In Time
for violence, some sexuality and partial nudity, and brief strong language.
Reviewed by: Thaisha Geiger
CONTRIBUTOR
| Moral Rating: | Average |
| Moviemaking Quality: |
|
| Primary Audience: | Teens Adults |
| Genre: | Sci-Fi Action Adventure Crime Thriller Drama |
| Length: | 1 hr. 49 min. |
| Year of Release: | 2011 |
| USA Release: |
October 28, 2011 (wide—3,000+ theaters) DVD: January 31, 2012 |
avoiding death through wealth
human desire for immortality
time as currency
rich vs. poor
POVERTY—What does the Bible say about the poor? Answer
poor in the Bible
“aging gene”
world over-population
corruption
SUICIDE—What does the Bible say? Answer
If a Christian commits suicide, will they go to Heaven? Answer
the final judgment and eternal death
| Featuring |
Justin Timberlake … Will Salas Olivia Wilde … Rachel Salas Amanda Seyfried … Sylvia Weis Cillian Murphy … Raymond Leon Shyloh Oostwald … Maya Johnny Galecki … Borel See all » |
| Director | Andrew Niccol—“Gattaca,” “Lord of War” |
| Producer |
Regency Enterprises New Regency Pictures See all » |
| Distributor |
“Live forever or die trying. Time is money. Time is power.”
Time is an invisible currency in all of our lives. While the characters in Andrew Niccol’s latest thriller have a literal neon countdown on their forearms, the clocks in our own lives tick away with each day that passes. When people drink too much or even sit through a movie, they are giving away hours from their lives.
In this alternate reality, humans are genetically altered to stop aging at 25. Afterwards, the digital clock on one’s arms begins to tick. In order to live, time must be purchased. However, there’s a conflict: time is money. The poor live in the ghettos and can only purchase small increments of time. Literally living day to day, they run to all their destinations and work through their lunches. In startling contrast, the rich live in slow relaxation, living sheltered existences. Though their wealth has allowed them to be essentially immortal, foolishness can still cause their death.
Justin Timberlake stars as Will Salas, a hard worker who lives in the ghetto with his mother (Olivia Wilde). After a man gives Will over a hundred years, Will soon finds himself on the run. While living the high life in a richer area, he sets his eyes on Sylvia Weiss, the daughter of one of the richest men who owns numerous time banks. When the cops catch up with Will, he takes Sylvia on the run with him.
The movie has a very original plot; I also enjoyed how they used different “time” phrases, e.g. Timekeepers, timeshares, time zones. However, I wish it had gone deeper. Several questions arise, but are never fully answered. What happens to Will’s father? How was the time system set up? “In Time” does deliver some good lines about the importance of life, but then renders itself to a few chases and a rushed romance. Though I will say that I give Amanda Seyfried an enormous amount of credit for being able to act out action scenes, all while running in high heels.
Objectionable content
Throughout the film, several women wear very low-cut attire. During a bar scene, two women flirt with a wealthy man. One of the women asks him to take her home; while the other suggests to him that “you can take us both”. Will and Sylvia share numerous kisses. During one scene, they skinny dip in the ocean. During the scene, one can faintly see Sylvia’s derriere underneath the water. Later on, she and Will play strip poker. She takes off her shirt, wearing only her bra and panties. Will gets on top of her, but they are soon interrupted before things can go any further.
There is quite a bit of violence, but it’s mostly bloodless. Several are shown dying from a brutal heart attack when their time runs out. There are some fistfights and shootings. Two men are shot underneath their chins, while another is shot from behind.
One man commits suicide by deliberately draining his time. After his cardiac arrest, he falls from a bridge. In all, there are about 13 uses of profanity, including one ‘f’ word and one GD.
Throughout the entire film, it is stated multiple times how people wish to be immortal, but not everyone can be. There is a clear distinction between the rich and the poor. The rich have several years in their time banks, while the poor struggle to make it through each day. In 1 Timothy 6:16, Paul wrote that God “alone is immortal”. However, we can achieve our own immortality through the cleansing sacrifice of Jesus. In his second letter to Timothy, Paul again mentioned immortality. In 1:10, he wrote:
“but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.”
This film has a very intriguing premise. In reality, we do purchase everything with our time. Time’s limited and precious. It’s all too easy to zone out and waste minutes, if not hours on things that are completely worthless. Though the film could have been a lot more, it does provide some food for thought. I don’t personally recommend the film and suggest that potential viewers wait for the DVD release.
