Recently, I watched 2 movies with my fiance: In Time and The Woman In Black. Both movies have positive and negative sides, but both are also recommended for any movie lover.
The main reason I watch IN TIME is because of Amanda Seyfried. I’ve been liking this actress since Dear John, and growing even more fond of her in Chloe and Red Riding Hood. Her role in this movie, unfortunately, is not very charming or daring, but she’s still a sight for sore eyes.
The tagline for this movie, Time is Money / Time is Power, is an understatement; time really is everything.
In the world of IN TIME, people stop aging by the age of 25, but then they only have one year left to live before their hearts stop beating abruptly. Here, when you reach 25, a set of number on your arms starts to count down (see the green line of numbers on Justin Timberlake’s arm in the poster?). If you want to live longer, you have to earn time (by working, fighting, gambling, or stealing it from other people). In this world you also have to pay everything with time–30 minutes for a decent meal, 1 minute for using a payphone, 2 hours for using public transportation, etc.
The concept of this movie is very interesting, but the storyline is quite simple. JT plays Will Salas, a poor man (yeah, poor, he literally live day by day, only have about 24 hours on his arm no matter how hard he’s working to earn more time) who becomes rich in one night when a stranger suddenly gives him a century before he kills himself. Then the Time Keepers (more or less like the police in this world) chase Will accusing him of murder. In the process, Will takes Sylvia Weis, a billionaire’s daughter, as a hostage. He demands a high ransom so he can give more time to the poor (kinda like Robinhood, eh? robbing the rich to give to the poor). Will believes that no one should live forever and that distributing time fairly is a way to restore justice. Sylvia is then convinced to support his cause.
We get a lot of action in this movie, though it’s not remarkably done. There is nothing new; we’re already familiar with the chasing-on-the-roof scene or car-chasing scene.
The Woman in Black
For some people, the main attraction of this movie is Daniel Radcliffe, but not me. I was on Goodreads, looking for some recommended horror novels to read when I saw this title: The Woman In Black by Susan Hill, and I was intrigued by the cover art. Since then, I haven’t got my hands on the novel, so I was delighted to know it is made into a movie (surely watching it is quicker than reading it).
I must say that I do not regret watching this movie in the cinema, because I truly adore the atmosphere brought into the screen: the landscapes, the old buildings and the antique toys; like being thrown back to past. And I was craving for a horror movie.
However, I am not impressed by the storyline; the twist are predictable. Several scenes are cliche (perhaps back then in 1980 when the novel first published, those scenes were new and original, but not so much now) and the characters’ way of thinking is too naive. If you’re looking for a movie with similar atmosphere and with better storyline, you might want to check out Awakening.
Radcliffe plays a widower named Arthur Kipps who, due to financial difficulty, accepts the job to sell a secluded house called The Eel Marsh House after finding the will of the recently deceased owner. He travels from London to a small village of which inhabitants are not very welcoming (in fact, they try to shoo him away). Upon arriving at The Eel March House, Arthur catches sight of a mysterious woman dressed in black (no doubt she’s not human). The villagers believe that this woman is responsible for the death of the children there. When Arthur hears about this, he fears for his young son who’s coming to visit him in the village and he strives to find a way to stop this woman in black from killing more children.