In Time - Deine Zeit läuft ab

Niccols typischer Science-Fiction-Film, der auch ohne eine futuristische Ausstattung, digitale Roboter oder effektvoll fliegende Dinge spannend und unterhaltsam ist. Es reicht ihm eine einfache, aber ausgezeichnete Idee, die er intelligent in eine Action-Geschichte eingliedert, welche humanistische Werte enthält. Justin ist OK, Cillian wie immer super und Amanda Seyfried würde man am liebsten nur ausziehen, mit Schokolade übergießen und mit ihr die letzte Stunde des Lebens verbringen. So würdevoll wollte Mostows Film Surrogates - Mein zweites Ich sein. (06.11.2011)

The heist of the century, which, if we combined the teams of Ocean’s Eleven and Mission Impossible, would be enough for two films, shouldn’t last two minutes in a dystopian sci-fi satire. A naive far left film with which I cannot and I will not agree ideologically. Unfortunately, other than the idea, In Time doesn’t offer anything else (like breathtaking action, some tension, etc.), it’s just well made. But that core premise is great, it’s a pity that Niccol wasted it in such a dumb film. 60 % (03.11.2011)

The Bonnie and Clyde of the digital age yearned for analog, resulting in a sympathetically understated film set in the future. In it, a single serious nag at the laws of Niccol's world immediately takes away from the positives but is then ultimately saved by the great Timberlake and even better Murphy. (14.01.2012)

Die clevere und einfache Hyperbel, welche den zeitgenössischen Kommoditätenfetischismus sowie den darwinistischen Kapitalismus ad absurdum führt. Außerdem ironisiert der Film die eigene Unmöglichkeit, den etablierten Barrieren des Showbusiness zu entrinnen. Niccol stellt jedoch die wenigen Attraktionen (Bond-Zitate, Bonnie und Clyde-Romantik, dystopische Filme) niemals der Idee eines Kampfes gegen ein ungerechtes System voran, bei welchem die Reichen (ontologischen) Reichtum ausbeuten, indem sie die Wehrlosen ausnehmen. Einige Thesen sehen so aus, als hätte Niccol Badious kommunistische Hypothese gelesen und jene den Bedürfnissen eines Hollywood-Spektakels angepasst (d.h. er wagte es nicht, so weit zu gehen, jedoch er schritt fleißig in die entsprechende Richtung - siehe der ausgezeichnete Schluss). Der Film ist voller Lücken in Sachen Logik und Motivation, das Drehbuch ist sehr unausgewogen, sowohl die Schnittarbeit, als auch die Kamera wirken etwas zahnlos, jedoch das Ganze stellt einen angenehmen Impuls dar, über den Zustand der heutigen Gesellschaft sowie die utopische Natur des Systems nachzudenken. Dies macht In Time - Deine Zeit läuft ab zu einem bemerkenswerten und herausragenden Werk im derzeitigen Hollywood-Peloton, obgleich dieser Streifen nicht gerade fehlerfrei ist oder grenzenlose Begeisterung verdient. (70%) (24.10.2011)

I don't want to live in this world. But I would look at it, maybe every day. The excellently selected cast of young Hollywood gives a taste of a story about justice, love, and adventure, but it is precisely the simple yet perfectly powerful idea of an alternative present that has created such a versatile spectacle out of "In Time". But because the idea itself is not enough, there is nothing left but to salute Niccol for the relentless pace. With the support of Armstrong's soundtrack, it is not difficult to forget to breathe in the decisive moments. (04.11.2011)

Andrew Niccol has two super blockbusters to his credit, Lord of War and above all Gattaca were able to inspire me and when I add his work on the script for The Truman Show, his merits are exceptionally high in my eyes. Simone may not have been a film that could be talked about in superlatives, but it was still a very decent and definitely above-average affair. On the other hand, In Time is a decline in quality from all sides, which is rarely seen. This is especially painfully true in comparison to the genre and the thematically related Gattaca. I would describe Gattaca as a cultured and clever film, this film is banal shallow Hollywood nonsense without a hint of logic. True, it is filmed at a fast pace and with undeniable directorial professionalism, and it has "quality" (but at least attractive) actors in the lead roles, so I will give it a second star, especially considering Niccol's previous merits. But I do it with a truly heavy heart because this film is simply, to put it bluntly, stupid. Overall impression: 30%. (17.12.2016)

Life should be lived, not survived. A classic, Bonnie and Clyde-style Hollywood tale weighed down by deep thoughts about how today’s world works. All in all, this is a bit of a weak picture for Niccol, but for most of the competition, this is way above average. An excellent cast does wonders. Even dumb Alex Pettyfer plays devilishly well (as a real swine) and Justin Timberlake finally abandons his image of pop singer to become a regular actor. And Olivia Wilde wins this years award for sexiest fifty-year-old. A mythical poke in the ribs for politicians and “self-declared defenders" of our world. I don’t have time. (16.11.2011)

