When In Time begins, the screen glows a phosphorescent green, like a Cousteau documentary with nighttime shots of coral reefs and deep-sea fish. The camera pulls back – slowly; taking lots of time – and the fuzziness shapes itself into rapidly changing digits, like on an alarm clock, except that these numbers are scorched on a forearm, like a serial number on a prisoner at Auschwitz. The grim analogy is entirely appropriate in a film that situates its protagonist (Will, played by Justin Timberlake) in a ghetto pocked with privation. In Time depicts a sullen dystopia where aging is halted at 25 and life is terminated at 26. Anyone older is living on borrowed (namely, bought or stolen or gifted) time, and the green digits on the forearm indicate how much longer you’ll live. It is like being in a concentration camp – a life of endless toil, overcast with the constant awareness of death. Andrew Niccol, the director, established with Gattaca that he is committed to thoughtful sci-fi, and here too, he toys with the idea of a future whose citizenry is rent into haves and have-nots, and whose guiding light is Darwin. Only the fittest will survive. The fittest in Gattaca were those with good genes; here, as the horological title suggests, the fittest are the ones with the most time on their hands. Literally.
This is a fine premise for a thriller. We embrace, in the present, the cliché that time is money, but in Niccol’s world, time is money. Time is the currency – a cup of coffee costs four minutes. Like harried businessmen, the residents of the working-class zone named Dayton – where Will lives – keep looking at their wrists, at the time. The pawnshops trade in time. Automated ticket-vending machines announce monotonically, “Please deposit one month.” When Will, a have-not, is touched by tragedy, he vows, “I’m going to make them pay.” He means, of course, that he’s going to take the people responsible – the haves – for all the time they’ve got. Will gets an unexpected gift – over a century, transferred to him by a 105-year-old who’s lost the desire to live. (The latter doesn’t look a day over 25, which is when he stopped aging; it’s safe to assume that nobody goes to medical school any longer to train in plastic surgery.) Armed with more years than he knows what to do with, Will sets out to the district of the haves, whose coolness and reserve Niccol paints in shades of ice-blue. (The ghetto community, in comparison, is doused in warm shades of amber.)
These early portions are queasily involving. Niccol’s future-world is rendered different not by extravagant computer imagery but through touches just a shade eccentric – a retro-looking mirror that folds into the wall like a concertina, or a phone that rests on a metallic pyramid-like base. The linguistically inclined among us are kept busy counting the shameless number of time-related puns, not a single one of which is left untouched. The most unremarkable of phrases (“Who has time for a girlfriend?” or “Got a minute?”) accrue new meaning. This lightness is slowly leavened through hints of racism, which is sometimes subtle. After Will wolfs down his food in the district of the haves – called New Greenwich, an altogether apt name for where the rich live (money is time, which, as displayed on the forearm, is green) – a waitress walks up and observes, “You’re not from around here, are you?” She knows because he does everything a little too fast, his eye on the clock. Timberlake, who has grown into an unexpectedly interesting actor, is perfect as someone from the wrong side of the tracks who’s nonetheless comfortable in the midst of people far above his station. He puts a boyishly handsome face on our naked desire to cheat death, to get more time.
Trouble arrives in the form of Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried) – for Will, and for the movie. He accepts an invitation to a party at her father’s mansion, and when events conspire to land him behind bars (for a crime he did not commit), he escapes holding Sylvia as hostage. They embark on a cross-country run – Niccol runs out of ideas. There is a vital contemporariness in this story, where a few – say, one per cent – hoard the riches while the majority languishes in want. Niccol is right to transform his leads into Bonnie and Clyde, as well as Robin Hood – the have-nots rising in rebellion against the haves. But the far-flung social implications gradually simmer out of focus as the film narrows its sights on one man’s (and one woman’s) efforts to steer clear of the cop (Cillian Murphy) on their trail. (Will and Sylvia also have to dodge time bandits – which could have been this film’s title had it not been appropriated, earlier, by Terry Gilliam – who prey upon those with, um, too much time on their hands. The puns just keep inserting themselves, don’t they?) For all his grandiose stabs at changing the world, all Niccol wants to do is borrow the premise and the predicate of Logan’s Run. By the end, In Time is reduced a bafflingly generic chase movie, with the audience left to their own devices to entertain themselves, wondering, perhaps, if a dystopian version of Scarborough Fair would echo with the refrain of “parsley, sage, rosemary and time.”
An edited version of this piece can be found here.
Copyright ©2011 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Rahul Agarwal
November 6, 2011
Excellent review! I went to see this movie with a lot of hopes – I expected a “Blade Runner” or at least a “Dark City” with action. It began that way, but perhaps decided to pander to the lowest common denominator towards the end.
A very minor point: I thought the “New Greenwich” name was, more than the color, a reference to the place around which GMT and thus time zones are designed.
LikeLike
KayKay
November 6, 2011
“Timberlake, who has grown into an unexpectedly interesting actor”
Right about that, his zany performance in The Social Network was a pleasant counterpoint to the dourness in the film. And I liked him in Friends With Benefits as well. If he chooses his roles well, he could be the next successful music-to-movie crossover star, a la Mark Whalberg,and a tad more interesting as the latter’s always struck me as a one-trick pony (he’s pretty much Dirk Diggler everywhere!)
