Review: In Time (2011)
Since I'm a fan of dystopian sci-fi, and the director Andrew Niccol also directed Gattaca and the Truman Show, I thought I'd go see this movie in the theater. Plus, I enjoyed Logan's Run back in the day. Just to summarize the plot, here's the quote from Twentieth Century Fox:
"Welcome to a world where time has become the ultimate currency. You stop aging at 25, but there's a catch: you're genetically-engineered to live only one more year, unless you can buy your way out of it. The rich "earn" decades at a time (remaining at age 25), becoming essentially immortal, while the rest beg, borrow or steal enough hours to make it through the day. When a man from the wrong side of the tracks is falsely accused of murder, he is forced to go on the run with a beautiful hostage. Living minute to minute, the duo's love becomes a powerful tool in their war against the system."
So, the concept is everything in this movie (much like Gattaca and the Truman Show). The concept is the real meat, in my opinion. Now you just need a great script, decent actors, a talented director and competent crew. These things are your vehicle for delivering the concept; kind of like an ice cream truck bringing you the tastiest, creamiest ice cream you've never had. The problem begins when someone forgot to refrigerate the vehicle. And then they left the windows open for whatever neighborhood insects and critters that wanted to come and sample the sugary treat. By the time the truck arrives at your house, the concept has melted and become fodder for all manner of parasitic vermin.
I'll start with the bad news: Justin Timberlake didn't really get the job done. He's Nicholas Cage all over again, enough said. In fact, many of the actors failed to grab the screen. The only two exceptions were Cillian Murphy (Sunshine, 28 Days Later, Inception) and Vincent Kartheiser (Mad Men, Alpha Dog (funnily enough)), and they were playing the "bad" guys. The director did a passable job of directing, but not so good on the writing (yes, Andrew wrote and directed this). I would actually like to watch this movie again, just for the director's commentary, because I would like to know if he compromised due to the studio, the budget, or if he just failed on his two feet. The dialogue was flat, the pacing bad, the dramatic moments over engineered and the world-building was completely lost in the chase scenes. I'm not saying I could do better, just that I expected better.
In a future where humans can be genetically engineered to have a glowing time bank on their arm, I was expecting a setting that was a little more futuristic. Other than paying and earning in units of time, the whole world seemed very 2007, down to the cars, buildings, clothes, and language. I suppose it's possible that our culture would have stopped progressing at some point and our only advancement is a biological currency. Or not.
Here, I'll just list some gripes:
- Everyone's balance is prominently displayed on their arm? Really?
- There's no low-balance threshold to alert the account holder in advance?
- There's a big board of "money on the grid" but we can't do wireless transfer without touching?
- Will's mom has been living in this particular universe for 50 years and appears to be a noob?
- Will walks into and out of Weis headquarters with a million years, uncontested? Uh...
- The millionyears daughter just happens to be a rebel that attaches herself to Will like velcro? Come on.
- Timekeepers? Are they normal cops, or do they just chase down misuse of time? Like langoliers?
- All expenses are measured in whole units? Really? Even with tax? It's not 1d5h30m for a new suit? Just 2 days? Ok.
- Wouldn't it make more sense (cents) to measure all currency in seconds, or milliseconds? You could still get a translation into years, months, etc.
- I'll stop now - I'm losing faith in storytelling.
The good news: the concept still has potential and it may result in a talented writer out there somewhere getting inspired to write a novel or short story that gives it a fighting chance. I like the capitalism spin on our own lifespan, but it would be more interesting in a format where exposition could come in it's own time.
Anyway, the more I think about it, the concept may have been too big to tackle with this style of movie (thriller) and could have been better delivered as a drama, in the spirit of Brazil (1995).
Bottom line: Wait for a free rental on Netflix. I myself give it 3 of 5 stars.