It's not it. The poster and main characters are romantic to some extent, but In Time is a disgracefully wasted opportunity. Andrew Niccol came up with a captivating and highly original story, but unfortunately, he completely fails in other aspects. It's not that I expect flying saucers or a million-person battle, but perhaps just a bit more polished visuals, more fatefulness, more dynamic action, more exuberant artistic stylization, and definitely fewer unfinished plotlines. Buying and stealing time is nice, but if you think about it, it's clear that if someone could gain time just by touching someone else, everyone would have killed each other a long time ago and certainly wouldn't wait in front of a time bank offering thirty percent loans. They could have also done without a certain type of car for the wealthy class, and the retro police cars don't fit in there either – there are simply too many of those things. But to not just criticize, the million year concept is cool, there are occasionally thrilling scenes, Justin Timberlake is good as always, and Cillian Murphy is phenomenal as always. In my opinion, Niccol would have been better as the screenwriter, not the director. (12.11.2011)

Eine getarnte und moralisierende Langeweile, die von mir 2,5 Sterne bekommt. Die Idee ist gut, sie wurde aber nicht bis ins Detail durchdacht. Die beiden Hauptdarsteller sind miserabel, der Plot wurde irgendwie zusammengeflickt. Wenigstens für den ausgezeichneten Cillian Murphy sage ich danke. Mit anderen Filmen von Niccol kann man In Time - Deine Zeit läuft ab überhaupt nicht vergleichen. Und wenn man ihn mit anderen Science-Fiction-Filmen aus der letzten Zeit vergleicht, ist z. B. Der Plan viel besser. (13.11.2012)

Looks like Andrew Niccol has been partying with Ken Loach. It's beyond my power of comprehension how a kind of pub idea that lays down its meaningfulness in a film right after the first confrontation could win 40 million, regardless of the box office. Putting aside the traditionally excellent Deakins behind the camera and the ever-divine Cillian Murphy (who, of course, makes the acting limits of both protagonists stand out), all that's left is a tiresomely immature anti-utopian vision crossed with incredible Bonnie & Clyde romance and boundless naivety. There's no point in addressing the sheer technical background of time as currency, and in general the entire internal economy of the film has the logic of a 15-year-old Greek leftist revolutionary's brain. Instead it's the Marxist railing against a system that resembles apartheid communism in its centralization (everyone works under a central evil company) that piques the interest. The fact that the film informs us that if an ailing bachelor lays out $315 billion in front of the workers on the street in the ghetto (see trivia), everyone will take their decent piece and go see the world is perfectly consistent with the perception of the world's problems from the armchair of a millionaire director out of touch with reality. (06.07.2015)

I expected a lot from this movie. At first, I thought it might have been directed by Duncan Jones, who was behind the great films "Source Code" and "Moon", but it wasn't. Well, it was noticeable. The plot is not bad. Time has become money and people kill each other to steal their time from one another because it allows them to live forever and look twenty-five. What happens when you are poor your whole life, but suddenly find out that your life will last longer than a century? Well, someone will definitely notice. The film unnecessarily relies on chases and running instead of further developing an interesting idea and playing with it. The second half is basically just an action film that halted the promising sci-fi. Justin and Amanda work well together and hold the film together, but I was really expecting more. It's a shame to waste such a great idea. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/04/diar-milovnika-filmu-c-0003-eastwood.html (14.02.2013)

Of course this was awesome. I've never considered the science fiction field a thing particularly suited to my personality, but I can still appreciate a quality work. In this particular case, perhaps there's nothing to fault – a stunningly original script, well-crafted direction, very good actors, great pacing... What I'm missing is a moment that would have really resonated with me or a greater urgency of that parallel with the real world. There are several of those parallels, of course, and I quite often like to dissect them, but in this particular case I’ll likely stick more to the surface level (and it's a hell of a good one) and content myself with knowing that internally it's not stupid at all... ))) This is my first ever Andrew Niccol film, so I can't resist one more observation (which, I suppose, has long been an open secret) – despite the fact that In Time is predominantly a work of the science fiction genre, it surprises (by the standards of science fiction films) with its unusually modest production design, and overall leaves more of an impression of "refinement and aloofness from its genre peers": could it be that hot New Zealand creative blood? In conclusion, I apologize to all Niccolologists for my clumsiness in the form of a final founded characterization of the filmmaker, as I realize that it must have been developed several times before in a much more sophisticated way. And otherwise I really enjoyed it :)) (10.10.2012)