We live in time | Movie reviews from Reelviews

I’ve never been a fan of big, bold tear-jerkers – ones that often work just as well as movies or Kleenex commercials. Despite great, lively performances from the main actors Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield, We live in time turns out to be one of those films that can’t resist pushing a few buttons too many times as the manipulation is turned up to 11. The decision to present the plot as a chronological jumble doesn’t work – it undermines the emotional core of the film by making the artificiality of certain plot elements too obvious. You can never really delve into the breezy, romantic aspects of the early relationship because there’s a stage 3 cancer diagnosis hanging over everything. (This isn’t really a spoiler as it’s revealed early on.)

Pugh and Garfield almost sell the film. They are great when apart and even better when together. They have tremendous chemistry. And maybe that’s the only thing fans of the genre need. But the plot doesn’t do them any favors as it goes to various peaks in their decades-long relationship without dealing with any logic as to why the script takes place from 2023 to 2013 somewhere in between. I find that this non-linear approach fails more often than it works. In 2024 there was a movie where it was necessary and effective (The outrun). We live in time does not mark the second.

We live in time skips three main parts of Almut (Pugh) and Tobais (Garfield’s) time together. Chronologically speaking, it begins with a kind of “Meet Cute”: Almut runs over Tobais with her car and accompanies him to the hospital. As an apology (even though he was probably more to blame than she was), she offers him a free meal at the upscale restaurant she owns and where she works as a chef. The second act focuses on the couple’s efforts to conceive. And Act III shows them coping with Almut’s cancer diagnosis, which includes difficult career/life decisions, and how they present the situation to their young daughter Ella (Grace Delaney). These scenes are deeply tragic as they depict the inevitability of battling cancer and the indignities that come with it.

I assume the intent of the presentation We live in time
In the manner chosen by writer Nick Payne and director John Crowley, the aim is to recreate a journey through Tobias’s memories – the film is a collage of scenes as seen through his eyes (although there are times when he does not idea deviates and shows things that he was not privy to). Unfortunately, while this artistic flourish may look good on paper, it results in a muddled narrative that can sometimes be difficult to navigate. Sure, there are “clues” to the time frame – Pugh’s shaved head when Almut undergoes chemotherapy, her inflated prosthetic belly when she’s pregnant, etc. – but recognizing them takes too much of a brain toll. The story, especially in its weaker moments, needs a stronger emotional connection than intellectual connection.

There are isolated vignettes, though We live in time is spot on. One montage in particular stands out to me: Almut and Tobais, trying to have a child, go through all the ups and downs of failure: the repeated negative pregnancy tests, the trips to the clinic, the fertility treatments… I know it from my own experience How apt these scenes are. But after the happy moment where the little stick shows a positive result, the film segues into a birth scene that feels like it was rejected from a bad sitcom.

The 1990s saw the rise of Nicholas Sparks’ popularity, along with the success of Nick Cassavetes’ adaptation of his novel, The notebookspawned a cottage industry of books and films aimed at making audiences cry. Over time, this kind of heavy-handed manipulation disappeared from movie screens;
We live in time feels like a step backwards. While it’s not necessarily a bad thing, doesn’t everyone need a good shout out every now and then? – The film occasionally tries too hard to pump up the waterworks, allowing its structure to overshadow the performances of its lead actors. Those longing to use a small packet of tissues may be willing to overlook the film’s flaws, but I wonder if a conventional telling of the same story might have been more effective in the long run.

---

We Live in Time (UK/France, 2024)

---