close [×]

Dear Flixster Community,

After seven fabulous years with you all, we are sorry to let you know that we're going to be retiring the Flixster Community site on September 30, 2014. Please note that you can still access your ratings, reviews, and quizzes on Flixster and Rotten Tomatoes using your same login. We have had so much fun building this community with you.

Thanks for all the memories,

Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites

Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried, Cillian Murphy, Vincent Kartheiser, Olivia Wilde ... see more see more... , Matt Bomer , Johnny Galecki , Collins Pennie , Toby Hemingway , Brendan Miller , Yaya DaCosta , Alex Pettyfer , Shyloh Oostwald , Colin McGurk , Will Harris , Michael William Freeman , Jesse Lee Soffer , Aaron Perilo , Nick Lashaway , William Peltz , Ray Santiago , Zuleyka Silver , Laura Ashley Samuels , La Monde Byrd , Paul David Story , Maximilian Osinski , Blake Sheldon , Melissa Ordway , Abhi Sinha , Ethan Peck , Germano Sardinha , Korrina Rico , Emma Fitzpatrick , Seema Lazar , Adam Jamal Craig , Andreas Wigand , Bella Heathcote , Sasha Pivovarova , Luis Chavez , August Emerson , Cathy Baron , Kris Lemche , Sterling Sulieman , Rachel Roberts , Christiann Castellanos , Jeff Staron , James Drew , Swen Temmel , Jessica Parker Kennedy , Matt O'Leary , Trevor O'Brien , Faye Kingslee , Kristopher Higgins

When Will Salas is falsely accused of murder, he must figure out a way to bring down a system where time is money - literally - enabling the wealthy to live forever while the poor, like Will, have to ... read more read more...beg, borrow, and steal enough minutes to make it through another day. -- (C) 20th Century Fox

Flixster Users

51% liked it

67,428 ratings


36% liked it

157 critics

DVD Release Date: January 31, 2012

Stats: 7,238 reviews

Your Rating

clear rating

Flixster Reviews (7,238)

  • May 18, 2014
    The premise of time being currency, and that for a few to live forever many must die, is amazing. Also, the cast is great. But the film, written and directed by Andrew Niccol, is less than the sum of its parts. It does not explore the world it creates. There are too many heavy ha... read morended narrative arcs. And the film ultimately becomes a Bonnie & Clyde knock off. In Time is fun, but it could have been so much greater, especially in the wake of the Occupy movement.
  • June 8, 2013
    Odd and enjoyable sci-fi thriller, even if somewhat predictable.
  • December 24, 2012
    "In Time" is a wonderful premise done in by an aimless and weighed down script. The story goes into out-of-the-blue directions that do the premise a major disservice. Perhaps if they had fully focused the story around the "Robin Hood" angle more completely, "In Time" could hav... read moree worked, but it wastes too much time with subplots involving uninteresting criminals, predictable villains and connect them together with ponderous dialogue.

    A wooden Timberlake and a pallid Seyfried are serviceable as leads but just like the rest of the cast the actors can't find their character's consistent core purpose so they just play them as generically as possible. Vincent Kartheiser and Cillian Murphy play versions of other characters they've played before.

    Shoulda coulda "In Time" rarely delivers on its promise.
  • July 31, 2012
    Interesting enough. Action filled enough. Halfway decent enough storyline. I think, however, that Justin Timberlake isn't actor enough...Not bad, but not memorable, either.
  • July 27, 2012
    Take an interesting idea that has a message that fits the Takeover movement like a glove and you should have a film that resonates as well as entertains. In Time does that... to a point, although it comes on a bit heavy handed and the back half resorts to the typical car chase s... read moretock in trade of a film that can't really figure out something better to do with its screen time.

