close
close

Florence Pugh, Andrew Garfield elevator film

Florence Pugh, Andrew Garfield elevator film

play

A kiss is the hallmark of a love story. The new “We Live in Time” should have kept that other KISS in mind: Keep it simple, stupid.

Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield are great together and deliver strong performances as a British couple overcoming personal and professional hurdles, including a cancer diagnosis. But the romantic drama (★★½ out of four; rated R; now in New York and LA and nationwide Friday) employs a nonlinear narrative that does no one any favors and actually undermines the film’s potential as an effective tear-jerker.

Directed by John Crowley, who went from the amazing “Brooklyn” to the dull “The Goldfinch,” “We Live in Time” oscillates between three different phases in the lives of its lead couple.

Join our Watch Party! Sign in to get USA TODAY’s movie and TV recommendations delivered straight to your inbox.

These are the first years in which aspiring star chef Almut (Pugh) and Weetabix marketing guy Tobias (Garfield) are enjoying an unconventional meeting when Alma hits him with her car while he is picking up a pen to sign his divorce papers sign. This initial phase involves the birth of her daughter on a truly crazy day and an important six-month window in which Almut’s ovarian cancer forces her to choose between a treatment that could prolong her life but causes more suffering, or making the best use of what is left Time to decide.

The film touches on some tropes, such as a crazy bit where they ride on a carousel and some romantic comedy where Tobias and the heavily pregnant Almut struggle to get out of their parking lot to get to the hospital and their baby to get. (It actually leads to one of the film’s stronger sequences, in which the couple is forced to give birth to their child in a gas station toilet in a tornado of heartwarming and hilarious chaos.) Many of the emotional stakes feel earned because they aren’t are real, especially since Almut and Tobias have to weigh up children and marriage at the beginning of their relationship and later have to make important medical decisions.

“We Live in Time” successfully flips tired stereotypes and depicts a modern couple where the woman is the one who is competitive and whose job is at the top of her priority list, and the man is the devoted support system. Still, the film dwells so much on Almut – even giving her a backstory as a figure skater – that Tobias is a character who lacks development.

While Almut has a cool job and spends a lot of time making personal sacrifices to compete in a major world cooking competition, Tobias is a loving father and friend whose desires and ideas outside of marriage remain unexplored. At least Garfield is great at bringing nerdy warmth and awkward seriousness to Tobias, Pugh is enjoyably fiery as Almut, and each brings equal depth to their characters’ features and foibles.

What dampens its emotional impact is the time-hopping aspect that sets the film apart from similar stories. Crowley deviates from the usual blatant melodrama and emotional manipulation, although the way the film unfolds disrupts the natural emotional development of her characters. A film like, say, “Love Story,” the eternal, whiny cancer fairy tale, builds toward the eventual waterworks – while it leaves some scrambling for a tissue, “We Live in Time” ends up thwarting that catharsis more than that it reinforces it.

Sometimes you watch a movie like this because you need a good exclamation. Armed with good intentions and better actors, We Live in Time boasts complex emotions and complicates everything else.

Related Post