In Time Commentary

At first, glance, this looks like it could be a really interesting movie.  Everyone lives for 25 years and then gets one more year as currency.  The can work to get more, spend it, etc.  When you run out, you die.  Everything else is just like regular life.  There are people killing each other for their time and the elite who have more than they can use.  But this makes them immortal.  And everyone winds up being 25 years old physically regardless of their actual age.  Well, except for Justin Timberlake.  He looks about 30 for some inexplicable reason.

The problem is that I don't know how they could have made this movie good.  The whole thing is crippled by the overuse of cheesy "time is money" writing that makes you realize that the whole idea of time as currency is pretty ridiculous.  There's a weak attempt at a morality story about greed and inequality with painful attempts at Robin Hood with Stockholm Syndrome.  But the poor writing doesn't stop there.  It's pretty horrible all across the board.  And, in a future where they've figured out how to genetically engineer people to be immortal, they're still using gunpowder and the internal combustion engine?  Sorry, but when this all happens, we'd better have flying cars.  It's also crippled by the fact that, because nobody is over 25, almost all of the actors are jackass douchebags and it makes it hard to care about anyone in the movie.  And the girl just happens to know Darwin's birthday off the top of her head?  That one really baffled me.

Finally, for a movie that is supposed to be a thriller, it moves way too slow.  The whole time, they make you think they're building to some sort of amazing, edge of your seat twist and by the time they get there, you've just stopped caring.

Don't see it.