    There is a certain nice, retro feel on display here, especially with all the customized Lincoln's and Dodge Challengers circa late 60's and early 70's. That and a nice usage of the L.A. canals and seedier backstreets (some of which I swear I've seen in about a million other films), give the film a good feel, as does some of the lighting elements - but then again it's so uneven. There are washed out scenes that perhaps were intentional, but jarring nonetheless when coming from the tight, claustrophobic dimness of the "ghetto".

    The story here, just in case you were asleep in class, deals in a future where people stop ageing at 25 (think Logan's Run), and yet someone came up with the bright idea (to stem overpopulation, no doubt) to give everyone a time counter that activates at age 25. From that point on, in order to survive one has to buy time. If you go bankrupt and your time goes down to zero... well, let's just say that at that point Elvis leaves the building.

    This is ok as far as it goes - a nice little bit of sci-fi - but the film does a nice turn by going deeper, suggesting that the 1% can control population growth and keep the downtrodden down by manipulating the cost of everything. So one day a bus ride will cost an hour, the next day it'll cost two - all to keep the lower class from gathering too much time (money). It is this aspect of the film that gives it relevance and really, if director/writer Andrew Nichol would have spent more time developing this aspect he would have had a better film. In fact, the first half, where this is explored, kept my attention. It was only later when Nichol went all Hollywood that the film loses its way - and boy does it ever; resorting to inane car chases and a Bonnie and Clyde buddy type film with bits of humor and bon mots that totally change the tenor of the film.

    There is the big confrontation scene at the end where any five year old can tell way in advance what will happen, sucking any potential tension out of the situation. Making it worse is that the film then reuses a dramatic device from earlier in the film - the first time was poignant, the second just seemed silly and lazy. This is then followed with a tag that attempts further humor and is simply superfluous - making this feel like a low budget B film; which got me thinking of all the other B cult films from an earlier age - this film would fit right in to the category where a film like "A Boy And His Dog" reside - not great filmmaking, but not without a certain quirky charm - though A Boy & has a more cohesive narrative.