As to the second half degenerating into a chase flick, that’s the impression I got from the trailer (which, like a big chunk of Hollywood trailers nowadays, don’t function so much as teasers to see the complete film, as they are 2 minute Cliff’s Notes of a flick’s entire plot, laid out in easy to digest 2 minute bites) which has put me off seeing it in the cinemas. Will wait for the DVD.
And please don’t tell me the wonderful Cillian Murphy is yet again typecast as the smarmy bad guy!
LikeLike
brangan
November 6, 2011
Rahul Agarwal: Oh that’s the most obvious inference, because there are those huge maps on the walls with time zones and such. It just occurred to me that there was this other little inference too, and I thought I’d jot it down in the review.
BTW, I identified a lot with this piece, and was hugely relieved that critic-bashing isn’t an isolated Indian sport 🙂 These lines, especially, rang true:
“But it would be a sad day, wouldn’t it, when a critic — a critic! — has to apologize for having a blissed-out time at the movies.”
And, “The real point is that we can’t win.”
One thing I’m so happy to be out of is the grading system. God, the trouble I had with it while actually writing reviews! It’s the single most vile and difficult thing I’ve had to deal with in this profession — because I don’t do “comprehensive” reviews that rate movies like report cards, and it was hell trying to distill the essence (rather, my very personal experience) of a film into stars. Phew!
LikeLike
Anurag
November 7, 2011
“One thing I’m so happy to be out of is the grading system. ” And I for one am extremely thankful to you sir for being so. And no offense to other critics as i can see their challenge quite bluntly- any critic who rates by stars seems to focussed just on justifying why so many stars or to be specific why the extra half star !!! oh come on! as if thats going to dramatically affect the merits of the film if not the box office which actually gets affected these days- case in point : ra.one. With ur review brangan i can relax, sit back and read an experience of a certain pov instead of judgement to agree with. Keep up the good work.
LikeLike
brangan
November 7, 2011
Anurag sir: “sit back and read an experience of a certain pov instead of judgement to agree with.” — that’s all it is, really. Thanks for getting that and putting it across in such a simple way.
LikeLike
Manojh
November 8, 2011
Rangan, you should have a punchline “Idhu Review alla, Right of View” under your blog title, instead of repeatedly having to come up with an explanation of how your “reviews” are to be read 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
November 8, 2011
Manojh: Or I could post quotes like this one — extracted from James Wolcott’s memoir by the music critic of The New Yorker 🙂
LikeLike
rameshram
November 8, 2011
Sunday morninga kapi, indu paper and baradwaj rangan reviewoda start pannina, hear attacke varradhu pongo ha ha ha ha ha (said in poornam vishwanathan’s best)
LikeLike
Akshay Ahuja
November 10, 2011
I particularly loved the phrase : Do you come from time ?
LikeLike
Radhika
November 12, 2011
Brannigan, you might be interested to know that this entire premise was introduced in a wonderful Mandrake comic – Mandrake and the Gold Hunting Alien – not that anyone is giving any credit to that genius, Lee Falk. Here is a link to the comic :
http://indrajal-online.blogspot.com/2007/10/150-mandrake-and-goldman.html
It’s nice fleshed out, I think, and fairly internally consistent, even if the second half, as you say, degenerated into a chase movie. I think there was much meat to be explored in how the social dynamics of such a situaton play out, but they preferred a chase to that
LikeLike
Radhika
November 12, 2011
It’s interesting, isn’t it, that except for Amanda Seyfried, all the others are well over 25? Olivia Wilde is close, at 27, but all the main men are in their 30s but pretending to be frozen at 25, Heh, our Khans are also similarly stuck in a time warp.
LikeLike
brangan
November 13, 2011
Radhika: See, I keep telling everyone. There’s more to Mandrake than just the sight of Narda and Karma lounging around in bikinis 🙂
LikeLike
Radhika
November 14, 2011
Wikipedia tells me that Harlan Ellison won a lawsuit asserting the premise is lifted from his short story circa 64, so I guess it isn’t Lee Falk’s idea in the first place. Though I still think that was a great comic, she ended defiantly
LikeLike
KayKay
November 14, 2011
” There’s more to Mandrake than just the sight of Narda and Karma lounging around in bikinis”
Of course there is! Were you as shocked as I was when Hojo was revelaed as the secret chief of Inter-Intel?
LikeLike
brangan
November 15, 2011
KayKay: Yup. I even have that comic, the one where he is revealed as the chief. Indrajal Comics totally rocked. Always preferred them to moral-science-dispensing ACK. Old-fart alert, but I wonder if kids today smile at the phrase “Mandrake gestures hypnotically…” 🙂
LikeLike
KayKay
February 4, 2012
Just saw this. Interesting concept let down by ham-fisted execution. And the ending….so Andrew Niccol is advocating a welfare state as the solution to current economic woes? Just steal all that time (money) and distribute it willy nilly to the have-nots, crashing the system in the process? So at the end it all, is In Time a screed for Communism, I wonder?
LikeLike