In Time

2011

Director Andrew Niccol

Science Fiction. It is the genre of ideas. Of staggering vision and originality. It has produced some of the most incredible works of fiction. But yet, all it takes is for one of these great ideas to fall into the wrong hands and we are thrust back faster that the speed of light to square fucking one.

In the future, genetic alteration allows humanity to stop aging 25 years after birth. Due to over-population concerns, time has replaced money. Will Salas is one of the unlucky ones, living day to day in the slums. After saving the wealthy Henry Hamilton from the sinister Minutemen, Will is given the gift of time, allowing him to experience life amidst the social elite, where he encounters the wealthy businessman Phillipe Weis and his alluring daughter Sylvia, all the while pursued by Timekeeper Leon.

Phew. It is impossible to explain In Time’s premise quickly. It is such a fascinating concept. After a lawsuit, writer and director Andrew Niccol - best known for directing the ambitious Gattaca and co-penning the magnificent The Truman Show - now grudgingly acknowledges the classic Harlan Ellison short-story, “Repent, Harlequin!” Said the Ticktockman as its source material, but unlike that other film (ever heard of The Terminator?) that conveniently borrowed some of Ellison’s ideas, In Time is not in danger of becoming a classic of the genre.

The pacing is a mess. It starts out fine with Justin Timberlake’s Will forced to flee, but once he reaches the Utopian and ‘imaginatively’ titled New Greenwich, things start to lose cohesiveness. Long gone is the tight, succinct narrative form of works of art such as Logan’s Run or Minority Report. Sometimes it takes Will seemingly hours to get to New Greenwich, passing through an endless series of dangerous blockades, but when he flees, he is back in mere moments. What is such a fascinating idea is relegated to another ‘Run Around’, Bonnie and Clyde wannabe movie in which the characters sport fancy florescent green tattoos on their arms to remind us that this is a science fiction film.

For once the plot has the perfect excuse to only cast sexy, nubile youngsters. It is an amusing introduction when Solas greets his 50-year-old mother, played by 27-year-old Olivia Wilde, and when Weis introduces us to his mother, wife, and daughter, all of whom look virtually identical in age. Timberlake isn’t too bad in the lead role. He isn’t too good either, but he’s tolerable. Why Cillian Murphy is here is confusing; wasted as the undeveloped, leather jacket-swirling Timekeeper. The wig wearing Amanda Seyfried’s face is just a pointless pair of tits, whilst Vincent Kartheiser has obviously just been cast because he knows how to wear a suit from his time spent in Mad Men. Oddly enough, the most interesting characters are the Minutemen, led by Alex Pettyfer’s Fortis. A group of boy band-looking gangsters, they have lasted this long by stealing other people’s time. Everyone else is a little too serious, but Pettyfer is clearly having a blast hamming it up, and it’s a shame he doesn’t feature more.

Despite referencing The Matrix in one rooftop chase sequence, for a dystopian vision, the bright cinematography used by Roger Deakins is wrong, hindering the overall tone. After the incredible recent run that cinematic science fiction has been on, with Duncan Jones’ Moon and Source Code, Christopher Nolan’s Inception, Neill Blomkamp’s District 9, Gareth Edwards’ Monsters, and George Nolfi’s The Adjustment Bureau bringing some intelligence back to the much-maligned genre, In Time is a painful reminder of disgraces such as Johnny Mnemonic, Equilibrium and Æon Flux, and the other dumb monstrosities that make you ashamed to call yourself a sci-fi fan.

** ¾ / *****