In a future where people stop aging at 25, but are engineered to live only one more year, having the means to buy your way out of the situation is a shot at immortal youth. Here, Will Salas finds himself accused of murder and on the run with a hostage - a connection that becomes an important part of the way against the system.
The world is shocked by the appearance of two talking chimpanzees, who arrived mysteriously in a U.S. spacecraft. They become the toast of society; but one man believes them to be a threat to the human race.
Jarrod and his pregnant girlfriend Elaine travel to Los Angeles to meet his old friend and successful entrepreneur Terry, and his wife Candice. Terry gives a party in his apartment for ... See full summary »
Set in a futuristic world where humans live in isolation and interact through surrogate robots, a cop is forced to leave his home for the first time in years in order to investigate the murders of others' surrogates.
Welcome to a world where time has become the ultimate currency. You stop aging at 25, but there's a catch: you're genetically-engineered to live only one more year, unless you can buy your way out of it. The rich "earn" decades at a time (remaining at age 25), becoming essentially immortal, while the rest beg, borrow or steal enough hours to make it through the day. When a man from the wrong side of the tracks is falsely accused of murder, he is forced to go on the run with a beautiful hostage. Living minute to minute, the duo's love becomes a powerful tool in their war against the system. Written by
Twentieth Century Fox
Sci-fi writer Harlan Ellison launched a lawsuit against New Regency and director Andrew Niccol, claiming that the film's plot bore an uncanny similarity to his short story "Repent Harlequin! Said the Ticktockman". Initially, Ellison was seeking an injunction against the film's release, which he then watered down to a request for onscreen credit. Ultimately the case was dropped with no money exchanging hands between any of the parties. See more »
Everyone in the movie has their clock on their left arm. However, when Will and Sylvia are at the pawn shop, the woman holding the shotgun has no clock on her left arm. See more »
I don't have time. I don't have time to worry about how it happened. It is what it is. We're genetically engineered to stop aging at 25. The trouble is, we live only one more year, unless we can get more time. Time is now the currency. We earn it and spend it. The rich can live forever. And the rest of us? I just want to wake up with more time on my hand than hours in the day.
See more »
Looking at this film and its concept I was intrigued. With this said the film does fail to live up to the potential of its concept. One of the few major issues i have with this film is the lack of back-story with regards to the implementation of the 'body clock', along with the lack of true quality acting and a well written script. As a result of this what the viewer will get from this film experience are moments (and i mean moments) where you are enjoying the film, but by the end of it all you can reflect on what you have seen and notice that you could have done a lot more with your money if you had not gone to watch In Time.
...What a pity
172 of 285 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?