Andrew Niccol’s newest sci-fi venture “In Time” is one of those films that comes around every so often with an excellent premise and appealing cast but falls short of telling a convincing story.
Set in the not-too-distant future, the film shows a dystopian corporate world where humans are genetically engineered to stop aging at 25; once they cross that threshold their time to live literally becomes currency. Everyone has a neon clock tattooed on their right forearms ticking down the years, days, minutes or seconds they have left. Time is spent on material items: minutes can buy a cup of coffee; an hour can buy a bus ride. A person can earn time by working or stealing in the ghetto or inheriting it in the realm of the wealthy, thus having the possibility of living forever.
Living day to day takes on a whole new meaning for Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a 28-year-old factory worker who lives in the ghetto of Dayton with his mother Rachael (Olivia Wilde) and strives every day to earn enough time just to pay the bills and make it to the next day.
One night at a local bar with his friend Borel (Johnny Galecki), Salas meets a wealthy stranger who has over a century of time on his clock. Salas saves the man, Henry Hamilton (Matt Bomer), from a gang of time-bandit “Minutemen” who would kill a man for a week worth of time. Hamilton reveals to Salas that he is 105 and tired of living. In the early morning Hamilton transfers his time to Salas, saving only a few minutes for himself, before going to a nearby bridge and “timing out,” effectively committing suicide. Left with the message “don’t waste my time,” Salas travels from the poor “time zone” of Dayton to the wealthy “time zone” of New Greenwich, accessible only through ever-increasing toll payments.
Salas meets Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried), heiress to a fortune and daughter of Salas’ soon-to-be enemy Philippe (Vincent Kartheiser). Accused of the murder of Hamilton, Salas soon finds himself on the run with Sylvia from the police force known as the “Timekeepers,” led by Raymond Leon (Cillian Murphy). Running doesn’t prove to be enough as Salas and Sylvia delve deeper into the injustices of the system. In this world the poor die young and the rich are numb to real life, never taking risks for fear of dying by mistake. The couple works together not only to evade the Timekeepers and Minutemen but also to even out the time distribution between the rich and poor.
The film makes no secret of its similarity to the current economic experience in America. The rich have it all while the poor have nothing, an idea in line with the 99-percent, rich-blaming mentality of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The metaphor is obvious in the beginning and only gets more blatant as the film continues, until the “time is money” puns begin to overwhelm. The middle class seemingly doesn’t exist, something that makes the economic argument simplistic, though at the same time may comment on the ever-widening gap between the rich and poor in America and the awaiting consequences in the not-too-distant future.
Niccol, who delivered a convincing futuristic film with 1997’s “Gattaca,” fails to meet the mark with his newest venture. “In Time” leaves much back-story unexplored while playing up tired car chases and an excess of action-movie running (which Seyfried does in six-inch heels the whole time). A whole subplot about Salas’ father is hinted at through the film and then unceremoniously dropped. Seyfried’s Sylvia is flat (as is her chemistry with Timberlake), and her poor-little-rich-girl rebellion is not set up or developed enough to be believable. The world-building in general is done haphazardly: the reason and science behind the 25-year lifespan is unexplained, yet the audience is made to accept it as a foundation from the beginning.
That’s not to say there isn’t anything to love in the film. Wilde, though only on screen for a short period, delivers an emotional, heart-pounding performance that sticks with you. Murphy is similarly attention-grabbing, as are the Timekeepers as a group, more interested in “keeping the time” than enforcing justice.
Ultimately, “In Time” fails to execute its intriguing premise, and emotional scenes, stunning silhouette cinematography and overall good acting is muddled by an in-your-face metaphor, flat characters and a desire for more world-building. Go see it if you like almost-thought-provoking action movies, but pass it up for something like “Margin Call” if you want a more human look at the economy.
Grade: C+
‘In Time’ fails to execute intriguing premise
Daily Emerald
October 29, 2011
0
More to Discover