Painting By Numbers - In Time

3 out of 5 Popcorn Kernels

See Trailer Here

Being a lover of science fiction, I was very intrigued at the premise behind In Time; although this is not a new premise, it is a new take on the dystopian science fiction thriller (where technology advances to such a degree that it controls our lives...literally. Can anyone say ATM!). But this take on an old theme, although freshly acted, is somewhat dimmed by a staggering screenplay.

That is not to say that In Time is not interesting, it is very interesting, and it is more of a action thriller than a Utopian one. But given that this feature is about time - it is not surprising that it takes on the action side of science fiction. Given the director Andrew Niccol (who also directed one of my favorites: Gattaga), I was assuming something else. But here, we are introduced to a society, where time is money...literally. Everyone is given 25 years to live - in that time - anything you earn that would usually pay in money, now pays in minutes to your life. So the rich can live forever, and the poor are struggling to buy time.You either add to your life or the government turns off your body clock and you die upon your 26th birthday. Of course - my biggest beef about science fiction features, is their lack of minorities in this future...but more on that later.

You Parked The Car WHERE?

In In Time we meet Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), who seemingly lives with his mother Rachel (who also looks 25), in the ghetto of the future...funny how it looks like the ghetto of today. He shares some if his time with his mother, who is approaching her 50th birthday, extending her life. There isn't much depth to their relationship, it serves as only a vehicle for the plot near the end of the movie. One day, while in a bar having drinks with his best friend Borel (Johnny Galecki of The Big Bang Theory), they see a guy, Henry (Alex Petttyfer) buying drinks for people in the bar (this obvious act eludes that he is wealthy). This attracts the attention of some thieves, who try to attack him - but Will intervenes and helps Henry to escape.


It is not until the next morning, after they have slept in an abandoned warehouse, that Will discovers that he has more than a Century of time displayed on his arm (this digital display is embedded in all the forearm of the citizens...no need to wear a watch), and when he looks outside the windows, he see that Henry is about to commit suicide bridge-style. The time he gifted to Will, was his Thank You. Henry had already lived 100 years, and was just tired...of living.


This act attracts attention of both the police and the previous attackers; one who wants to make sure Will didn't steal the time, and the other who want to take the time from Will. In the meantime, Will enters an interesting world of the rich, and this is where I thought In Time was fascinating. The dynamics of the wealthy, their use of time, the ways they can manipulate the very digital system that keeps the poor alive (seemingly just long enough so they have to labor a lot more just to survive; thus making the wealthy more wealthy...sound familiar?), was what I wanted more of from this movie. But in an action movie, the characters have to run through these dynamics without us really delving into them.

At The Tone...The Time Will Be...

Will eventually meets Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried), the daughter of a wealthy businessman, and kidnaps and holds her hostage in order to slow down both of the types that are trying to catch him. It is really their movie. Justin and Amanda have amazing chemistry, but because of their youth, they are only becoming aware of the way the government controls the world through time, so we never go more that skin deep into this society. We understand their different lifestyles, and each get a chance to see and feel how the other lives, but they are both still children who live at home with their parents, so their sacrifices in life are limited. I would have loved to have known about their parents struggles in getting to the point to even make the decision to HAVE children in such a society. Can you imagine the medical bills? What is the cost to your life just to have a child? Are there even doctors in such a society where the government gives you an automatic 25 years of life?  What about taking care of your child...what would be the cost of that? Adoption? Hacking the system? Bank accounts? Interest? Credit? These issues are never covered, but it would have made In Time a much more thought provoking experience.


And as for the minorities in this movie, which are not introduced at all. We see them in the poorest grottoes of the neighborhood, but they have no real presence. I understand that the movie is the point of view of just one part of society, but this movie seemed smarter than that. With such a division of classes, minorities would have been the logical subdivision that would also have made this movie a classic. Gattaca did the same thing in it's depiction of classes, and yes there was no minority presence in that one, but it did display a very emotional part of society, disabilities, and a minority class that went beyond skin color; and that made it shine; because there was a story-arch in the way rich and poor looked at each other, and they appreciated and understood the differences. 


In Time doesn't make that arch. We see the poor giving to the poor, and the rich feeling sorry for them, but there is never a great change in their morality. But we already live in a society like that - and this one is taken as pure entertainment, not as a lesson for life...and if you see this movie on that level, you will be on time to have a good time, no matter what the time of day you see In Time.