User Reviews

...In that, after finally getting around to seeing it last night, being unsure as to whether I disliked 'The Child in Time' or not. It does have some good things and it's to me nowhere near as bad as some of the reviews have said. However, considering the cast and the subject matter, 'The Child in Time' could have been so much better and it is easy to understand why the reaction to it was mostly mixed to negative.

As well as having talented actors on board (Benedict Cumberbatch has rarely disappointed me, even in lesser projects where he tended to be one of the better assets of them) and that it touches on the very sensitive and daring subjects of a missing child and nervous breakdowns, 'The Child in Time' is also adapted from wonderful source material from Ian McEwan. Talking briefly about how it fares as an adaptation, 'The Child in Time' underwhelms, the book has much more depth, more consistent emotional and harrowing impact and the storytelling has far more clarity. As has been said many times by me, adaptations deserve to be judged on their own terms, on that front it's to me neither great or terrible, the unevenness of it makes it a tough one to rate and review.

Starting with 'The Child in Time's' good things, where it fares most strongly is the acting, which is mostly very good with a couple of exceptions (Elliot Levey doesn't register in a heavy-handed and underwritten character that could easily have been cut out entirely). Benedict Cumberbatch gives a performance of true understated poignancy and honesty, a truly courageous role to take on and he does it justice with one really feeling his anguish and pain. Likewise with Kelly MacDonald, who in her emotional scenes wrenches the gut and heart without being overwrought and she also charms. The two have terrific chemistry together and succeed in portraying the emotional toll of one of the worst situations ever for a parent. Stephen Campbell Moore is touching in a more difficult role than one thinks and the bravery of his performance is equal to those of Cumberbatch and MacDonald. Saskia Reeves is a sympathetic presence.

Apart from some jumpy editing where transitions seemed rushed and sudden, 'The Child in Time' looks good, especially in the beautiful and suitably bleak locations. Had no problem with the photography like some did, which is slick and matches the thought processes of the characters very well, as an epileptic who can be sensitive to the technique used. there are films and television shows that overuse and abuse it far more. The music score is haunting and soothing.

There are elements that work well in the story. It starts off very well, starting off in a tense and affecting way. The outcome of Charles' story, the scene in the school and the eulogy were particularly emotionally powerful moments and while it was not focused on enough the main story resonates and is handled sympathetically. Cumberbatch, MacDonald and their chemistry have a lot to thank for this.

However, much of the story execution could have been much better. Not enough time is devoted to the missing child story, which was the most interesting and well done part, and focuses too much on elements that are nowhere near as interesting or well developed. Charles' subplot had its moments, like the interplay between him and Stephen, but should have gone into more depth and not been as confused. More problematic were the pub/time, prime minister and the Child Education committee elements, the first made no sense whatsoever and was severely under-developed, the second was pretty pointless and underwritten and the third felt shoe-horned in and it felt disconcerting that for a Child Education committee it seemed they had their own interests at heart and not the children's.

Writing had its moments, like the eulogy scene, but tended to be stilted and contrived. Structurally it was pretty scattershot where the back and forth was not always as clear as it ought to have been and it often felt like the writers didn't know what its primary focus was. The middle third, which was where things started to fall apart, drags.

Apart from Stephen, Julie and Charles, the characters are either thinly sketched or superfluous. Really do have to agree with everybody who said that the near-universally panned ending is a huge let-down, far too abrupt, tacked on, rushed and left too many things unresolved (especially when it had a lot of strands that were crying out for resolution). In fact the whole thing felt incomplete.

Overall, uneven and difficult to rate and review, didn't know what to make of it. Applaud anything that takes on difficult subjects that need more awareness, but 'The Child in Time' would have benefited from trying to take on less and doing more with its primary issues. 5/10 (my mixed feelings rating). Bethany Cox

Stephen Lewis (Benedict Cumberbatch) is a children's book author whose life is devastate when he loses his daughter in a grocery store. His life with wife Julie (Kelly Macdonald) cracks apart and she moves to a remote country home. His friend Charles is mentally deteriorating.

The jumps in time leaves the story disjointed in its telling. The Prime Minister confused me. I don't know why the story becomes political for a second. Even Charles' connection and his illness confused me. There is one big devastating section in which Stephen mistakes another child for his own. That scene strikes right into the heart. I usually like Kelly Macdonald but she seems to be underused. Benedict is doing good work but the overall sense is a disjointed story flow. This is based on a book and the adaptation is probably too scattered.

