Movies with Maricor: Don't Waste Your Time with In Time
By Maricor Capulong EGN Movie Reviewer In Time Directed and written by Andrew Niccol Justin Timberlake Amanda Seyfried I warn ...
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2011/11/movies-with-maricor-dont-waste-your.html
By Maricor Capulong
EGN Movie Reviewer
I warn everyone not to watch this movie, much like its message about wasting time, this movie was a waste of 109 minutes. If our society had relied heavily on time as our monetarial exchange, this movie is not worth a second.
Okay let me backtrack a bit, I let a bit of a brain fart get past my normal cool demeanor.
Will Salas is the main protagonist of the film, played irritably by Justin Timberlake. Will introduces the viewers to a dystopian future where time is the main form of currency. It was not necessarily explained how, why and who made this decision, the topic is often alluded to throughout the movie. In this future a strong social divide is apparent, Will has to work everyday making just enough to let him live literally day to day. Everyone stops aging at 25 yrs of age, on their 25th year a timer appears on their right arm telling them how much time they have left. No one ages, no one gets old, no one dies unless they are fatally wounded or their internal time runs out.
Will then meets a man in the Ghetto neighborhood bar, who is obviously flaunting his years. Will winds up helping the man escape from hoodlums who want to rob him of his years, in turn the man gives all of his years to Will. Big mistake....This in turn makes Will Salas wanted by the time cops, er... I forgot what they were called. But they are basically cops who keep tabs on the flow of time within social classes.
At this point of the movie, my best bet would be that the writer ran out of steam in regards to where the story was eventually going to lead. The characters are not very well contrived, we don't have any character background for their motivations. If their back story is presented, it is often presented in a rather rushed manner rather than cleverly written with care into the thread of the story.
We learn that Will's father was a renegade himself. Tiny snippets of information are dropped here and there but nothing coherently substantiated. Will's father's memory was nothing more than a lead up explanation to how Will was going to outsmart the neighborhood thugs later on.
Will Salas became an aimless hero, his character had no purpose in the movie. If Will did have a point, it was lost on me since he runs around changing his motives on what to do with his time. First he travels to the rich part of town to seek revenge for his poor friends. Then when he finally gets there, he squanders time like he was never poor.
Will then forgets his main purpose and flirts awkwardly with Sylvia Weis, a daughter of a rich and powerful executive, played blandly byAmanda Seyfried. Will then kidnaps her for ransom, but her rich father would not oblige. So the two then fall in love and join forces to rob time banks. They move around like thrill seeking mongers hungry for the next fix. Their motives, like I said is not very clear or often overtly confusing. Sylvia for some reason, resents her father for sheltering her too much. Although she gets a taste of hardship when she loses the time her father gave her, she lacks the understanding of the fact that her father loved her so much.
It irritates me when movies that are supposed to be imaginative are anything but. This film had potential to be visually striking, unlike Blade Runner where you have robots, flying cars and panned out views of the whole city, In Time looks as though it was just shot in the alleys of Chicago. The sets should have evoked a sensory feeling of emotion for the viewers, for them to be able to see how a futuristic ghetto should look like. Production practically and probably skimped on artistic expression just to pay a lofty sum to a novice actor with name value like JustinTimberlake.
The story drudges on as inept cops fail in finding two renegade citizens. The cops are so unorganized that Will eludes them three times in the movie. At some point Will and Sylvia jumps off a building window, maybe three stories high with a car to cushion their fall. The cops stop chasing them because they cant jump out of the same window. The cops are often just congregating in their head quarters just looking at grids and wondering where the criminals could be. Will and Sylvia hit up time banks and robs them in broad daylight, giving away time to everyone. Not even being discreet about it, they rob a string of Sylvia's father's banks. Yet for some reason, the cops are always an hour behind in terms of catching on to Will and Sylvia's pattern.
There are also unrealistic measures of time in regards to how fast it really runs out. We have the two heroes having only one minute left to live, running around trying to figure out where to get time. They run about five miles to the nearest pawn shop in the span of only one minute? How fit are people in the future? Do they have lungs of steel? Calves of rubber? I mean a minute sprint for a five mile dash? Really?
There is also a lack of apathy in my part when characters die for running out of time. What is so tragic about living 100 years and not aging? Living 100 years and keeping my beauty, heck I would be so lucky to have that luxury. It would be different if people still died because of cancer or aids, or being shot. Why should I feel bad for people who are physically fit and are just being literally shut off. They have lived their lives young, tell me what is so tragic about that? If no one has the right to live forever, would everyone in that parallel universe be a hypocrite? They all are basically living longer because they have the ability to know when and how they are going to die. For anyone to actually selflessly give up that right to live forever would promote aging right? So why would they just revert back to the old days when money is money, and we all age? It would have been different if people actually aged and every time they earn time, they become younger. In that sense people can still have a choice whether to age gracefully or be a time hog and live a little longer. Just saying....
In Time could have been more, could have been better, could have been anything but wasted... I am very surprised since the same person directed and wrote Gattaca. This idea was even simpler than Gattaca, I just don't understand the reason for it being so sub-par from what Gattaca was. There should be no reason. None.
