17/16
An aspiring chef and a recent divorcee discover that their lives have changed forever when a chance meeting unites them in a decade-long, deeply touching romance. When Florence Pugh was unable to attend the film’s premiere due to other filming commitments, Andrew Garfield brought a life-size cutout of her to fill her absence. During the wall in the living room with candles and fire, Almut closes Tobias’ notebook, but in the next shot it is open. Almut: Who is in a hurry? Tobias: Because I am worried that there is a very obvious and real possibility that I will fall in love with you. The Graham Norton Show: Timothée Chalamet / Colman Domingo / Andrew Garfield / James Corden / Ruth. Jones / Laufey Lin Bing Jonsdottir (2024). This is a sin Author Al Hazan Performed by Ally Hazan. Non-linear structure: a double-edged sword We live in a time when we use non-linear structure to make bold narrative choices. While this complicates the story, making it seem like a series of fragmented flashbacks or fairy-tale flashbacks, it comes at the cost of emotional connection. The constant switching between different moments of the relationship allows the audience to fully immerse themselves in the key events. As a result, some key moments feel rushed, and we miss the opportunity to truly absorb the emotions and meaning of certain scenes. A linear approach could provide a deeper connection. Almut’s Career: A Missed Opportunity One of the elements I missed in We Live in Time was a deeper dive into Almut’s career as a chef. We are told that cooking is her passion, but the film does not spend much time explaining why it is so important to her. What sacrifices did she make to achieve what she is? What role does the kitchen play in her personality and how does it contrast with her personal difficulties? By ignoring this aspect, the film misses an opportunity to add depth to her character. This would help not only better connect the viewer with her journey, but also make her internal conflict of balancing career and family more immediate and understandable. Product placement: a few distractions Let’s talk about Weetabix moments. When the product literally becomes part of the conversation, it feels like the movie just took a little break to sell us breakfast. It’s a moment that makes you wonder, “How much did Weetabix pay for this?” It didn’t ruin the movie, but I definitely could have done without the snack commercials in the middle of the movie. Strong actors anchor it. Despite its flaws, “We Live in Time” is held together by Garfield and Pugh’s incredible acting. . Their chemistry alone makes the film worth watching. Both actors are able to deeply convey pure emotions, carrying the weight of the film’s emotional core. Conclusion In the end, “We live in time” is not a revolutionary film, but an honest one. It’s a deeply personal story of love, time and loss, and while it doesn’t always capture all the emotional moments, it still offers moments of true beauty. If you are a fan of romantic characters and bright actors, this film is worth watching.