Usually I don't like, don't watch sci-fi. But the reviews here & elsewhere were intriguing, transcending the genre. And Amanda Seyfried usually is watchable no matter what. Dropping a dollar in the red vending machine turned-out to be rewarding cinematically.
This film has been called an "action movie," a "sci-fi" flick. What it is is an ingenious "morality play." Congratulations to the writer/director and Fox for greenlighting it, no pun intended relative to the embedded arm timer(s).
We've all heard, ad nauseum, that "time is money." And that's the poetry of this production, to take that which is ordinary, known, obvious maybe, oft stated, and overlooked, and restate it in a way that captures and captivates. In this film time IS money, and therein also is its genius of concept and revelation.
Is the plot perfect in every regard about which some reviewers are nitpicking? Not sure; probably not. It's not important though. It's close enough to be sufficiently provoking. And it's original, creatively so.
TIME also is LIFE itself, stating the obvious. Without it, money does not matter, the old "you can't take it with you." And by flipping the time-is-money thing used mostly by bosses of the world as a people-prod - those who have plenty of money that others often are making for them - it hits close enough to human nature to make one think sitting there in the cinema seat, on the couch, commenting on how we value what we have, or don't have - and those who are greedy hoarders. Those who have TIME have LIFE. And since time is currency in the film's world, it shows us ourselves in an original, clever, and even poetic way - in today's cinema vernacular of guns, action, and violence.
The one-day-at-a-time sub-theme was interesting & stimulating.
This film is an intelligent concept staffed with actors good enough to make it really interesting. Timberlake was fine, even well cast; Seyfriend is nearly always totally watchable, and is here, too. Her make-up and hair was effective, almost subduing the Seyfriend look, while emphasizing it for a futuro effect. Good job.
The '70's retro-techno-non-piston (I think) cars were a warpish concept, interesting for some kind of future world & alternate universe environment. ('70's Detroit product was America's ugly automotive nadir, opening the door for the Japanese.) However, as other reviewers have noted, the Jag car crash early in the film looks like '50's model not-so-special effects. It's so bad it seems out-of-place in a film that otherwise is slick. The money must've run out here in the real world ...
Filmed with the ARRI Alexa, the digital capture uses a lot of the ugly fluorescent green and sodium orange available practicals of our real world. But it's effective, especially for the grittier parts of the action. To see how digital and available light can look superb, see Soderbergh's "Contagion."
As for "In Time," it's that rare original concept where the Hollywoodie stars & production make it work effectively & provocatively. Bravo.
This film has been called an "action movie," a "sci-fi" flick. What it is is an ingenious "morality play." Congratulations to the writer/director and Fox for greenlighting it, no pun intended relative to the embedded arm timer(s).
We've all heard, ad nauseum, that "time is money." And that's the poetry of this production, to take that which is ordinary, known, obvious maybe, oft stated, and overlooked, and restate it in a way that captures and captivates. In this film time IS money, and therein also is its genius of concept and revelation.
Is the plot perfect in every regard about which some reviewers are nitpicking? Not sure; probably not. It's not important though. It's close enough to be sufficiently provoking. And it's original, creatively so.
TIME also is LIFE itself, stating the obvious. Without it, money does not matter, the old "you can't take it with you." And by flipping the time-is-money thing used mostly by bosses of the world as a people-prod - those who have plenty of money that others often are making for them - it hits close enough to human nature to make one think sitting there in the cinema seat, on the couch, commenting on how we value what we have, or don't have - and those who are greedy hoarders. Those who have TIME have LIFE. And since time is currency in the film's world, it shows us ourselves in an original, clever, and even poetic way - in today's cinema vernacular of guns, action, and violence.
The one-day-at-a-time sub-theme was interesting & stimulating.
This film is an intelligent concept staffed with actors good enough to make it really interesting. Timberlake was fine, even well cast; Seyfriend is nearly always totally watchable, and is here, too. Her make-up and hair was effective, almost subduing the Seyfriend look, while emphasizing it for a futuro effect. Good job.
The '70's retro-techno-non-piston (I think) cars were a warpish concept, interesting for some kind of future world & alternate universe environment. ('70's Detroit product was America's ugly automotive nadir, opening the door for the Japanese.) However, as other reviewers have noted, the Jag car crash early in the film looks like '50's model not-so-special effects. It's so bad it seems out-of-place in a film that otherwise is slick. The money must've run out here in the real world ...
Filmed with the ARRI Alexa, the digital capture uses a lot of the ugly fluorescent green and sodium orange available practicals of our real world. But it's effective, especially for the grittier parts of the action. To see how digital and available light can look superb, see Soderbergh's "Contagion."
As for "In Time," it's that rare original concept where the Hollywoodie stars & production make it work effectively & provocatively. Bravo.