    I'm really torn over whether or not this should be considered fresh or rotten - It does have some watchability, and in spite of the change or direction, isn't a total disaster - it rides right on the cusp - a 5.5 if you will. I won't discourage anyone from seeing this, but won't recommend it either.
  • June 27, 2012
    A real surprise. A thrilling, stylish, sexy and daringly original action-thriller. One hell of a wickedly entertaining and exciting movie. One of the most original sci-fi films to hit the screen since The Matrix. Director, Andrew Niccol brings slick direction and vision to this f... read moreilm and has plenty of energy to go around. Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried are sensational. Cillian Murphy is excellent.
  • fb619846742
    June 16, 2012
    A flat-out disappointing misfire concerning a dystopian system where time is literally money, and how a man from the ghetto (Justin Timberlake) who has nothing to live for strives to live in a world where the poor are given just as much time to live as the rich, who collect time.... read more With good actors, a better set-up character wise, and a story that offered any sort of surprise to it, this may have been a riveting film in the same vein as director Andrew Niccol's classic 90's gem "Gattaca". Sadly, with exception to Cillian Murphy, the film's acting is largely terrible, with Justin Timberlake proving to be the least convincing in the lead role. As previously said, the film offers nothing in the way of surprises, and the characters are one-dimensional and hollow just like the story itself. An intriguing premise is somehow squanded despite a capable director at the helms and a promising young core of actors at his disposal. Ugh.
  • May 25, 2012
    Great idea with incredibly dumb execution. In the future, time is currency and everyone stops ageing at 25 for some reason. Timberlake finds himself receiving thousands of years from some guy tired of immortality. He ends up being chased by the cops in charge of time, and by some... read more very non-threatening gangsters. The idea is wonderful, and the perfect vehicle for social satire. The poor spend their lives on food and essentials, literally living day to day, meanwhile the rich just spend, spend, spend. It also has the great chance to view the pain of immortality and how it's not how long you live but how you live. Which is why I'm so angry at the stupidity and nonsense in this film. I understand that nobody ages, but why does everyone look like a model? Characters just vanish, and it just becomes one huge assault on the 1%. Like a teenager with a good idea, but doesn't understand what they are talking about. There are huge lapses in logic. A major character dies because of time running out, even though simple maths would show that she would have survived. People run at each other in slow motion, with dramatic countdowns, but it doesn't play in real time. Timberlake's character knows how to fight, which I put down to his mention of his father being able to fight, and then we find out that fighting just involves holding hands. This makes for the most boring confrontation between Timberlake and the antagonist. Let's hope for an intelligent remake in the future, because this just ruins the premise.
  • May 23, 2012
    Writer/director Andrew Niccol is no stranger to scientific ideas. In 1997 he delivered the Orwellian genetic engineering "Gattaca". In 2002 he tackled computer generated imagery in "S1mOne". He also penned the predictory script to reality TV in 1998 with "The Truman Show". Fantas... read morey and Science Fiction seem to be genres that he's comfortable with but this is not one of his better efforts.
    In the not too distant future, people stop ageing when they reach 25. If they are wealthy though, they can buy time. The rest, have to work for it. Lifespan has replaced money in this dystopian world. One of the workers is gifted time from a suicidal friend, which allows him to escape his poor background and experience the life of the rich. But there are state police, known as "Time keepers" who are out to thwart his new life.
    The premise to this is quite an intriguing one and the dystopian futuristic setting is wonderfully captured by the Coen brothers' regular cinematographer Roger Deakins. It's just a shame that with such a strong base to work from, it becomes nothing more than a chase thriller and abandons any attempt to delve into some possible existential theories. Even as a chase thriller, it lacks any form of excitement. It has it's moments but ultimately the film takes too long in getting to it's destination. Time is of the essence for it's characters and ironically, it also gets taken from us, having to slog through this. I'm not Justin Trousersnake's biggest fan, but he delivers a decent performance. However, the progression of his character as a future 'Clyde' to Seyfried's 'Bonnie' is uneasy and a little hard to take. Cillian Murphy's 'Time keeper' police officer is quite an intriguing one but he has little, to no, backstory. When we are given a glimpse into his character it's too little too late. It's this overwhelming feeling of emptiness that, as a whole, the film suffers from.
    I didn't go into this film expecting a masterpiece or anything but I still expected more than I got. Despite looking good on the surface, it's ultimately hollow. Fans of the likes of "The Adjustment Bureau" may find more to savour though.
  • May 1, 2012
    "The truth is, for a few to be immortal, many must die."

    In Time is a decent action movie, but nothing more. It's enjoyable for an afternoon, but never rises above disposable entertainment.

    The cast is likable. Timberlake and Seyfried have good chemistry, even though Timberlak... read moree occasionally seems like a less than convincing fit. I like the guy as an actor, but he doesn't entirely match the character he's asked to play. To be fair, though, the character (Will) is like an amalgam of every positive protagonist trait in movie history. He's completely selfless, generous, smooth, charming, crafty, and seems to be able to transform into an invincible action hero any time the need arises. That would be tough for any actor to sell. Amanda Seyfried is here only to look hot running around in heels and be won over by the hero. She does a good job, but since those criteria are accomplished by her genetics, wardrobe and the script (in that order), that's only to be expected.

    Cillian Murphy isn't given anything more than a generic "tough and relentless, but fair" detective/antagonist role to work with. Vincent Kartheiser, on the other hand, is the one actor in the movie that's absolutely perfectly cast. No one can play a rich d-bag like Vincent.

    The main problem with In Time is that the script needed a lot more polish. The concept is cool (people are essentially immortal, but every moment after they turn 25 must be "bought"), but the "time is literally money" angle could have worked a lot better if it was wielded with a bit more subtlety. Yes, we get that the rich and privileged few are "living" off of many. The story hums along at first, but then seems to waver in tone and purpose. What's simple and straightforward at first eventually unravels to the point where even the characters themselves seem to not know what they're doing or why. Timberlake and Seyfried never seem to be in any real danger, and the climaxes are thoroughly anti- climatic (the fight scene between Timberlake and a bad guy in the third act is absolutely, though unintentionally, hilarious).

