Time Out

Not rated yet!
Director
Laurent Cantet
Runtime
2 h 14 min
Release Date
10 September 2001
Genres
Drama
Overview
An unemployed man finds his life sinking more and more into trouble as he hides his situation from his family and friends.
Staff ReviewsAround the Web ReviewsAudience Reviews

Check back soon when the reviews are out!

Or why not join our mailing list to stay up to date?

 

SIGN UP!

Box office recaps sent twice a month (maximum).

( ̄^ ̄)ゞ (☞゚ヮ゚)☞ No spam! ☜(゚ヮ゚☜)




 ✍🏻  > 🗡️   Want to join our team? Email us!  
Crosswalk1
Cross Walk



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Time Out
    Movies from Film Forum, 05/09/02Watch for a low-profile film from France making its way around the country. Time Out recently won the grand prize at the Venice Film Festival, and it deserves the high honors. In my opinion, it's the most artful and rewarding movie so far this year.Director Laurent Cantet's film is a haunting character study of Vincent, a man who has everyone (including his family) fooled. He has convinced them that he is a successful businessman making a career change. In fact, he claims to be taking a job with the U.N. But in reality, Vincent has been laid off, and he is spending his days driving around in the French countryside alone, watching people and taking naps in hotel parking lots.While Vincent seems almost psychotic at times, the film's brilliant trick is to make us envy him. He seems to have discovered a freedom, a perpetual vacation. By living a lie, he is able to voyeuristically enjoy the city and the highway, without the stress of a job, without real deadlines or pressures. One early scene crystallizes the quality of his happiness—he drives along in his plush sedan, parallel to a crowded commuter train, chuckling with smug satisfaction as he observes the crowded masses on their way to tedious day-jobs. The car is his bubble, his security.But one can only live in such denial for so long. As Vincent slowly learns the cost of his freedom, he is drawn dangerously close to the edge of madness. One moment, he's sneaking into an office building just to see how far he can go before he is stopped. The next, he finds himself entangled in crime. Actor Aurelien Recoing gives what will be remembered as one of the finest performances of the year, giving Vincent a variety of subtle twitches and false smiles that keep us on edge. Even when he's draws from previous employment experience to fabricate his identity, we're not sure if he every really worked anywhere at all. He's one of cinema's all-time great liars, and the story brings him to the inevitable consequences. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-1'); }); Some moviegoers may find it slow-going. Cantet takes his time, letting us become almost comfortable in Vincent's presence, then shocking us with the audacity of his lies and his willingness to deceive his loved ones. But the film is not just about one man's journey into denial. It is also about work, about the way that modernization drives us to tedious tasks and makes us feel unimportant. In this light, family, intimacy, humility, and honesty shine through as sources of life and purpose in a crowded world of lonely people.J. Robert Parks (The Phantom Tollbooth) calls it thought-provoking, and says the film "forces the audience to contemplate the nature of the global economy and the role of work/vocation in its expansion. What is meaningful work? What are our responsibilities?" It also explores "why a man would resort to such an outlandish and ultimately fruitless lie." googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-2'); }); if (gptClientWidth >= 992 && gptClientWidth <= 1000000) googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-3'); }); Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat (Spirituality and Health) say, "Cantet draws out a bravura performance from Recoing. This involving French film vividly conveys the soul-shattering debilitations of unemployment and the spunk needed to survive while adrift in the universe." ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

Quintus Curtius1
Fortress of the Mind



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Sunday Film Roundup (5/15/2016)
    film2

    We now consider a few of the most recent films I’ve seen.  I should have started doing this a while ago.

    Continue reading

    ...
    (Review Source)

VJ Morton5
Right Wing Film Geek



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)
  • Skandies Decade Best
    (”Time Out” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    Skandies Decade Best

    It’s almost the end of the decade and, as he did in 1999, Mike D’Angelo has asked us Skandie voters to pick our 10 favorite films of the decade and our 10 favorite performances (one category only; male and female, lead and supporting). He’s about halfway through the countdown now at his blog Listen, Eggroll.

    Here are my ballots, with the Mike-request proviso that I not give away the point totals. To that same end, I’ve also listed them in alphabetical order, so as not to suggest any order of preference. There’s also links to those among the films and the actors’ films that I’ve written about.

