Timberlake's "In Time" Poorly Executed

With Occupy Wall Street protestors filling the streets and making headlines around the world, it’s clear that the class divide has become wider than ever. In a country where anything, even the government itself, can be bought and sold to the highest bidder, the best interests of the people always take a back seat to those of the corporations. The top 1 percent can bask comfortably in their wealth without ever having to fulfill their duties as citizens. No wonder why the lowly 99 percent have decided to fight back.

Since the rich are so rarely brought to justice, films and TV shows depicting this idealistic fantasy have become more popular than ever. Though the pointed line, “Is it stealing if it’s already stolen?” is technically from Andrew Niccol’s new thriller In Time, it could easily serve as the tagline for ABC’s guiltily pleasurable series “Revenge,” as well as Brett Ratner’s upcoming star-studded comedy Tower Heist. 

What separates In Time from the others is its level of ambition. Niccol specializes in crafting sci-fi parables that would work great as short stories. Like Philip K. Dick or Rod Serling, Niccol can dream up a premise so provocative that it manages to seep into one’s subconscious. Some critics have blasted him for merely beating high concepts into the ground, but I disagree, especially in the case of his first two feature screenplays: Gattaca and The Truman Show. In both pictures, Niccol brilliantly worked within the realm of heightened sci-fi fantasy in order to explore the role of technology in modern society and its unsettling tendency to commoditize mankind.

In many ways, In Time is a slick variation on Gattaca. Both films are set in futuristic time periods where genetic engineering has split the world into segregated communities of the haves and have-nots. While Gattaca followed a protagonist who assumed the identity of a man who is genetically superior, In Time centers on a poor twenty-something with an elite identity forced upon him by a suicidal rich man. Yet what really distinguishes the society of In Time is its mode of currency: time itself. Once citizens turn 25, they cease to physically age, while a “clock” appears on their arms that looks disturbingly like the numbers branded on concentration camp prisoners. The clock represents the time they have left to earn more time. If they can’t, their clock is literally cleaned. 

This is a set-up loaded with intensely stimulating ideas, but they frankly deserved a better vehicle. After its promising first act, In Time quickly devolves into a diverting B-movie based on enthralling A-grade concepts. Modern audiences would’ve appreciated a film with more nerve to explore the questions it raises rather than rely on familiar action formulas to deliver standard payoffs. It’s the wrong movie at the right time. 

Justin Timberlake is efficiently magnetic as Will, a man wrongly accused of murder after saving a wealthy man from vicious gang members. The man plummets to his death immediately after switching his century-worth of time with Will’s nearly empty clock. Yet before his suicide, the man informs Will that there is in fact more than enough time on the planet for everyone, if only the rich would cease to sit on it. Instead, the cost of living rises in order to ensure that the poor continue to die. This quietly enraging conversation functions as the slingshot propelling the picture through the rest of its narrative.

After Will is seen at the site of the suicide, cold-blooded “timekeeper” Raymond (the eternally steely-eyed Cillian Murphy) naturally suspects foul play and hunts him down. But Will has an agenda of his own; he intends to take the rich “for all they’ve got.” The ever-radiant Amanda Seyfried sparkles as the jaded daughter of a man whose wealth has practically made him immortal. He’s played by Vincent Kartheiser of “Mad Men," whose Kewpie doll-like grin and perpetually pained eyes suggest the soul of an old man confined within young flesh. The amber tones in Roger Deakins’ cinematography are particularly striking in scenes featuring the uniformly photogenic upper-crust, who truly appear to be made of money. 

In Time is too weighty a film to function as an escapist lark. Every attempt at humor feels forced, and the final act peters out into a series of repetitions. Timberlake has proven his acting chops in a series of dramatic roles, most notably in Nick Cassavetes’ Alpha Dog, but here the charismatic star seems oddly detached (never more so than when he’s required to cry). Thoughtful viewers may be able to overlook the film’s flaws and appreciate its clever commentary on the downfalls of “Darwinian capitalism.”

The film isn’t quite worth the full price of admission, but it’s certainly worth two hours of your time.

In Time opened Oct. 28 at the AMC Showplace Village Crossing 18 and Regal Gardens 1-6 in Skokie. It opened at number 3 behind Puss in Boots and Paranormal Activity 3, earning $12 according to Box Office Mojo. It is rated PG-13.

Like us on Facebook