I had thought and hoped this was a series but found out tonight that yes, it was just the one program, and we're supposed to be happy with what we got. There were so many loose ends left. This could have gone so much further. Yes, we can work out what all the clues were and what it was all about but it would have been so much more satisfying to see "the rest", when it only just seemed to be getting going. I had only just persuaded my husband that it "had potential" and that we should watch the next episode, and then there wasn't one. A huge disappointment and a huge waste of Benedict Cumberbatch's time and talent. Really disappointed. I'd been hoping for a "Broadchurch-like" series with twists and turns and eventually a resolution. I guess with the "time" thing that couldn't logically happen but was really hoping for much, much more.

Based on a novel by Ian McEwan, the subject matter of the movie is not an easy one.

Benedict Cumberbatch was really good in this. I applaud anything that takes on difficult subject matters, but it was a very strange movie and the plot was a little jagged in edges. I couldn't grasp where it was going or why. The unevenness of it makes it a tough one to rate and review. It was unsettling to watch and sometimes just plain odd.

Many of the critical reviews are fair. Ian McEwen's book just doesn't translate into a screenplay very well. It's just not constructed that way. I'd still recommend it for Benedict Cumberbatch's great (as usual) performance.

I am surprised at the negative reviews for this work. I thought it was a wonderfully gentle film which explored the ineffable sadness of loss - of a friend, of childhood and of a child. This is about what happens after the crying and shouting has stopped. Life goes on regardless - something most of us have to face at some point. When you doubt your own belief and hope and when ghosts haunt your waking days... this is a film about losing a grip on what is 'normal'.

I found this film very moving - I did not expect any resolution or for everything to be tied up neatly at the end. Instead we are given a glimpse of adults fighting off despair and trying to find some sense and meaning. It was very well written, accompanied by some beautiful music and filled with excellent camera work. The best TV film I have seen for some while.

So the movie plot is not that original ,, but it's Benedict Cumberbatch so i had to watch it ,, and it was actualy worth it .. even though it was a bit confusing sometimes .. switching between time periods but still if you concentrated enough you'll get what is exactly going on .

The script writing wasn't that magnificent but it looked so good with the level of Mystery/Drama heightened by the couple Benedict Cumberbatch and Kelly Macdonald .

finale thought ,, i think it's a BBC movie ,, so don't expect a "Doctor Strange" movie ,, but it was over all a very good TV Drama.

What a strange TV film this was and I have to say I didn't get it at all. The big story was the abduction of a well-connected London couple's four year old daughter whilst out shopping with her father, played hand-wringingly seriously by Benedict Cumberbatch. There's never any doubt at all that she will ever be found and so the piece becomes an extended study in grief and loss and its effect on the relationship between the parents. But there's another altogether stranger story intermixed into the plot as Cumberbatch's best friend and publisher, the Prime Minister's spin doctor, approaching burn-out, gives up his city and Westminster life to retreat with his devoted wife to the country but where instead of recharging his batteries he regresses to his childhood on his way to a nervous breakdown and beyond.

I just wasn't convinced by any of it. Cumberbatch and his wife, played by Kelly MacDonald separate after their daughter's disappearance but in their first meeting in months inevitably end up in bed. Both of them seem to have visions of children in their midst, culminating in Cumberbatch's big breakdown scene when he mistakes a young schoolgirl for his Katie and finally realises in the process that she's never coming back.

There are a number of peripheral characters who flit in and out of the narrative like the female teacher who befriends Cumberbatch while they attend a Commons Committee on children's education and his mother who witters on about imagining her unborn son being present at a small-town bar before she'd even conceived him.

There's plenty more of that kind of weirdness, like the suspicious behaviour of the Prime Minister and Home Secretary over their aide's dropping out, said aide's running about the countryside in short trousers like he's on "The Coral Island", Cumberbatch's aforementioned teacher friend who cuts her head en route to his house and nosily discovers his untouched "shrine" to his absent daughter...

I wasn't convinced by the situations portrayed or the back and forth treatment of time which I found tricksy and confusing. As for the performances, you could literally see Cumberbatch and McDonald acting and not very impressively at that, while in the writing, I found nothing credible in what was depicted with the dialogue falling unnaturally from everyone's lips.

