In Time.
By far, one of the worst movies I've ever seen. And I had such OK expectations for it. Normally, when I have OK expectations (which is to say I don't really want to watch the movie), there is at least 1 element of surprise that presents itself that gives me a sigh of relief - a feeling that is a mixture of gratefulness that the director invested enough time in the film to keep audiences on their toes, and that while I could have been doing something else that I wasn't (yes yes, opportunity cost), I'm not entirely unhappy at my decision.
I hope you can see how I am tempering my feelings about this. I'm trying so hard to be so level headed on my reactions. Calm. Composed.
In Time failed even in that regard. In fact, even writing this blog post about the movie is making me feel a bit like I'm still wasting my time. But the one thought I did want to share - why I had even remotely OK expectations for the movie - is because it was about time. Time as a currency. Time as a valuable asset that's traded for the likes of food, resources, work, etc... now that is a pretty cool concept with which you can probably already imagine an unthinkable amount of scenarios full of suspense. And maybe that was the issue. There was so much to do, but so little time... pun intended.
Brings me back to the end of this trek I'm approaching. Approximately 1.5 months!
 |
| corny, i know... |
No comments:
Post a Comment