|
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product details
|
Reviews
Amazon.co.uk Review
As a storyteller, Andrew Niccol tends to think big, tackling heady subjects such as genetic predestination (Gattaca), the nature of reality (The Truman Show), and celebrity in the cyber age (S1m0ne). In Time, Niccol's first film since 2005's Lord of War, has a typically gigantic premise--a world where everyone over 25 years old must pay for every continued second of their existence--but stumbles in the execution. While the ideas are exceedingly clever, the telling isn't especially witty. Justin Timberlake stars as a goodhearted but desperate minimum-wager trapped in a society where the rich are essentially immortal and the poor see their lifespan shorten with every purchase. (A cup of coffee costs 4 minutes, taking the bus also takes 30 minutes off of your life, and so on.) After being gifted with a century by a mysterious benefactor, he begins a romance with a beautiful socialite (Amanda Seyfried), whose father holds the key to the entire monetary system. Matters are complicated with the introduction of a relentless time cop (Cillian Murphy) with his own motivations for restoring the unnatural balance of things. Niccol has fun laying out the aspects of a world where even the elderly are genetically frozen at age 25 (the scenes where Timberlake interacts with his mother, played by a disturbingly spry Olivia Wilde, are an unsavoury hoot), but has difficulty translating the ingenuity of his concept to a compelling narrative, which rapidly devolves into a mix of uninspired chase scenes and a succession of time-related puns that would have trouble passing muster on a Laffy Taffy wrapper. (The bad guys threaten to clean Timberlake's clock. Repeatedly.) While science fiction aficionados will find much to chew on in Niccol's askew reality, In Time never quite hits the marks that its own ideas suggest. As a film, it's more fun to think about than watch. --Andrew Wright
DVD Description
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. 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. A slick and sexy action thriller starring Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried.
Special Features:
Special Features:
- The Minutes
- Deleted/ extended scenes (x 10)
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
25 of 28 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
I decided to watch this based on the advertising campaigns I'd seen on TV which made it sound as though it had the potential to be a great film - and it was, for a little while.
The concept of "In time" is essentially that we've obliterated the use of money as the ultimate currency and switched it for time. Now, at the age of 25 our clocks start ticking whilst we stop aging, which sounds great right? We never get old! But there's a catch, once those clocks start to tick we're genetically engineered to only have one years worth of time remaining. This means we have to start earning (or stealing) time.
The aging concept is brilliantly demonstrated a number of times. Our main man, played by Justin Timberlake, lives with his mother who is 50 - except she only looks 25. Things like this can actually seem a bit weird at first but you quickly get used to it. So how do we get time? Well you can use your time to buy things, like coffee or to pay your rent but you can also get some back from other people donating or by working.
What's interesting is that there is still a divide between "rich" and "poor". The richer people have infinite time it would seem, although how they get it isn't always explained. I liked this aspect of the film, who says that one family deserves to live longer than another? Why should one man "time out" to allow another to live? This corrupt balance is explored quite a lot - it is suggested that this is a way of monitoring the population size.
Aside from this, there is actually a plot underneath this unique world - Timberlake's character is accused of murder. I won't say anymore on that because it will inevitably ruin the story but from here we're lead on a race against time and restoration of justice. The only negative I have is, I felt the ending was weak - almost like the writers couldn't think of a plausible way to end it so they came up with the easiest thing.
So would I watch this again? Definitely. Should you watch it? I recommend it. Hope this helps someone.
The concept of "In time" is essentially that we've obliterated the use of money as the ultimate currency and switched it for time. Now, at the age of 25 our clocks start ticking whilst we stop aging, which sounds great right? We never get old! But there's a catch, once those clocks start to tick we're genetically engineered to only have one years worth of time remaining. This means we have to start earning (or stealing) time.
The aging concept is brilliantly demonstrated a number of times. Our main man, played by Justin Timberlake, lives with his mother who is 50 - except she only looks 25. Things like this can actually seem a bit weird at first but you quickly get used to it. So how do we get time? Well you can use your time to buy things, like coffee or to pay your rent but you can also get some back from other people donating or by working.
What's interesting is that there is still a divide between "rich" and "poor". The richer people have infinite time it would seem, although how they get it isn't always explained. I liked this aspect of the film, who says that one family deserves to live longer than another? Why should one man "time out" to allow another to live? This corrupt balance is explored quite a lot - it is suggested that this is a way of monitoring the population size.
Aside from this, there is actually a plot underneath this unique world - Timberlake's character is accused of murder. I won't say anymore on that because it will inevitably ruin the story but from here we're lead on a race against time and restoration of justice. The only negative I have is, I felt the ending was weak - almost like the writers couldn't think of a plausible way to end it so they came up with the easiest thing.
