A Wrinkle in Time

Name: A Wrinkle in Time
Genre: Adventure, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Family
Released: March 9, 2018
Duration: 109 min
Rating: 53
Cast: Alexia Rae Castillo, Andre Holland, Bellamy Young, Chris Pine, Daniel MacPherson

2018

METASCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 52 Critics

See All

USER SCORE

Generally unfavorable reviews based on 211 Ratings

See All

2.8

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2.8	Your Score
2.8	User Score Generally unfavorable reviews based on 211 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

A Wrinkle In Time (Trailer 2)

Movie Details & Credits

Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures | Release Date: March 9, 2018

Starring: Alexia Rae Castillo, Andre Holland, Bellamy Young, Chris Pine, Daniel MacPherson, Deric McCabe, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Levi Miller, Michael Peña, Mindy Kaling, Oprah Winfrey, Reese Witherspoon, Rowan Blanchard, Storm Reid, Zach Galifianakis

Summary: After the disappearance of her scientist father, three peculiar beings send Meg, her brother, and her friend to space in order to find him.

Director: Ava DuVernay

Genre(s): Adventure, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Family

Rating: PG

Runtime: 109 min

See All Details and Credits

Awards & Rankings

40	#40 Most Discussed Movie of 2018
23	#23 Most Shared Movie of 2018

Watch Now

Buy On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Original-Cin - Karen Gordon

Jan 3, 2019

Ava DuVernay’s beautiful and visually imaginative A Wrinkle In Time is a magical mystery tour for teenage girls. It’s a female empowerment movie that says love triumphs over evil and light trumps darkness. It says that the many teenage girls who believe they’re not good enough can find their strength and beauty, even through their flaws. Read full review

The Seattle Times - Moira Macdonald

Mar 7, 2018

Its message is of a young woman’s empowerment, and of how love can save a family — and if the special effects sometimes overwhelm that message (such as a glorious field of flowers that takes flight in a colorful frenzy), it rings through loud and clear by the end. Read full review

Austin Chronicle - Kimberley Jones

Mar 8, 2018

The opening act, I’m sorry to report, is a mess. Read full review

Entertainment Weekly - Darren Franich

Mar 7, 2018

A Wrinkle in Time hits that unfortunate un-sweet spot common to big-budget science-fiction/fantasy, where the spectacle feels more summarized than experienced. Read full review

We Got This Covered - Luke Parker

Mar 10, 2018

Trying to juggle complex theories of metaphysics and cosmology with simple themes of self-acceptance and the deterioration of the “darkness,” A Wrinkle in Time comes off as a disjointed and miscalculated project, rather than a visual and contemplative journey. Read full review

Arizona Republic - Bill Goodykoontz

Mar 7, 2018

There are moments of real power and beauty in Ava DuVernay’s film, based on the much-loved Madeleine L’Engle novel. You just have to work too hard to find them. Read full review

Uproxx - Vince Mancini

Mar 7, 2018

If anything, the trouble with Wrinkle is that you never really get a sense of DuVernay’s personal touch. In fact, it feels a lot like Brad Bird’s big budget, equally smarmy 2015 Disney film, Tomorrowland. Both attempt to be so broad and universal that they feel disconnected from anything human. Read full review

SEE ALL 52 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

ledaumas

Mar 11, 2018

I loved this story so many years ago when I was a tween. So I was excited about the film. I forced my boyfriend to go who had never heard of this book, but he loves science fiction. The movie did seem to lack character development as I had to explain to my boyfriend why a character wasI loved this story so many years ago when I was a tween. So I was excited about the film. I forced my boyfriend to go who had never heard of this book, but he loves science fiction. The movie did seem to lack character development as I had to explain to my boyfriend why a character was motivated to do what they were doing, especially Calvin and Charles Wallace. However, it was still the story I loved from long ago about the fight between good and evil from the viewpoint of tweens.… Expand

1 of 28 users found this helpful127

rlindau

Mar 12, 2018

I found the movie to be slow (I dozed off a couple times) and more-than-unusually unbelievable (just hand-waving explanation of why / how the heroine surmounted the evil forces)

7 of 8 users found this helpful71

TimW001

Mar 12, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall not a great movie. Lacks the basics needed for story telling. No character has any development. The characters never actually solve a problem. The villain had no motivation or purpose. And the solution was the power of love, which is just lazy story telling. The tone was consistent with that of a soap opera. Scenes that were trying to be magical were just dull.
At one point of the main characters becomes a flying lettuce. This scene took up about ten minutes but didn't lead to anything. Nor did it come up again. It was pure fluff.
At no point did any main character solve a problem. A lot was grown at them but they were basically completely passive in a solution. The villain also did not have clear motivations as to why it wanted to kidnap the main character. But it was defeated by love.
There were no subtlety in any narrative or character. If a character had an insecurity you were directly told. If they overcame this you were not shown this but instead directly told this. It's just bad story telling.… Expand

