Reviews

Like most people, I went into this with no idea what I was watching. Unfortunately, it stayed that way throughout the film. It's absurdist, sure. Which just isn't my thing. I like a well-told story and if the logic is missing, it's not a well-told story imho. So, fair enough, I'm not the target audience. To me it was just some really nice cinematography and a bombastic soundtrack. But I find myself thoroughly bored by seeing disjointed stories about entirely unrelatable characters.

That said, I read somewhere that the director thinks audiences would side with Oliver and that gave me pause. Why the hell would people side with a total narcissistic psychopath? Are y'all okay? 😂

So why did I waste two hours on this? Very simple: the actors are great, and I'll watch anything with Rosamunde Pike in it. She is, as always, incredible. Plus, I felt it would be disingenuous to rant about the movie without having finished it. 😅

Was this *meant* to be uncomfortable? I genuinely can't tell whether it's supposed to be cringe or if it's accidentally cringe. But I definitely cringed a lot watching this (the singing, especially). It's neither the comedy nor the romance it claims to be. No chemistry between anyone, and the immature "jokes" definitely do not land.

Now, I love Alison Brie as much as the next person but I have genuinely never seen her this bad. Her acting is stiff and uncomfortable, and in this character, her slightly too high, ethereal voice becomes grating within literal minutes. Honestly, all of the acting is over the top and fake, so I blame writing and directing for this more than the actors themselves.

Speaking of the writing (in which Alison Brie was apparently involved): The plot is predictable but not exactly relatable. "My Best Friend's Wedding", which some people have compared this to because of the plot, works because Julia Roberts is enchantingly irresistible even when her character makes terrible choices. Alison Brie's character in "Somebody I Used to Know" unfortunately ain't that.

For the main part of this film I couldn't really tell if they wanted the viewer to be on the lead's side or whether this was *meant* to be an unlikeable main character situation. Brie's character definitely oscillates between Manic Pixie Dream Girl, creepy ex, and "girl, you should really be in therapy instead of doing this". She 100% has main character syndrome, and the messiness isn't entertaining.

The only reason I gave it 3 stars is because the ending finally does manage to make a point on female empowerment and body positivity but, good grief, it could have gotten there in much better ways than it did.

One additional random thing that turned me off it is the homophobic subplot with Cassidy's parents. What in the...??? Why? So unnecessary!

All in all, the real highlight in this entire film is Danny Pudi, who is a breath of fresh air.

avoided this film like the plague. But no, I thought it would at least be a nice fluff film for a lazy Sunday. And it was okay, for a while there. BUT THEN THAT DAMN GIRL QUITS THE JOB SHE ALWAYS WANTED IN ORDER TO MOVE ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO BE WITH A GUY! Seriously? And her father thinks that "it's a kick-ass idea". Uh, I don't think it means what you think it means.

Now I'll know to trust my instincts and to avoid all future films written by Kelly Fremon (I am burning that name into my memory so I won't stumble into another one of hers, ever). I can't actually believe a woman wrote this spineless story with that unfeminist dud of an ending. Keep in mind that I read all of the Bridget Jones books and suffered through a fair amount of moderately unamusing rom coms – so I have a relatively high tolerance for exasperating women in fiction. However, "Post Grad" just made me go, "Hulk smash".

The only stars I did give to this are for Jane Lynch, Carol Burnett and Michael Keaton. Unfortunately, they'll have to share one, because "Post Grad" is simply: Awful.

Three things:

1. If you expect typical Steve Martin, don't watch this.

2. If you expect typical Claire Danes, probably don't watch this either.

3. If you want an excellent quiet film about loneliness and human connection, then go ahead.

The poster is misleading, I think. It is too glossy and too focused on the triangle. It would lead you to expect a different film, so in the beginning I was a bit puzzled as to where this was heading. But once I went with the weird it just got better and better.

In my opinion it's not so much about the love triangle as it is about the loneliness of three different people and how they're trying to connect/avoid connecting. It's not some big dramatic chase after the girl but the drama happens WITHIN the characters: her depression, his inability to connect, her unrequited love.

While Steve Martin's usual roles do have the tragedy underneath the comedy this one comes without the top veneer of fun. It's refreshing! And Martin is actually fantastic in this, touching, heartbreakingly lost and lonely. It is such a joy seeing him playing a serious character. And in fact, the only truly tragic character in this movie. Danes and Schwartzman end up making a connection, he never really does until it's too late.

My only problem with the movie was Jason Schwartzman's character: He does bring some comedy/levity into it but his cluelessness is almost too cringe-worthy at times. I mostly felt embarrassed for him. Hence only 9 out of 10 stars from me.

I am torn about this. I like the original idea which could've made for epic sci-fi cinema with some decent language puns thrown in. However, the plot is seriously anemic and a lot of the language puns don't work out and end up being horribly corny.

The action sequences seem a bit contrived, the romance somewhat unmotivated, the main character nauseatingly goody two-shoes. And then there's the random number of bad guys thrown into the mix to keep things interesting – until you don't need them anymore and can dispose of them equally randomly. And sometimes things just happen because they're convenient that way, explanations be damned, as if they're just the ramp needed for more action scenes.

Better writing could've also coaxed better performances out of all the actors. Both Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried seem at times completely oblivious as to what they're supposed to act. They barely have any chemistry together.

As for Seyfried's character: Is she the rebellious daughter or rather the clueless, wide-eyed girl that falls for a guy from the other side of the tracks? Is she both? Who knows? In any case Sylvia isn't even remotely as three-dimensional as she could be and despite showing some initiative she ends up being merely a doe-eyed damsel in distress.

Of course the movie does not pass the Bechdel test. In fact, it's infuriatingly white male- focused with the women mostly intended as eye candy. Every single person in this film is either male or if female clearly in the damsel/mother/sister/daughter trope corner.

Who is indeed wonderful is Cillian Murphy. Granted, I will watch that man run in a black leather coat any day, but quite besides my personal preference Murphy does prove once again that he really can play anything. The underlying maturity he infuses into his role as Timekeeper is a joy to watch. This is the same guy who was a vulnerable Kitten in "Breakfast on Pluto" and a considerably scary Scarecrow in "Batman Begins" - and again he immerses himself deeply in his character who actually ends up being the only one in "In time" who resembles a three-dimensional person.

At the end of the day "In Time" is just a brilliant sci-fi concept that could have made for a much better movie if only for a better script and some decent direction.