seem both fresh and rotten at once.
  26. It reeks of contempt for the audience. This is not just a "B-movie" -- it's a B-movie that fails to entertain on any level.
  27. 11
    As Timeline so adequately proves, not every bestseller will render a good film.
User Score
4.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 47 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 27
  2. Negative: 17 out of 27
  1. Justin
    Jul 25, 2006
    10
    The problem with the users is that most of them probably never read the book. The movie was incredibly well done and was fairly accurate with the book. The movie by itself was good enough to be called incredible. A great movie from a great book. Full Review »
  2. Jennifer
    Mar 6, 2006
    0
    Unintentionally funny and predictable. My roommates and I kept calling out the lines before they were said by the characters.
  3. MattK.
    Dec 18, 2003
    0
    I saw this movie right after seeing master and commander because i had time to kill. i never thought it looked any good, but the only other movie playing was brother bear, so i choose timeline. i think i would of preferred watching brother bear now. from the awful plot, the lame special effects, and the "wormholes" in the story, this movie is disgusting. the acting is so unbelievably atrocious, i mean oh my god, i cant even begin to explain.....that french dude francois doesn't deserve to be in a home video for crying out loud, and yet he gets that salary while anyone else in the world would be better cast. maybe he's a cool guy, but what were they thinking? the dialog sucks big time, making no sense, the love story is baseless, the action isn't 1/10,000,000 as good as any scene from one of the lord of the rings movies. this ruined my "good movie feeling" i had from watching master and commander, and i hope someone punishes these people. Full Review »