Search found 4 matches: Cillian Murphy

Taking the criticism to heart, I decided to go see it again, and I liked it even better this time, which I really didn't expect. I actually liked the story better, but the real difference was Amanda Seyfried. Her versatility is awesome and she even had some of the best lines, "The poor die, and the rich don't live." I haven't' really liked her rolls that much until now or the movies she was in.

Some other things:

I thought "Darwinian Capitalism" was very appropriate, at least from her father's viewpoint. The fittest, in this case the luckiest, survived. It could also be applied (unintentionally) to the idea that the fittest economic system is where money is the medium of exchange, not time--but that's for a political thread.

I agree with the Bonnie and Clyde comparison, it occurred to me when I saw it the first time, but disagree that they should have followed B & C's example. I think the ending was set up beautifully [spoiler]by the death of his mother under the same circumstances.[/spoiler]

I don't think Cillian Murphy's performance was flat, it was perfect for the role, making him well cast. But it WAS almost identical to his roll as Fischer in Inception. He may become type cast or labeled as a character actor, which will limit his career, but those two performances, on their own, were excellent. I expect he can do more. If not.....

TrixRabbi wrote:I honestly can't by any stretch of the word called this film "Excellent". It is however highly enjoyable, but possibly not for all the reasons it tries to be.

You argue against yourself, particularly when you throw perception and subjective taste into the mix.

Random Notes:

-Justin Timberlake did a great job but Cillian Murphy was a bit flat.

How so, he was precisely in character? And the time counters were well within the bounds of sci-fi artistic license.

Darwinian Capitalism. He just said that. He seriously just said that.

Yeah, I cringed too, but primarily because it wasn't clear what was meant. But I'm going to have to wait to review it to see if it did make any sense.

-They really missed a good pun opportunity with the phrase "Take your time".

I honestly can't by any stretch of the word called this film "Excellent". It is however highly enjoyable, but possibly not for all the reasons it tries to be.

The social metaphors don't pack as much of a punch with all the hilarity (either intended or unintended) ensues. The movie is overfilling with Time-related puns, so that the movie feels it needs to explain in case you missed the joke. [spoiler]"It's your money or your life. But in this case, your money is your life."[/spoiler]

The plot becomes absurd to the point that I was literally laughing at what it would do next. [spoiler]It starts off looking like it'll be an "Innocent-Man thought guilty" type of movie, before becoming a sort of Sci-Fi Patty Hearst story that then turns into Bonnie and Clyde without the cathartic ending.[/spoiler]

The film makes some great musings on modern day society, the current financial crisis, and the concept of money itself. However, the movie tries to hit you over the head with it. Even if the message is good, it's hard to take a film about a world where people have digital clocks embedded in their arms seriously when there's a barrage of puns in your face. [spoiler]"He could have put the time in a capsule."[/spoiler]

In Time is an enjoyable action flick that tries to be more than it can achieve. I do recommend it if you're looking for a sci-fi/action movie with some heart.

Random Notes:

-Justin Timberlake did a great job but Cillian Murphy was a bit flat.
-Darwinian Capitalism. He just said that. He seriously just said that.
-They really missed a good pun opportunity with the phrase "Take your time".

Excellent movie (whether it knows it or not) starring Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfred, Cillian Murphy (a bad guy with integrity) and Olivia Wilde. Set in the future where time is the currency. Everyone lives to 25 (Wilde is Timberlake's mother!), then a clock in your arm determines how much time you have left. Time can be bought, sold, traded or stolen.

At first glance, it appears to be a parody on class warfare, but the poor are incarcerated or trapped in ghettos from which there is no escape, while the "rich" rule as an oligarchy. The real question that keeps coming up is what is living? Are the rich, captives in a prison of their own design? Their motto is "For a few to be immortal, many must die". Does that equate to, "For a few to be rich, many must be poor." R/T has it at 36 (critics) and 72 (public)--a common split of late. See what you think. 8/10