    BEST FILMS OF THE 00s

    CAPTURING THE FRIEDMANS (Andrew Jarecki, USA) — review essay here
    THE CHILD (Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Belgium) — review essay here
    DOGVILLE (Lars von Trier, Denmark) — review essay here
    4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS AND 2 DAYS (Cristian Mungiu, Romania) — TIFF review here; with expansions here and here
    GRIZZLY MAN (Werner Herzog, USA) — review essay here
    MEMENTO (Christopher Nolan, USA)
    LA PIANISTE (Michael Haneke, France/Austria)
    SILENT LIGHT (Carlos Reygadas, Mexico) — TIFF review here; with review essay here
    SONGS FROM THE SECOND FLOOR (Roy Andersson, Sweden)
    TIME OUT (Laurent Cantet, France)

    BEST ACTORS OF THE 00s

    Bjork, DANCER IN THE DARK — review of the film here
    Russell Crowe, CINDERELLA MAN — review of the film here
    Ryan Gosling, THE BELIEVER
    Olivier Gourmet, THE SON — review of the film here
    Isabelle Huppert, LA PIANISTE
    Heath Ledger, THE DARK KNIGHT
    Maia Morgenstern, THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST — review of the film here
    Simon Pegg, HOT FUZZ
    Aurelien Recoing, TIME OUT
    Imelda Staunton, VERA DRAKE — review of the film here

    Advertisement
    Advertisements
    Report this ad
    Report this ad

    Like this:

    Like Loading...

    Related

    2011 -- Best Old FilmsWith 4 comments

    Believe it or notIn "Albert and David Maysles"

    I blame SonnyIn "Ben Shapiro"

    October 11, 2009 - Posted by | Skandies

    2 Comments »

    1. Only two (2!) American films neither of which is by an American, and no American actors! What a snob. Not really. I wouldn’t have gone with Crowe, and know you only did because he’s your favorite current actor. I also think you may like Morgenstern’s performance more than anyone in the world, but every other choice is really solid. I’d have made room for Bill Murray and maybe Aaron Eckhart and Nicole Kidman (all for obvious films) but it’s a really great list. You’ll be the only person who votes for Pegg, but it’s a really inspired choice.

      In fact, Hot Fuzz would make my top ten. I haven’t seen Songs From the Second Floor, but look forward to. I feel you probably went with the best Haneke (it is) much like you did with Crowe. I like all of your choices even though my list would be considerably different. The two docs are masterworks. I’m not nearly as big a fan of the brothers Dardenne as you are, but L’enfant is my fav (though wouldn’t make my top ten). I like Memento a lot, but I prefer The Prestige. Nolan still isn’t the director I’d like him to be but I think that he developed significantly from one to the other, and I actually think The Prestige has the better, more ambitious, screenplay. Time Out and Silent Light are obvious, and while I don’t love the Mungiu I definitely get the love. And Dogville is nothing short of von Trier’s best film. So much better than it has any right to be, and maybe the most intelligent film of the young century.

      P.S. Do you really only just think Hot Fuzz is about having fun at the movies, or do you agree with me that it is also an anti-utilitarian (socialist/statist/Marxist) parable.

      Comment by James | October 12, 2009 | Reply

    2. Correction, Jarecki is an American, and so is him film.

      Comment by James | October 12, 2009 | Reply


    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

    « Previous | Next »

    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Toronto 08 — Day 6 capsules
    (”Time Out” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    Toronto 08 — Day 6 capsules

    THREE BLIND MICE (Matthew Newton, Australia, 2008) — 6

    This is the sort of competent genre movie that you might catch flipping the channels, watch it through and be reasonably well entertained. THREE BLIND MICE is about the last night of liberty for three Australian Navy sailors before their ship heads for Iraq. The hemmed-in-by-Aristotelian-unities events that follow are more or less exactly what you expect if you’ve ever seen ON THE TOWN (the premises’ similarity being noted) or THE LAST DETAIL. But THREE BLIND MICE avoids the mannered quirkiness that torpedoes many Australian comedies (to outsiders anyway), and it is well cast though to fairly conventional types — the wiseacre leader (played by director Newton), the straight arrow, the dubious outsider. The set pieces are handled effectively (they’re lengthier and with less cross-cutting between than you’d expect), with a poker game for money holding some real tension and a meal with the prospective parents-in-law turning into the date from hell. There’s also a couple of War subtexts that pleasantly don’t turn out quite the way they often do (and gee … it turns out that military abuse happens not at the behest of the Bush administration and their grand Salvation Through Leviathan plans). But still … I shouldn’t oversell this refreshing spritzer of a movie, because it is very schematic and predictable, and never really pushes toward something great. Neither ON THE TOWN without music nor THE LAST DETAIL without Jack Nicholson could be called awesome.

