I must first admit that I am a huge science fiction fan. However, I am only a fan when it is done right, as in 2001, or the Matrix. I recently watched the science fiction movie "In Time", and I can say that this movie is not done right. Each science fiction film sets its own parameters. The reason that the Matrix series works so well is that it sets it's parameters and then works within those parameters. The problem comes when a sci-fi film sets parameters, then completely ignores them. It is totally cool with me if you want to break the laws of physics, but only if the parameters you have set require it.
"In Time" does not break the laws of physics, but it does break the unspoken laws of sociology. The film never adequately justifies exactly how a society based on time would work. If time is used as currency, and firearms are readily available, what is stopping a person from going crazy an hour before they die? The difference here is that people know exactly when they will die. This will lead to absolute chaos when the time nears. However, in this movie, they do not address this point specifically. The movie would have been much better if they had spent more time dissecting the sociology of the situation rather than an action bang em up movie.
I would also like to point out that Justin Timberlake played the lead protagonist, while Cillian Murphy played the lead Antagonist. As far as acting goes, Murphy crushes Timberlake, and I am sad that Murphy has to take a back seat to an inferior actor, because let's face it, Timberlake did a great job, but Cillian Murphy was born to play the protagonist, end of story.
