It seems like Justin Timberlake can handle anything that is thrown at him. He explored the business world in an Oscar-nominated film, “The Social Network,” tried to balance sex and friendship with Mila Kunis in “Friends With Benefits,” and now he’s starring alongside Amanda Seyfried in the science-fiction thriller “In Time.”
The film focuses on a futuristic dystopia in which the aging gene has been shut off. Everyone stops aging at 25 years old, but once they reach 25 they’re given just one more year to live, which is displayed as a clock on their left arms.
However, there’s a catch: Time is money. A cup of coffee is four minutes and the toll to get into the wealthy zone is one year. To deal with these high prices, the poor steal time from others just to survive.
Timberlake plays Will Salas, a poor man who lives in the ghetto. Wealthy Henry Hamilton, played by Matt Bomer, gives Salas more than 100 years in order to time himself out, after realizing immortality is not what he wants. This exchange attracts the attention of the timekeepers, men who follow the flow of time. While trying to escape, Salas meets Sylvia Weis (Seyfried) and chaos ensues.
“In Time’s” intriguing plot makes the film exceptional. The talented cast adds to the movie’s appeal. Timberlake, however, outshines the other actors. His performance even overshadows the film at times – he adds complexity and sensibility to his character that the movie never expands on. Seyfried’s role limits her to a few witty lines, which is a shame, because she’s more than a pretty face.
Although the film is entertaining, the plot seems rushed and some of the characters feel detached at times. Writer-director Andrew Niccol’s brilliant concept could have been made into a better film. “In Time” could have even been 2011’s “Inception.”