6 of 6 users found this helpful60

Minh18121999

Apr 15, 2018

A poorly conceived movie,from the director of Selma and the writer behind Zootopia,this movie was a monumentally disaster.It had good things in it:great visuals and some good performances.But apart from those things,this movie was basically unwatchable,very incoherent.One of the worst films of 2018

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

shpostal

Mar 9, 2018

I'm a bit biased, having loved the book since I was in elementary school, as early as the third grade when my parents bought me my own copy because I loved the book. It was my first "novel" so to speak, even if it was geared somewhat toward younger readers. Not that MadeleineI'm a bit biased, having loved the book since I was in elementary school, as early as the third grade when my parents bought me my own copy because I loved the book. It was my first "novel" so to speak, even if it was geared somewhat toward younger readers. Not that Madeleine L'Engel didn't propose some silly ideas in her book (defining the "Mrs.'" characters as former stars didn't make sense even when I first heard it, but it didn't take away from the overall imagery and storyline), but as usual Disney Studios have a way of sanitizing, omitting and ultimately ruining this adaptation a second time, after an even worse earlier version that was so bad I couldn't believe it. We don't expect movie scripts unless they're bios or historical to follow to the letter the books they use for their movies, but this is ridiculous. There is no mention of the Murry twins, Sandy and Dennys, who would be in a book of their own later. Charles Wallace was not adopted, and Meg's father disappeared as a part of a military experiment with several other scientists, and they were not part of NASA. Further details include the "Mrs." Whatsit, Who, and Which as young, and Whatsit a young first time whatever she is, which is the opposite of her book personality, very very old, as are the others. In fact, in the book, while Mrs. Which is the strongest of the three, she barely if ever materializes completely, and then in a typical witch form. But Disney really blows it as their version of Meg and Charles Wallace are so far from the book characters it's maddening. Meg was angry - smart, and much more impetuous in the book, and Charles Wallace was more vulnerable, and likable. The boy playing him does okay, but comes off as a young smartass most of the time. The worst thing they did was screw around with Camazotz, a planet controlled by an evil entity called It. It didn't suddenly change backgrounds like the movie claims. The cul-de-sac with the automaton children did not convey the sinister behavior of It controlling their every breath and movement, along with the rest of the city where the kids had to go to find Meg and Charles Wallace's father. The book had a far more sinister feel - all identical buildings that didn't fold up, then to apartment style buildings as they neared the city center, and finally the skycrapers, all identical, except for the monolithic CENTRAL Central Intelligence building, higher than any building on Earth and just as wide and deep. Here is where the Man With The Red Eyes encountered them, not on a beach with a stupid Wizard of Oz reject who takes them to a single room instead of the great building. Believe me - the millions of us who loved the book I'm positive thought these plot aberrations were silly and distracted from the menace of the story. Your kids might think it's okay, but I hate this movie. It fails every which way to convey the dangers of the book, removes the cold sinister feel of Camazotz, and falls woefully short of doing the classic book justice. Maybe if some film company besides that lukewarm Disney could give it a go, but I doubt anybody will. Not even Chris Pine or Reese Witherspoon can save this dog.… Expand

17 of 19 users found this helpful172

Laura4015

Jun 30, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Nice try but what the???? The trailer made this movie look amazing. so i had to see it. The movie is nothing like the trailer. Instead it is a mind-numbing, pointless mess. All it relied on was CG effects, nothing more. The only reason I watched the whole thing was because I wanted to see how the kids find their father by just walking through the entire universe. Supposedly he had been missing for 4 years and was found crouched down in some tunnel. How long was he there for? Well, he looked pretty healthy and sane and clean for someone lost in the bad part of the universe with absolutely none of his basic needs met, like food or water. I liked the character of Meg and the girl who played her did a great job considering the terrible script. But that was the only character. The rest were absolutely ridiculous. Why keep casting the same faces over and over and over and over again? None of the dialogue or silly quotes made sense. As for Calvin, that was just total cringe. This "gorgeous guy" just happens to come along for this bizarre ride, just for the sake of trying to turn this movie into a romance somehow? Stop leaving out substance and realism and replacing it with corny romantic possibilities Disney! This movie needed to expand on the key concepts but it kept getting side tracked by "stunning" visuals.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

BulgarianCritic

Nov 26, 2018

What a boring non whimsical movie that should have never existed.Do not waste your money and your time on this movie

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

SEE ALL 78 REVIEWS