0
0
We often use that old line, “time is money,” but what if that were true? What if each hour of work added time to our lives—and each bill we paid took time away? What if we could wheel and deal our way to immortality? And what if our debts could eventually kill us? It’s a fascinating idea—one that writer/director Andrew Niccol merely begins to explore in his sci-fi thriller, In Time.
In the film’s futuristic world, humans have been engineered to stop aging at 25. At that point, the clock starts ticking, and they’re given one year to spend as they wish—unless they can earn more time, that’s it.
You see, in the future, time really is money. While the poor struggle for each second until they time out, the rich can live forever. But immortality isn’t always as great as it seems, and one remarkably wealthy man wants out. He gives all of his remaining time—over a century’s worth—to a poor kid named Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), who soon finds himself on the run from those who seek to keep order and balance within the system.
The concept behind In Time is certainly an intriguing one. Granted, the fact that no one in this technologically-advanced world ages past 25 definitely takes some getting used to (Will’s mother, after all, is played by Olivia Wilde). But the film’s time-is-money foundation will give you plenty to think about as Timberlake’s Will goes about his race against time (and the relentless Timekeepers who want to keep him in his place).
Unfortunately, though, a clever concept can’t carry the entire film. Problems arise when Will teams up with adventure-seeking rich girl Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). At first, when Will goes on the run, Sylvia is his hostage. Then, suddenly (and with no real explanation), she decides that she wants to work with him—to help him fight against the oppressive system that’s actually worked quite well in her favor. It’s supposed to be a noble decision—to turn her back on her wealthy past (and her greedy father) and fight for equality. But the story is so perplexingly underdeveloped that it might take you a while to figure out that Sylvia and Will aren’t just acting like a couple of rebellious kids; they’re trying to be activists—like a pair of dark, futuristic Robin Hoods.
The lack of story development isn’t the film’s only flaw. The effects are often cheesy (especially one particular car crash scene that looks like it was filmed using a Matchbox car), and the acting is passable at best. It’s a shame, too—because In Time had plenty of potential. Maybe, after coming up with a cool concept and hiring a hot young cast, Niccol tried to develop it all into a brilliant sci-fi thriller—but he simply ran out of time.
DVD Review:
The DVD release of In Time is pretty bare-bones. In addition to a trailer and some previews, the special features menu includes just a collection of short deleted and extended scenes. Most of these extra scenes (including one in which Will and Sylvia decide to steal directly from Sylvia’s father’s wealthy friends) were quite wisely cut.