And as for the restorative, I won't go quite so far as to say happy, ending, it's entirely predictable and wholly unconvincing.

I don't know, maybe it was adapted from one of those impossible-to-dramatise modern novels, I hear about. All I know is that I wasn't moved or touched by anything I saw in this production and frequently looked away from the screen in embarrassment at the gaucheness I was witnessing.

I watched this movie, despite all the negative ratings and I am surprised. I think this is a very moving and well done piece. The acting was just "wow"! Has humanity benn so desensitized, that this story doesn't find more followers? I was very moved and this is definitely one of better productions lately. Thank you for making this film!

Despite the not so good reviews, we really enjoyed this TV movie. The acting was superb and photography excellent. What more can I say ?

Ya know what I mean !

This film tells the story of a father who lost his daughter while shopping for groceries.

The story is sad and heart wrenching most of the time, but it still has positivity and humour in it as well. I like the ending which gives hope and optimism which lifts the gloom.

I still enjoyed this movie. I dont know if it's because I enjoy watching Benedict or what but I found this movie engaging. His best friend's story line seemed strange and a bit out of place but other than that it was decent.

I enjoyed watching the deep love between him and his wife and how they navigated through the pain. The story didn't necessarily need a happy ending. I thought the ending was actually quite beautiful and heartfelt.

It would be difficult for any couple to survive a tragedy like that. One person would be blaming themselves and the other would be blame them as well. It's a no win situation.

Wow! This movie caught me off gaurd. I found it on my streaming service. Well acted and emotionally grabbing.

This excellent production had a real feel of a high quality indie movie. Cumberbatch was outstanding as the desperate Stephen Lewis who for a split second takes his attention away from his beloved little girl, an action which is at the heart of this beautiful and yet painful story. And yet the story is also uplifting, and at times there are touches of real life humour as well. The relationship between Stephen and his estranged wife Julie is so real on screen. You can easily believe these two deeply love each other despite their difficulties that they face. Everything about this film is moving, thoughtful and filled with genuine emotions. And bravo for Cumberbatch's company SunnyMarch for for taking such cerebral material and turning it into a beautiful and moving film! Kudos all round to all involved in bring this to life.

A British television film based on the 30 year old novel. The theme intrigued me. I thought I'm going to see an emotional film. But it was not strong. Basically the film avoided those common cliches. Like the film characters trying to get over a disaster that struck in their lives. But you can't avoid them entirely.

Occasionally the narration kept reminding us what led each new development. So in a way it was refreshing. Like cinematically it achieved something different in the theme we're very familiar with. But it was less entertaining, and the viewer might feel they were fooled. So honestly, I would say watch it without any expectations.

This is the story of a couple whose 4 year old daughter goes missing. The story follows their bearing, how it affects their relationship and how far they keep their hope to see her again. Difficult times ahead, their lives go on. There's a bit of politics too. I thought it was developed inappropriately compared to the initiation, but the real life filled with everything and everyone around us.

In a short, you would see unexpected drama events than everything you could anticipate. It's just a life. No matter what happens to whom, it keeps going forward. Might not be the best message, but it's only being honest. For me, it's like 8, but all I wanted was to end even better than the existing one. So it became an average. Who knows you could like it better than me!

5/10

The lead actors were great, the storyline was terrible, it didn't directly reflect anything, there is no insight to what happened, who took her, nothing. It was difficult to watch after so much hype. There was so much potential for this movie, felt like it got cut off or stopped recording, not ended like it should have.

I admit I was afraid to watch this. I don't like formulaic movies with predictable characters and storylines. But, as a huge fan of Benedict Cumberbatch, I decided to trust in its worth. I was not disappointed. As a mother of 5 children, having lost one, I was a little on guard and told myself in advance of viewing--don't buy into anything... don't feel... don't fall apart. I was somewhat stoic but as the film progressed and I became attached to the main characters, instead of it causing MY pain of MY loss to well up, instead I felt the whole gamut of emotions of the characters, so realistically and unashamedly and believably portrayed. Don't try to text or work on your computer or do any distracting tasks--you will miss the astonishing beauty of the cinematography and the subtle nuances of the characters and settings--there are several scenes without audible words but these may speak even more loudly.