We Live In Time

 

When: 18th January 2025

Where: Cinema

Writer: Nick Payne

Director: John Crowley

(Spoilers ahead)

We Live In Time relies on its actors and Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield are perfectly cast. Not only do they interpret the script beautifully, but they bring their own personalities to the characters, making them detailed and nuanced. Nick Payne's script is wonderfully crafted, it shows such clear understanding and a close reading of what it means to be human. By allowing the actors to interpret it in their own ways, and I suspect improvise around it, the characters are given a texture and depth which is often lacking from film characters. 

One of the most notable elements of this film is its portrayal of time. Time is what the film is all about, it's in the title, yet what may surprise many people is its non-linear portrayal of time, the film takes place in disjointed time. Disjointed time is not something new to Payne, in his play Constellations the characters similarly explore a love story through a series of disjointed scenes and I loved the decision to present the film in this way. Firstly it made a fairly simple narrative captivating for the viewer, it felt fresh and yet honest and familiar. Also by making the audience aware of Almut's cancer diagnosis from the very beginning, the pain of the inevitable ending is constantly looming in the background, it really does feel as though Payne wants to make us cry through the majority of the film. Yet what is most interesting about the decision to use disjointed time is the way it emphasises the films message. We Live In Time, as the title suggests, is a play about the limits of time, its predetermination and inevitability, it's a film about not wasting the time you are given, the time you can't control. Therefore by showing the story in a non-linear timeline Payne identifies that at the end it is not the order in which things happened that is important, but the ways in which you use that time, the things that make a lifetime worthwhile. Nothing particularly out of the ordinary happens, there's no surprises, you're basically told the ending in the first 5 minutes, yet there is something magical about it, Payne finds something beautiful in the ordinary highs and lows of life. He makes this more than just a love story inflicted with the pain of cancer, he makes life into a piece of art that connects with everyone.

It is clear that Payne predominantly writes for stage there is something theatrical about this film, not only in the way he portrays time but also in the details of the narrative. I often view theatre as much more closely related to its local contexts, and whilst that's not to say film can't be, movies are made for a globalized audience whereas a performance of a play takes place in one specific location, for what is likely to be a much more localized audience. Yet here Payne pays close attention to the nuanced details, the societal cues and understandings present within the films British context - Britishism's if you may - grounding the characters. To give an example, there is a moment in which the couple eat Jaffa Cakes, a well known, highly British, food, but they each eat them in their own specific way, something which is in the brands marketing and a defined nuance in British culture - Everyone has their own specific way of eating a Jaffa Cake. It's details such as this which make the work feel like a close study of humanity, as is seen in theatre, which stands out amongst an abundance of Hollywood movies. 

Yet, Payne has also identified the position of the piece in its filmic form. Every scene, every image, every frame is focused on Almut and Tobias, in fact much of the film consists of fairly close up shots. Nick Payne and John Crowley do this for a number of reasons; one to portray the intimacy of the narrative, emphasising the personal, and secondly to allow the characters to harness subtlety. By using close up shots Payne gives himself the capability to tell the story without words, the characters create their own physical language, small glances, looks, smiles, and we as the audience learn to read that. It is here that much of the story lies, its in their shared understanding, the way in which they appear on the "same wavelength" that makes their relationship real. It's something which theatre just cannot do. As much as we view theatre as a reflection of reality it's a stylised reality, with audience members possibly meters away at the back of the auditorium subtlety is not something it can afford. Yet here Payne uses it beautifully, bringing us closer to the characters, connecting with them and utilising society's collective interpretation of meaning. 

For those wondering, I did absolutely bawl my eyes out towards the end, in fact I think I watched quite a lot of the film through my own tears. The ending is inevitable and yet heart-breaking, if anything I think its inevitability is what makes it. The film doesn't try to trick you or shock you it portrays a raw truth, and part of that emotional response is pain and sadness and part of it is joyful. Almut fulfils her life goals, she achieves, she loves, she enjoys life, and as she waves her family goodbye, as they learn to live without her, they all smile. 

As I sit here and write this, remembering the journey of the film, of the characters, I am close to tears once again. It has left a mark on me, it has allowed me to think about my own life, to reflect, and maybe that sounds deep, or overly philosophical for a film, but I do think that this film will have an impact on the choices I make, on the way I chose to live my life. I may only be young, I may have a lot of time left, but why waste any of it. Time is not infinite and it is constantly moving out of our control, so what have we got to live for expect the things that give us joy, that give us pain, and that make us who we are.