MovieChat Forums > In Time (2011) Discussion > This movie wasn't horrible hardly at all

This movie wasn't horrible hardly at all


In fact, I thought it was pretty good. The premise itself did it for me, really...pretty thought provoking stuff and they fleshed it out in a way where the world built around it seemed believable. The realism made it that much more interesting and with a decent plot...I'm not sure what more you could ask of your scifi to consider it good, you know?

And Timberlake is a good, charismatic actor...I remember him being made fun of a lot back in the day but no, he's a talented guy who shows here that he's more than capable of holding his own, imo.

While Gangs of New York was one of those great movies I watched twice in the span of a year, this is one that I'd watch twice in the span of 3 years. Which...they should make that some kind of rating. This gains a 2 on the repeat scale, within a span of 3 years. Where's my millions?

reply

The movie is pretty good IMO. I really like the premise as well. Just wish they had laid out the plot better.

reply

I enjoyed it

reply

me too

reply

Me too too.

reply

I like it too.

reply

I also quite liked it!

reply

The correct phrase is “back in THE OLD dayS.” “Back in the day” is ghettospeak.

reply

Nobody cares what you think Kane! But you're wrong, probably only semi-literate and more than a little bit racist, and everyone knows there's nothing worse than an illiterate racist, Kane...

"Back in the day" implies a more personal, subjective version of a time-frame that's likely within the life-span of the person who's saying it. "I had much more of a foot fetish back in the day"
While "back in the old days" conjures images of horse drawn carriages, black and white movies etc...of simpler times in society itself. "People probably never talked about their foot fetishes back in the old days".
You're welcome.

reply