By Katie Barger
Managing Web Editor
Writer-director Andrew Niccol is a specialist when it comes to creating dystopia. His latest film, “In Time,” reveals a world in which everyone is programmed to stop aging at just 25 years old unless they earn more time for themselves.
From start to finish, “In Time” is full of action that is bold, well-staged and to the point. Still, the gun-wielding conflicts come at the expense of the movie’s science-fiction foundation and sacrifice intelligence and cleverness for action and violence.
Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) comes from Dayton, Ohio, a ghetto where people are robbed not for money, but days to live. The bodies of those who have run out of time to live line the streets.
Will’s fate changes when he is suddenly given a century of life by a 100-year-old man who is tired of living. He then travels to the wealthy, luxurious area in the fictional city New Greenwich. When “timekeepers” question if he murdered the man for his century of life, Will takes a rich hostage, Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried), and goes on the run.
Despite the many meticulously realized elements of this futuristic realm, the film does not feel exceptionally deep or intricate. The whole “time” system also seems to have its loop-holes, especially when it comes to the concept of time transfer. People pay for things or lend money by clasping hands, while all it takes to rob someone of his or her life is a firm grasp.Regardless of the gaps in the logic of his fictional world, Niccol is able to sell its emotional impact. When Will is suddenly flush with a hundred years, the sense of relaxation and possibility that comes from being “in time” is found laced throughout the film with its smooth cinematography.
One of the biggest faults of “In Time” is the treatment of its hero and villain. Will’s transition from having no time to gratuitous amounts of time prompts him to play Robin Hood and take time from the rich and give it to the poor.
There is nothing personal about his journey, despite a few lines that attempt to link his actions to those of his father, who was also something of a rebel.His enemy, the timekeeper Leon (Cillian Murphy), is drawn with characteristics that render his motivations not enigmatic but meager. Focusing more on Leon’s development as a character would have made him more dynamic.
With the emphasis on action, deep observations about the world are encapsulated into cheesy catchphrases, like “For few to be immortal, many must die.”
Whenever Will and Leon recite these aphorisms, the film’s credibility is undermined. Seyfried, in contrast, manages to sell her rebellious rich-girl role. Her transfer from a world plentiful in time into a world where people run down to their last minutes makes her a dynamic character.
“In Time” does a great job explaining the rules of the world but fails to learn from the lessons of its characters. The premise is clever enough to overlook many of the movie’s flaws and will entertain those who love adventure and spectacle.
Overall, the film will provide audiences with an enjoyable experience, but is still nothing special. “In Time” is rated PG-13 and is in theaters nationwide.
Leave a Reply