eldestjay

This movie left me with so many questions. Not questions about the plot, because the plot was very clear; nothing was confusing or hard to understand. It left me only with questions like: "Why is 25 the age they stop at?" "Who the heck authorized this system of currency?" "How in the heck does it even work? They just drop dead once they're time's up?!"

In Time really ticked me off. The gaping holes in it's back story left you assuming things left and right. It was agonizing to watch, because it was interactive; but not interactive like Inception, where you had to pay attention to every single detail. It was interactive because you were forced to guess things. To fill in the obvious blanks that the script and plot-line left sitting there like a duck waiting to be fed. The movie sincerely wanted to be what we would call "a smart thriller. You know, like Inception, the Matrix, Alien? That kind of thing. However, the bad writing and unabridged amateurism displayed by all of the young actors and actresses, left the movie gasping for breath, but still caught under the avalanche of atrocity that it was desperately trying to run away from.

I wish I could say that the acting was on par with what you'd expect from "A-List" actors like Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried. Sadly, it wasn't. Becoming an A- lister clearly doesn't take talent any more. Just a pretty young face, and an agent good enough to get you a part in the latest teen-friendly melo-thriller, focused on brining joy to those who aren't that adequate when it comes to things like... well, thinking or speaking or anything that involves using their brain.

It's sad really.... Anyway, don't go see In Time.

Margaret Thatcher was an amazing woman. I do not wish to undermine that fact. But The Iron Lady is one of those movies that is just screaming "Please give us an Oscar!" Several of these come out every year. Last year, we had The American, and Wrecked; this year gives us The Ides of March and sadly, The Iron Lady. 

The movie looked very promising at first. Really, what movie with Meryl Streep in a leading role, doesn't look promising? She is after all, a talented actress.  However, this movie's premise tries to capture something very profound and very controversial, but it tries to capture it in the exact way you'd expect it to. It portrays Thatcher as this high and mighty feminist who is far smarter than any man in existence. Now I have no problem with feminism, but some people take it to such an extreme that they make it seem as if women are far superior to men! That is a different sort of sexism that many choose to overlook.  Nevertheless, that's exactly what this movie does! It show every single male character in a bad light, and supposes that Thatcher is always the smartest one in the room. This is a big blow to the movie's integrity. 

Another thing I found disappointing was the cinematography. It lacked depth, and reminded me far to much of the King's Speech (I loved that movie). If your going to make a movie about a large shift in the British government, then don't do it a year after a similar film won best picture! 

Though, there is hope for the Iron Lady.  I've never been the biggest Meryl Streep fan, only because whenever I watch one of her movies, I can never fully connect to her character, because I only ever see them as Meryl Streep. It's hard for me to think of her as anyone else.  But something amazing happened over the course of the 2 hours that this movie spanned: I forgot who was playing Margaret Thatcher. I literally had to stop and think about it for a minute after the credits rolled. That's how good Streep's performance was. She WAS Margaret Thatcher. She deserves and Oscar. The movie doesn't.