Violence: Heavy / Profanity: Moderate / Sex/Nudity: Mild
See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.
On a technical point, it is too easy to transfer time between people, which stretches credibility—should our lives be easier to transfer than our ATM card? I don’t think so.
Moral rating: / Moviemaking quality:
Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 3½
The next morning, when Will witnesses Henry’s death, and it’s no accident that Henry’s fall and dead body are in the shape of the crucifixion, is when he accepts Henry’s charge and becomes a future day disciple. Next is the beach scene, when Will urges Sylvia to do something foolish—be prepared to give it all away—enter the water, and join him. The Christian allegories run deep, although not perfectly, when she accepts the offer. See all »
Moral rating: Excellent! / Moviemaking quality: 5
Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 3
Bank robberies are justified on the basis that “property is theft”—to use anarchist Proudhon’s classic formulation. How time is rationed is not explained. Why some have to die to allow others to live is not explained either. The movie would be laughable in view of the history of deprivations and despoliations where the communists have been in power, except this is a very cunningly and attractively presented apology for the most evil regimes—communist—national socialist—that have ever been on Earth.
All that is needed is to take from the rich to give to the less well off and the world will be wonderful, according to this film. Fathers and husbands dominate their womenfolk and their authority must overthrown, according to this film.
Viewed from a Christian perspective, this film is the Devil’s work. If the Soviet Union were still around, it would an integral piece of the curriculum. It is a disgrace.
…it is a communist film. The Socialist Worker agrees with me. It says it is “Marxist propaganda”. I agree.
I think Americans have not been exposed to socialism, so they do not pick it easily. I remember being the Christian boy who went to the Communist bookstore as a boy, because my parents wanted me to know who the enemy were and inoculate me early.“Will (Timberlake) is a super-exploited worker, living day by day. When a wealthy 105-year old man kills himself by giving Will all his time, the state then goes after him. How could a lowly worker have so much time, other than by stealing it?
Will ends up kidnapping a rich man’s daughter, Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). But they both soon end up playing Robin Hood, and force a bit of wealth redistribution.”
The writer/director is a New Zealander, and I can assure you that is just what the Communists used to discuss—“Imagine that time is money and see how the poor are oppressed by the rich.” These are the same people who used to have intercourse whilst dressed as nuns and make fun of pastors and priests, advocate free love, the dissolution of the family and created the death camps such as Vorkuta and Kolyma to send priests and pastors to and who implemented the terror famine in Ukraine—the Holomodor—Christians should have nothing to do with such people.
As a Quaker, I am not into pastors and priests, but I respect their right to come to the Lord as they see fit. Communists do not. “Marxist propaganda” is extremely offensive, there is no other description for it. …
Moral rating: Extremely Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 3½
But the most glaringly obvious message of the movie is that of Marxism. The capitalist businessmen are presented as ruthless, uncaring, greedy, and suffocating to the mind and spirit. And it’s all their fault that the kind-hearted, hard-working poor can’t catch a break. The answer to this? Rob the rich and give to the poor, of course! Sounds a bit like Robin Hood’s modus operandi.
Will and Sylvia, on their Bonnie-and-Clyde-type bank robbing spree, spout quintessential socialist sayings and repeatedly justify their actions with the phrase, “Is it stealing if it’s already stolen?” I’ve read other reviews that say this detracts from the story, making the movie seem too “preachy,” essentially, it’s propaganda with a direct message which is beguiled into our lives via an interesting story. On top of this, it totally wastes a dystopian creation that was otherwise quite intriguing.
Moral rating: Very Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 3
I would just like to state that the storyline is hardly original. When I saw the preview, I immediately thought of a short story I read in the 4th grade, entitled “Time is Money,” by Lee Falk. I’m 36 now. In the story, Tom is short on time. He’d been careless. He’d gambled it away on a woman. The same issues are present. The poor have very little time. The rich have a lot. People can lose it easily by being careless and foolish. And there is even the Timebank. In the end, no one believes Tom, until it is too late to save him. Who would think that a man in a silk tie and expensive briefcase would be overdrawn on his time?
Good dialogue, from both the more well known actors as well as Timberlake, and well thought out characters. Except for the objectionable content, this one was worth the theater ticket price for me.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 4