I got to do something today that I haven’t had a chance to do in a long time. I went to go see a movie matinee with my wife. And we went, surprise-surprise, to the latests sci-fi flick called, “In Time.” It stars Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried. The first thing that drew my attention to it is that only 25% of critics recommended it while 75% of movie goers did. It isn’t unusual for there to be a gap between the two perspectives but that is quite a gap. USA Today reviewed it with two and a half stars, “50 minutes of a movie that lasts 150 minutes) pretty much summed up the critics thoughts. The critic also complained it was just “Logan’s Run” combined with “Robin Hood.”
After seeing it, I think I understand it a bit more. Critics usually like originality and “In Time” borrows a bunch, and not just from the two movies the critic picked up on. There is also lots of “The Matrix”, “Gattica”, “Bonnie and Clyde”, “1984”, and even “Les Miserables” (the movie sports three separate villains and one is absolutely a sci-fi Javert). Critics often like things that are plausible and this clearly is not while audiences can suspend disbelief a little easier.
All that said though, like a good gumbo, sometimes something tasty comes out of a good mix. And the audience might just be a tad more sophisticated than the critics if they see that “time” may just be a symbol in this movie for many other things in our modern world.
Dig into this and this is a movie with a message among the pop corn crunching car chases and shootouts.
That it was filmed (at least partly) and takes place in future Dayton, OH was an extra treat.
I also enjoyed the Matrixesque Lincolns to boot.
A fun afternoon and worth the ticket (both the time and the money).
Until next time,