Thoughts: I was not expecting much from In Time but it was surprisingly good. The concept was original and worked really well (read the plot summery below, it explains the concept well). The acting was solid and the action was cool. Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried had good chemistry together, they were like Bonnie and Clyde. Cillian Murphy was, as usual, a very good antagonist. There were also some allegories and puns, which worked well with the plot.
Directed by: Andrew Niccol
Genre: Sci-Fi. Thriller, Action Adventure,
Release Date: October 28, 2011
Running Time: 109 minutes
MMPA rating: PG-13
The Good: Unique original concept,
The Bad: Some derivative aspects,
I highly recommend you this first paragraph below, it does not contain any spoilers and helps explain the movie's concept.
Plot: The following plot summery is copied from Wikipedia.com.
By 2161, genetic alteration has allowed humanity to stop aging at 25 but people are required to earn more time after turning 25 or die within a year. 'Living time', which can be transferred among individuals, has replaced money and its availability is displayed on an implant on people's lower arm. When that clock reaches zero, one dies instantly. Society is divided by social class living in specialized towns called 'Time Zones'. The poor live in the ghettos of Dayton, where youth predominates, and must work each day to earn a few more hours of life, which they must also use to pay for everyday necessities. The rich live in the luxurious city-like town called New Greenwich, in which the middle-aged and elderly predominate, though they looked young because they have stopped aging at 25 years old. They drive fast electric cars, and can live for centuries.
Below here is a summary of the actual plot.
28-year-old factory worker Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) lives with his mother Rachel Salas (Olivia Wilde) in the ghettos. One day, Will saves rich 105-year-old Henry Hamilton (Matt Bomer) from suffering a time-robbery assault in a bar where he flaunts his time around buying people drinks. Hamilton is attacked by Fortis (Alex Pettyfer), the elderly British mobster boss of a middle-aged gang called the Minutemen. Will leads Hamilton to safety, where Hamilton says to Will, "For few to be immortal, many must die", as there is essentially enough time for everyone to live a full life, but it is stockpiled for the rich to become immortal. An upset Will argues that no one should die before their time naturally ends so that others may live, upon which Hamilton describes how he no longer even desires life, in saying "your mind is worn out, even though your body may not be. We want, we need, to die." Watch the movie to see what happens next.
Plot: 8.0/10- The concept was original and it was executed well but it probably should have been explained a little better. Although the some the of plot was a little derivative.
Action: 7.0/10- In Time is more of a thriller than an action movie but was some gunplay and general action.
Acting: 7.3/10- Overall the acting was solid and Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried had good chemistry together. Cillian Murphy performance was also good.
Special effects: 6.5/10- In Time did use a lot of special effects but in one scene were there was a car crash, it looked really fake.
Soundtrack: 6.0/10- It was not bad but it was just not memorable
Comedy: 6.5/10- There were a few humorous pun relating to the name of the movie.
Would I Watch This Again: I would not go out of my way to see it again but if it happens to be on when I am flipping through channels I might watch it again.
Overall: 7.2/10- Overall In Time is a surprisingly good movie with an unique concept but could have been so much better.
Closing comments: In Time is worth your time to watch it.
Recommended for: Thriller fans, Sci-Fi fans, Justin Timberlake fans,
Click here to check out more of our movie reviews.
If you want to contact us or have any question please send an e-mail to johnstarslayer@gmail.com.
This looks like a good movie and one I've been wanting to see for awhile. Maybe I can rent it soon :)
ReplyDeleteI think you mean: "I *wouldn't* go out of my way to see it again but if it happens to be on when I am flipping through channels I might watch it again."
ReplyDelete@Shena Tokala: Maybe you can. :)
ReplyDelete@Eldra: Thanks, I did not notice that I did that. :)
No problem. :)
ReplyDelete