So would I watch this again? Definitely. Should you watch it? I recommend it. Hope this helps someone.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
It must be hard to be a director knowing you're only ever as good as your last film. I guess foremost in their mind must be that a film must be popular enough (ie lowest common denominator) to gain revenue while trying to achieve the original vision.
I think this is where In Time falls down to some extent; it had the potential to be a cerebral scathing attack on how the rich exploit the poor, which it did to some extent but it ended-up as action-flick by numbers. Films like They Live and Society achieved such allegories without pandering to any specific audience.
Some of the film worked really well; as others have said the substitution of time as currency was a very clever idea but one which wasn't explored fully. Any currency is zero-sum; for one to be a millionaire, a hundred others have to go wanting. Ergo to paraphrase one of the film's decent lines 'for me to live for eternity, people have to die'. I guess the danger of going down this route may have effected a rather dry economics-heavy film but, still.
Another aspect of the film I liked was the dichotomy between rich and poors' attitude to time; the latter having to make the most of every second given their lack of longevity. Hence the poor marking themselves out by their perpetual rushing about.
Other than that though, the cast were all reasonably two-dimensional. Timberlake was by far the best of a bad bunch and Cillian Murphy's bad-guy was beyond parody. In the absence of a truly thought-provoking examination of capitalist society it seems that charicatures was the path of least-resistance.
Don't get me wrong In Time is a watchable Friday-night flick but just disappointed about what could have been.
I think this is where In Time falls down to some extent; it had the potential to be a cerebral scathing attack on how the rich exploit the poor, which it did to some extent but it ended-up as action-flick by numbers. Films like They Live and Society achieved such allegories without pandering to any specific audience.
Some of the film worked really well; as others have said the substitution of time as currency was a very clever idea but one which wasn't explored fully. Any currency is zero-sum; for one to be a millionaire, a hundred others have to go wanting. Ergo to paraphrase one of the film's decent lines 'for me to live for eternity, people have to die'. I guess the danger of going down this route may have effected a rather dry economics-heavy film but, still.
Another aspect of the film I liked was the dichotomy between rich and poors' attitude to time; the latter having to make the most of every second given their lack of longevity. Hence the poor marking themselves out by their perpetual rushing about.
Other than that though, the cast were all reasonably two-dimensional. Timberlake was by far the best of a bad bunch and Cillian Murphy's bad-guy was beyond parody. In the absence of a truly thought-provoking examination of capitalist society it seems that charicatures was the path of least-resistance.
Don't get me wrong In Time is a watchable Friday-night flick but just disappointed about what could have been.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Most Recent Customer Reviews
A consistently interesting idea with slightly muddled execution
The idea is sci-fi genius. Everyone stops ageing at 25, and they then have to work to 'earn' more time - using it as the currency they use to buy everything from more years on... Read more
Published 2 days ago by Benminx
Yes limited BUT Good film GREAT VEHICLES
I enjoyed this film very much although I do agree more drama and more money would have helped, it does suffer from that Star Trek thing of too few people on the planet in this case... Read more
Published 15 days ago by truthsetter
"About time" I enjoyed a film this much!
Very, very enjoyable, from a film which was not anticipated to be great.
Will be buying this on Blu-Ray after watching it on the plane last month. Read more
Will be buying this on Blu-Ray after watching it on the plane last month. Read more
Published 18 days ago by LoukasG
Truly Awful
I watched this on a plane; i was looking forward to watching it because i thought the concept was interesting. The film however, wasn't. Read more
Published 22 days ago by SideshowAl
",,BRILLIANT ORIGINAL SCI-FI.."
I think this movie went past quite unseen by most and is very underrated as really its rather good, the story is far fetched indeed but its sci-fi and anything goes! Read more
Published 1 month ago by S. Drury
Awesome Film.
I really enjoyed "In Time" as did my girlfriend. The concept was original and Justin played the part well. Plus you've gotta love Amanda!! Read more
Published 1 month ago by Lewz88
Very interesting allegory
I liked Andrew Niccol's "Gattaca" and "The Truman Show" allegories and I like "In Time" as well. It is a dystopian "Brave New World" type of future, dealing with the corrupt... Read more
Published 1 month ago by Mr. J. Young
Thought provoking and surprisingly good!
Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried team up in this sic-fi thriller where time is quite literally the currency. The poor die young but the rich can live forever. Read more
Published 1 month ago by thatbookgirl
Really Good but not Fantastic
I thought this movie was really good, but as the title says it wasn't fantastic. If I'd have seen it at the cinema I probably wouldn't have bought it on DVD. Read more
Published 1 month ago by R. Kish
One in the eye for the rich
In Time is an interesting premise - set in an Orwellian, dystopian future where everyone only ages up until they're twenty-five then stays that way (why? We don't know). Read more
Published 2 months ago by Albatross
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192198663_.gif){kind=small}
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
