On paper, we live in time It seems to have been carefully thought out to be the perfect tearjerker for today. John Crowley, famous director of Saoirse Ronan romance films brooklyn, A team with famous actors/internet darlings Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield In a tear-jerking romantic tale of courtship and tragic loss. However, while filled with sex scenes and admirable close-ups, this is not a passionate, or even sweaty, embrace of lust and love, but rather a film that leaves a lasting impression despite its star power. The movie’s soggy handshake.
It’s shocking how we live in time With a work that should have received Oscar acclaim and audience love. However, despite bringing together two of the hottest young actors currently available, Crowley’s film falls surprisingly flat, with only a single time-jump set-up compared to a forgettable film that is, at best, underwhelming. Confusing and, at worst, frustrating.
we live in timeThe machinations don’t work.
we live in time The first is an already very mature couple who have a comfortable morning routine. Ambitious chef Almut (Pew) goes on a long run through a picturesque forest, searching for ingredients along the way for her next culinary experiment. She returns to a gorgeous cabin and gets to work in the beautiful kitchen, while her beloved husband Tobias (Garfield) is still sleeping comfortably in her bed.
After they finish breakfast in bed, and as soon as their sense of happiness is established, the film jumps back to before they met, when he was just a sad man on the verge of divorcing his first wife. After a cute encounter, a real car accident leads to exciting chemistry, as Pugh’s signature charm sparks with Garfield’s unflappable wholesomeness. other moments such as their Riding the carousel is funvery charming. But they’re thrown into this movie with little regard for pacing, theme, or any apparent logic.
Scary ‘we live in time’ horse instantly turned into meme
Despite flashes back and forth, their story is as simple as a weeping beach. They fell in love while she was building her first restaurant and he was coping with the end of his first marriage. They realized they had different expectations for their children and almost broke up. But they would overcome them, as this would be her first battle with cancer and its brutal chemotherapy treatments. The main plot of the film takes place after they give birth to their daughter, and the cancer returns, worse than before. The question is, will Almut endure another debilitating round of chemotherapy that might not even save her life? Or will she refuse treatment to make the most of the time she has left?
The Second Battle with Cancer alone would make for an interesting movie. But because the script is designed to cycle back and forth through the flavor of their entire relationship,we live in time It feels more like a postcard from a relationship than a fulfilling or captivating portrait. There’s little cohesion from one sequence to the next, and even if you’re a fan of these actors like I am, it’s hard to be emotionally invested in these characters.
Popular stories that can be mixed and matched
Florence Pugh shines. Andrew Garfield is in trouble.
This kind of role seemed perfect for Florence Pugh, as she’s a woman dealing with conflicting emotions that require her to smile and frown with equal warmth. Almut loved her husband and children, but she wanted to be more than just “a dying mother.” So when the opportunity came to compete in a high-level cooking competition, she couldn’t turn it down, even if it meant pushing her body to its limits and spending less time at home.
again, this That alone makes for a compelling story. but we live in time Aiming to create some kind of balance by following Tobias, who has far less going on. Almut is seen as having desires outside of marriage, while her husband simply mopes when she disappoints him. He is just willingan accessory that hangs on her body like an anchor. It’s crazy, because Tobias’s arguments in the movie—being honest about their marriage and trying a new round of chemotherapy—are valid, but he’s treated to a plot that treats him as a stubborn obstacle to Almuth’s career dreams. destroyed.
While Garfield delivers a soulful performance with his wide, watery eyes, the film’s scattered structure leaves him with little to draw from. Tobias’ awareness is so thin that the audience is left to fill in the blanks, perhaps due to a previous appreciation of Garfield or a general fondness for Nicholas Sparks-style romances in which infatuated lovers are doomed to be separated by death. In either case, the film itself is frustratingly fragmented.
Crowley fails to elevate the lackluster script.
To be clear, we live in time Not the worst movie of the year. This would be disgusting and bad restart crow. It’s Not the Biggest Bomb of the Year, This Looks to be Eli Roth’s Chaotic Adaptation Borderlands. This isn’t even a movie that could be said to have been enhanced by some sort of scandal, like Pew’s don’t worry honey or some other recent crybaby thing in 2024 It all ends with us. Actually, we live in time The stars’ incredible chemistry on the red carpet and in cheeky promotional interviews will likely back it up. But on its own, the film is far less than the sum of its parts.
The cancer story might be enough to sustain it. Perhaps flashbacks can enhance our understanding not only of the couple’s love, but also of the hardships they’ve endured before. Viewed from both perspectives, this can be a delicately balanced story, exploring how complex the choices of even life or death can sometimes be. But Crowley’s sloppy execution of Nick Payne’s pathos-laden script fails to do that. The time jump feels like an innocent novelty, an attempt to distract from how tedious the story actually is – especially Almuth’s first round of cancer, which consists of three brief scenes.
While Pew and Garfield devote their all to Almuth and Tobias, the chaotic sporadic scenes do little to build tension. In fact, jumping from a couple who are already together to a couple who have yet to meet undercuts the inevitable scenes of tense flirtation. It’s like everything in this movie that might work, there’s something else that works against it. Scenes like their first conversation in a hospital hallway and a vibrant birth scene give Crowley and company hope that they can break through the time-jumping chaos of the plot and tap into something unshakably profound thing.
But in the end, we live in time Very mediocre, lacking the energy, sensuality and raw human emotion we’ve come to expect from Pugh and Garfield.
we live in time had its world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival. The film will be released in the United States on October 11.
