IN TIME

For a film that’s all about the value of a minute, In Time sure wastes a lot of them.

Written, directed and produced by Andrew Niccol (S1mOne, Gattaca), the basic premise of the story is that society – either in the future or in some parallel, fictional reality (it’s never clear) – has evolved so that humans stop aging at 25. After that, they live on borrowed time. Literally. Time has replaced money as currency, and minutes, hours, days and weeks have become more precious than gold. Salaries are paid in time, purchases are made with time, even a bus ride will cost you two hours of your life. The more time you “spend” or share with others, the shorter your life. The more time you amass and hoard, the longer you live. The world is divided into class-system time zones (get it?!) that separate the haves from the have-nots. This allows the “wealthy” to live hundreds of years, while the poor die young and in increasing numbers as the cost of living rises.

Enter into this scenario Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a frustrated factory worker living minute-to-minute and barely scraping by. One night, a despondent rich man (Matt Bomer) gifts Will with all his remaining time... an unheard-of gesture that raises the suspicion of the authorities – in the form of head “time keeper” Leon (Cillian Murphy) – and attracts the attention of a crimelord (Alex Pettyfer), who wouldn’t mind having that time for himself.

Soon, in a bid to escape capture and assassination, Will goes on the lam with wealthy socialite Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried), whose father (Vincent Kartheiser) is one of the wealthiest man on the planet. The duo morph into a pair of pseudo Robin Hoods, determined to distribute time more evenly across the masses. But at what cost? And will they be able to escape capture before their time literally runs out?

In Time is blessed with a brilliant concept but sub-par execution and storytelling. Its biggest flaws are the enormous plot holes the audience is expected to overlook or begrudgingly swallow. My movie-going pal and I spent a good 10 minutes after the screening listing them all. Among them:

* Why is this supposedly advanced society, that’s figured out how to embed digital timecodes and expiration dates into human beings, seemingly living in the past in almost every other sense? They drive old cars, keep their time in safes and, evidently, haven’t managed to invent (or adopt) wi-fi for time transference. Is that for novelty’s sake? Or simply more interesting art-direction options?

* If the wealthy never run – because they have so much time that they can afford to walk everywhere – how does Sylvia manage to keep up with Will so easily as they run and run and run and run? He’s run all his life, she’s never done it... yet she barely breaks a sweat. And always in heels, no less!

* It’s never explained how or why society adopted this new model of population control. Nor is it explained how the redistribution of time will right more than a century of wrongs – if a poor person suddenly gets an extra week to live, how is that supposed to upset the world order?

* Nevermind the car crash so laughably unsurvivable that the audience actually DID erupt into laughter when the characters in the totaled convertible (!) emerged virtually unscathed.

Those are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Honestly, there are so many “wait... what?” moments that it started to become distracting. There are also too many seemingly endless and repetitive chase sequences, on foot or in cars, that eat up a good chunk of the film’s nearly two hour running time.

In addition, there’s a decided lack of romantic chemistry between the two leads. Undeniably likeable and engaging, they nonetheless come off more like good pals than a pair of star-crossed lovers desperate to be together and live. As such, it’s hard to become emotionally invested in their relationship and its fate. Timberlake and Seyfried are solid, but neither really shines in the way have in other films. The only cast members who really leap off the screen are Pettyfer, as a slimy villain, and Kartheiser, who actually successfully made me believe he was an old man in young guy’s body. (By contrast, Olivia Wilde, as Will’s mother, behaved more like his girlfriend than his parent.)

All that said, the film gets off to a good start and seems to want to tell a really unique, fascinating story. Unfortunately, it’s too mired in inconsistencies and implausibilities to really soar.