I give this movie 1/5 hearts. I felt they could have taken their time, excuse the pun, with this wonderful idea. Heavily depending on big name actors or singers to make money, there is no saving grace for this movie, not even Cilian Murphy.
EGN Movie Reviewer
Directed and written by Andrew Niccol
I warn everyone not to watch this movie, much like its message about wasting time, this movie was a waste of 109 minutes. If our society had relied heavily on time as our monetarial exchange, this movie is not worth a second.
Okay let me backtrack a bit, I let a bit of a brain fart get past my normal cool demeanor.
Will Salas is the main protagonist of the film, played irritably by Justin Timberlake. Will introduces the viewers to a dystopian future where time is the main form of currency. It was not necessarily explained how, why and who made this decision, the topic is often alluded to throughout the movie. In this future a strong social divide is apparent, Will has to work everyday making just enough to let him live literally day to day. Everyone stops aging at 25 yrs of age, on their 25th year a timer appears on their right arm telling them how much time they have left. No one ages, no one gets old, no one dies unless they are fatally wounded or their internal time runs out.
Will then meets a man in the Ghetto neighborhood bar, who is obviously flaunting his years. Will winds up helping the man escape from hoodlums who want to rob him of his years, in turn the man gives all of his years to Will. Big mistake....This in turn makes Will Salas wanted by the time cops, er... I forgot what they were called. But they are basically cops who keep tabs on the flow of time within social classes.
At this point of the movie, my best bet would be that the writer ran out of steam in regards to where the story was eventually going to lead. The characters are not very well contrived, we don't have any character background for their motivations. If their back story is presented, it is often presented in a rather rushed manner rather than cleverly written with care into the thread of the story.
We learn that Will's father was a renegade himself. Tiny snippets of information are dropped here and there but nothing coherently substantiated. Will's father's memory was nothing more than a lead up explanation to how Will was going to outsmart the neighborhood thugs later on.
Will Salas became an aimless hero, his character had no purpose in the movie. If Will did have a point, it was lost on me since he runs around changing his motives on what to do with his time. First he travels to the rich part of town to seek revenge for his poor friends. Then when he finally gets there, he squanders time like he was never poor.
Will then forgets his main purpose and flirts awkwardly with Sylvia Weis, a daughter of a rich and powerful executive, played blandly byAmanda Seyfried. Will then kidnaps her for ransom, but her rich father would not oblige. So the two then fall in love and join forces to rob time banks. They move around like thrill seeking mongers hungry for the next fix. Their motives, like I said is not very clear or often overtly confusing. Sylvia for some reason, resents her father for sheltering her too much. Although she gets a taste of hardship when she loses the time her father gave her, she lacks the understanding of the fact that her father loved her so much.
It irritates me when movies that are supposed to be imaginative are anything but. This film had potential to be visually striking, unlike Blade Runner where you have robots, flying cars and panned out views of the whole city, In Time looks as though it was just shot in the alleys of Chicago. The sets should have evoked a sensory feeling of emotion for the viewers, for them to be able to see how a futuristic ghetto should look like. Production practically and probably skimped on artistic expression just to pay a lofty sum to a novice actor with name value like JustinTimberlake.
The story drudges on as inept cops fail in finding two renegade citizens. The cops are so unorganized that Will eludes them three times in the movie. At some point Will and Sylvia jumps off a building window, maybe three stories high with a car to cushion their fall. The cops stop chasing them because they cant jump out of the same window. The cops are often just congregating in their head quarters just looking at grids and wondering where the criminals could be. Will and Sylvia hit up time banks and robs them in broad daylight, giving away time to everyone. Not even being discreet about it, they rob a string of Sylvia's father's banks. Yet for some reason, the cops are always an hour behind in terms of catching on to Will and Sylvia's pattern.
There are also unrealistic measures of time in regards to how fast it really runs out. We have the two heroes having only one minute left to live, running around trying to figure out where to get time. They run about five miles to the nearest pawn shop in the span of only one minute? How fit are people in the future? Do they have lungs of steel? Calves of rubber? I mean a minute sprint for a five mile dash? Really?
There is also a lack of apathy in my part when characters die for running out of time. What is so tragic about living 100 years and not aging? Living 100 years and keeping my beauty, heck I would be so lucky to have that luxury. It would be different if people still died because of cancer or aids, or being shot. Why should I feel bad for people who are physically fit and are just being literally shut off. They have lived their lives young, tell me what is so tragic about that? If no one has the right to live forever, would everyone in that parallel universe be a hypocrite? They all are basically living longer because they have the ability to know when and how they are going to die. For anyone to actually selflessly give up that right to live forever would promote aging right? So why would they just revert back to the old days when money is money, and we all age? It would have been different if people actually aged and every time they earn time, they become younger. In that sense people can still have a choice whether to age gracefully or be a time hog and live a little longer. Just saying....
In Time could have been more, could have been better, could have been anything but wasted... I am very surprised since the same person directed and wrote Gattaca. This idea was even simpler than Gattaca, I just don't understand the reason for it being so sub-par from what Gattaca was. There should be no reason. None.
I give this movie 1/5 hearts. I felt they could have taken their time, excuse the pun, with this wonderful idea. Heavily depending on big name actors or singers to make money, there is no saving grace for this movie, not even Cilian Murphy.
Posts
Post a Comment