Back to IndieWire

In Time—movie review

In Time—movie review

Writer and sometimes-director Andrew Niccol fixates on the future and doesn’t offer a sunny outlook, whether it’s in Gattaca, The Truman Show, or S1m0ne. It should come as no surprise, then, that In Time is yet another trip into the dystopian world of tomorrow, where lifespan has replaced money as the commodity of choice, and people stop aging when they reach 25. If they’re lucky—or well-off—they can earn or exchange days, weeks, months, and even years, thereby extending their time on earth.

Yes, this is a story of haves and have-nots. Justin Timberlake plays one of the latter, who ekes out an existence from day to day until he chances to meet—

—a wealthy man who feels he’s lived too long, and transfers more than a century’s worth of life to his new acquaintance. This harvest of “time” enables Timberlake to buy his way out of the ghetto and visit the wealthy part of town to see how the other half lives. It’s there that he meets time-mogul (and hoarder) Vincent Kartheiser and his beautiful daughter, Amanda Seyfried, who has no idea how difficult life is for poor buggers like Timberlake.

The concept is mildly interesting at first—even the cops are called timekeepers—but the novelty wears off pretty fast, and In Time becomes a dreary exercise in which the central metaphor is both obvious and heavy-handed. (Rich people exploit the poor, you see.) The characters are one-dimensional, leaving the actors with no place to go.

Future worlds can be fascinating, funny, or thought-provoking. This film is none of the above.

This Article is related to: Reviews and tagged , , , ,


Jay Lo

Good review! I thought the movie was ok and not as bad as I’d imagined. I think that Justin Timberlake stepped up his game in a Robin Hood type scenario. I hadn’t even heard of this movie till my coworker from DISH suggested it. I went and streamed it to my iPad using my DISH online feature. I watch all my movies with this awesome feature. It’s nice to be able to watch TV from other locations besides my sofa or computer desk. I’ve watched more movies now with this feature than I could in several years.


This movie has a very low rating in rottentomatoes, though the concept was unique there were critics who didn't find this movie not interesting. :(


The concept behind the movie was absolutely brilliant. It is a dystopian view of how the capitalistic system creates ghettos and zones in society that are difficult to cross unless you are born on the right side of the tracks. It is a dystopian metaphor for America today and Leonard Maltin critiques from the perspective of a have in American society and therefore concludes that the movie is poorly told and has few redeeming virtues. I thought the acting of Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried was way more than adequate and both will have long careers in Hollywood as the stars of yesteryear fade into oblivion. The man who greedily has a million years of time stored in his vault is reminiscent of the vultures in American society who worship money and will soon bring this nation down.


I don’t fully agree with the review.
It’s true that “the central metaphor is both obvious and heavy-handed”, but I don’t see that as a negative element.

I’ll say why: Most people nowadays are passive viewers, and thus, if it’s not obvious and heavy-handed as you put it , they wouldn’t get it. I think the metaphor was meant to be explicit so that it reaches everyone that is. I think it’s an interesting thing to do. It’s brilliant story poorly told, but the vast majority need to be able to relate to it in order to be into it.

It’s a bit like the other day I read reviews on that movie ” The Tree of life” while for me It was brilliantly directed, but for so much many they just didn’t get the movie , didn’t understand it at all, some even saw it two to three times and still no meaning whats so ever. I think theres a great number of passive viewers,as I stated up above, and thus, transforming a brilliant story into something that’s accessible to them, is an art in itself lol.


Just saw the movie; though opinions are looked at in good and bad lighting, I feel that Justin stepped his game up in this film. It was a solid original film with a fresh start to be copied by many other movies to come. Even if it feeds off the same concept of the wealthy taking advantage of the poor, and the poor fighting back, it took a new approach to a timeless underpinning of “old” and made it new again. Good movie.

shabbas goy

How does this no-talent, skinny and not even good-looking punk get all these movie roles?
Justin Timberlake can’t act and can’t sing. This white-boy ripped off Michael Jackson for years finally quit singing and now appears in movies. Hopefully this flop will be his last.


To Robert, you quoted that Justin Timberake can’t act, I guess you haven’t seen The Social Network.


I’ve seen The Social Network and just saw this and can confirm Justin Timberlake is a terrible actor who should never play lead or just never play at all. Also the plotholes are too huge and numerous to bear. Here’s to hoping hoping the rest of my time this weekend is better spent.

mike schlesinger

It’s a Hollywood studio exec’s dream: a movie in which practically everyone in the cast is in their 20s.


I gotta say, i don’t think that Justin Timberlake and acting go hand in hand.


I’m looking forward to ‘In Time’. It will be amazing to see Justin Timberlake and Cillian Murphy face off.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *