One Hundred New Movies for 2012 #11. In Time
I think that the premise for In Time is actually really fucking cool. If you don’t already know, this takes place in a time where the country get broken off into 12 seperate districts where the people living in each are sorted by their wealth (sound familiar?). But here’s the kicker, instead of their currency being physical money they use time. Every person is born with 1 year on their “clocks” and as soon as they turn 25 they stop aging and their time starts to run out; so they go to work and get paid in time. In short, the richest people live longer. In Time is basically an allegory for the economy in our world and it raises many questions as to how moral it is in capitalist countries for some to have so much wealth while others suffer and live day by day to survive.
I love movies like this because they’re controversial and can strike up debates that can and have lasted for years, but I digress. Despite this being a really good general idea for a movie there were a few inconsistencies that were a little implausible in my opinion, but I won’t disclose them as to not ruin this movie for anyone that wants to watch it.
Cillian Murphy, Justin Timberlake, and Amanda Seyfried (Sigh-frid) were all good-not great, but also not horrible. The direction, pacing, story outlining, and general execution were also enjoyable, but at the same time not all that noteworthy. I’m still a little undecided about how much I like this movie but it certainly wasn’t bad at all.
★★★☆☆
It’s pretty sad, how such a great concept was excitedly so poorly. The screenplay could have been better, as well as the leads.