    Still, I didn't dislike In Time. It has a lot of flaws and certainly didn't live up to its potential, but if you take it as a faintly ridiculous Bonnie & Clyde-lite action movie with a thick and cheap coat of social issues slapped on, then you can have a good time with it. The movie definitely wants to have substance and a message, though, and it fails at that.

Critic Reviews

David Thomson
June 20, 2013
David Thomson, The New Republic

In Time is so crammed with provocative ideas it begins to feel over-crowded. Full Review

Andrea Gronvall
November 10, 2011
Andrea Gronvall, Chicago Reader

Clever and unsettling. Full Review

Tom Huddleston
November 1, 2011
Tom Huddleston, Time Out

Niccol's major problem is timing: action sequences and dialogue scenes lie flat on the screen, while his tendency to play around with pacing means that any tension quickly dissipates. Life's too short. Full Review

Peter Rainer
October 31, 2011
Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor

The film is beautifully shot in chilly blues and grays by cinematographer Roger Deakins, and Los Angeles locales are well chosen for futuristic effect. Most of the time, however, I found myself glanci... Full Review

Bruce Diones
October 31, 2011
Bruce Diones, New Yorker

Niccol's zippy direction, joined to a sleek, rich production design, keeps the movie spinning like a shiny toy. Full Review

Dana Stevens
October 28, 2011
Dana Stevens, Slate

A movie so consistently flat-footed, with pauses between lines of dialogue so vast, that you begin to wonder if the whole thing might be a psychological experiment of some kind. Full Review

Laremy Legel
October 28, 2011
Laremy Legel,

Nothing more than a clumsily executed preach-a-thon. Full Review

Rick Groen
October 28, 2011
Rick Groen, Globe and Mail

Happily, there are some laughs en route. More happily yet, a few of them are even intentional. Full Review

Richard Roeper
October 28, 2011
Richard Roeper, Richard

In Time is filled with sly references and obvious puns, as well as sometimes heavy-handed parallels to class warfare. Full Review

Stephen Whitty
October 28, 2011
Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger

A both flawed and fascinating movie, give it this, at the very least: Even at its most far-fetched or thinly plotted, you never feel that "In Time" is wasting a second of yours. Full Review

Critic ratings and reviews powered by

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

More Like This

Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Gattaca
    Gattaca (87%)
  • I, Robot
    I, Robot (92%)
  • Repo Men
    Repo Men (91%)
  • The Maze Runner
    The Maze Runner (0%)


    • Raymond Leon: You can run.
    • Will Salas: So can you.
    • Sylvia Weis: We can't just keep driving around in this car. It's a cop car.
    • Will Salas: So let's make an arrest.
    • Sylvia Weis: I didn't mean to shoot him, I wanted to scare him.
    • Will Salas: I think you did both.
    • Sylvia Weis: Is it stealing if it's already stolen?
    • Will Salas: Live forever or die trying.

In Time : Watch Free on TV

In Time Trivia

  • Beyond fantasy. Beyond obsession. Beyond time itself... he will find her. Christopher Reeve and Jane Seymour star in this romantic fantasy  Answer »
  • What movie starred Christopher Reeves as a man traveling through time for a chance to be with the woman he loves?  Answer »
  • Beyond fantasy. Beyond obsession. Beyond time itself, he will find her. Christopher Reeve and Jane Seymour star in this romantic fantasy   Answer »
  • what was the movie where christopher reeve goes back in time to find the love of his life?  Answer »

Movie Quizzes

No quizzes for In Time. Want to create one?

Recent News

Recent Lists

Most Popular Skin

No skins yet. Interested in creating one?