A great concept, which potential was wasted as my time was in watching this.

Rating: 3/10 (25 December 2011)

In Time directed by Andrew Niccol has a marvellous premise. The idea is that in a future society time is actually currency where the whole economy, in terms of work and day to day living is based on paying a time allocation each individual has (that is somehow etched in/onto their skin) which is normally 25 years. However if someone has the means of wealth they can extend their life indefinitely and live for centuries. There is a class divide whereas the working class would only typically live to twenty five years. Somehow time can be exchanged between people as well. Eventually when your time is up, you are terminated.
The concept is original and interesting. As the film started I was asking all these questions, like why is the age you can only normally live to 25? Why and how was this society created? Is it based on time due to overpopulation? There are timekeepers throughout the film that manage and control time to keep the system working, but if people are allowed to exchange time, how is it policed? And how did this society based on a time society end up in a class divide? And why do those who live past twenty five not age?
I was looking forward to the film exploring this idea in depth, in what I thought would be a intelligent and thought-provoking movie. Instead Niccol stupidly decides to skim over these important questions as though it is background noise and is obsessed with bringing to the forefront two main characters Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) who when his mum dies (Olivia Wilde) ends up gaining centuries of time given to him by a suicidal stranger. Mistakenly identified as murdering the man timekeeper Raymond (Cillian Murphy) goes after him. Will kidnaps a rich daughter of a man Slyvia (Amanda Seyfried) where they go on the run to try and bring down the capitalist system. The problem is these two characters are boring and are not worth the screen time to pay for watching. We don't come to care about these characters or root for them in anyway. Both Timberlake and Seyfried give awful performances, which is a pity from her as she has given some good ones in Mamma Mia, Chloe, Jennifer's Body and Letters to Juliet. Timberlake though is even worse, particularly in the pathetic scene, which he horrifically overacts when his mum dies. Niccol is intent on making us agonise over watching the "romance" develop between him and Seyfried, which has no chemistry whatsoever. Even the action sequences, which is very little of is surprisingly boring and nothing we haven't seen before.
I will admit it is stylish looking with some great special effects and cinematography. I did particularly like one scene where Will and Slyvia are in a room and arm wrestle with a guy for time, which was cleverly written and skillfully executed (that is the only scene by the way) and Cillian Murphy gives a good performance as does Olivia Wilde in her cameo role, but they cannot do much with a flat and poorly structured script. In the end we are left with a film that looks like it will deliver the goods in first class except it doesn't arrive at all. This film might look cool at first glance and looks like it will have a lot to say, but underneath it is just a hollow empty shell, which is more concerned with showing off babes and guns (I wouldn't have minded had the concept been explored). This film shamefully manipulates it's audience into wasting their time viewing this rubbish. I did mildly enjoy a few parts as it does have a few saving graces. By far it isn't the worst film I have seen this year. I would certainly grant it that reprieve. However it is the most disappointing, with a great concept that had potential ending up criminally wasted.