    KISSES (Lance Daly, Ireland, 2008) — 0

    A piece of crap that I hated with a passion I haven’t felt since A HOLE IN MY HEART here in 2004. KISSES is one of the most immoral films I’ve ever seen — an apologia for young children running away from home. Basically a boy and a girl who look to be about 10 are unhappy with their next-door families and so run away on Christmas Eve to have fun in Dublin spending some stolen money — like ELVIRA MADIGAN with an Irish working-class setting and a happy ending. Did I say happy ending? Sorry I spoiled the movie (naw). But no … this movie is filled with benevolent barge-keepers, hookers with a heart of gold, street musicians whom the kids can help (like in “Beavis Can You Spare A Dime”), a Bob Dylan impersonator who imparts the wisdom that “we’re all running away from something” (see … it’s normal to do this kind of thing), hot dog vendors who give free sandwiches to persistent kids. Everything is played for a jolly lark, as if there are no dangers to 10-year-olds wandering the streets at a major capital city at night. Or rather, when danger does rear its ugly head, the two kids are able to defeat it through their own pluck. Oh … and the kiss in the “we’re alive, let’s kiss” scene is full-passion French-kissing, not the awkward pecks that might be believable. The film goes from a grim black-and-white to a washed-out color to full color in the course of the journey to Dublin, and then back when the kids are finally brought back to families that pointedly have not changed. Sure, the families are non-stop yelling from hell — the boy’s father punches his mom with a closed fist, understandably since she had just done the same; and the girl’s family is the sort where “you shchoopit cunt” is a term of endearment. But that’s part of the movie’s same stacked deck. I realize more than ever that KIT KITTREDGE made a genius move in sanitizing the Depression. It’s not a moral problem when an 8-year-old girl does her own crime investigation and the criminals are buffoonish, if the movie has basically been a fantasy from the beginning. But if KIT had played the Depression in full GRAPES OF WRATH miserabilism, it would have done what KISSES does with the brutalist portrayal of the family and the would-be kidnappers. There is even a scene that proves how black are the souls of the people involved with KISSES. The kids bought wheely shoes once at a Dublin mall and pointedly use them throughout. But later there is a reverie scene on an ice rink. Before it begins, the film shows the kids taking off their wheelies. After all, we can’t portray kids doing anything dangerous now, can we? Somebody might sue.

    TOKYO SONATA (Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Japan, 2008) — 5

    Late in this movie, a title card announces “three hours earlier.” If you walk out of TOKYO SONATA at that point, you’ll think you walked out on a terrific movie. Not such FATAL ATTRACTION can I think of a realistic film that was so observant and so well-done for so long, but which so suddenly turned on a dime into risible crap. Now, there’s no bunny-boiling or “not dead yet” type moments here; TOKYO SONATA maintains the naturalistic, observational style. But nothing that actually happens after that title card was one-millionth-of-a-billionth believable. It’s really a shame because TOKYO SONATA starts with the premise of one of my 10 all-time favorites (TIME OUT) — salaried-manager Sasaki is fired from his job because of outsourcing and tries to keep it from his family. Kurosawa also has interesting ideas that went places Cantet didn’t — like Sasaki finding a second downsized man who had his own ideas of how to handle things, some of them semi-comic, and he actually does take a legitimate if much-lowlier new job, rather than smuggling as Cantet’s hero did. And the rest of the family plays a bigger role and are hiding secrets of their own. He also has an interesting theme about loss of face and how authority once pissed away can never be restored (at least as itself). It’s as precise and formal as an Ozu family drama film — given certain adjustments for changes in Japanese society since the 1940s — until it bursts into much-more explosive territory with a violent family-fight scene. It’s all so good for so long that when you find out “three hours earlier,” it’s an utter shame how laughable events become. One example: a conventional Japanese housewife throws herself at a home invader who threatens her at knifepoint.

    THE BROTHERS BLOOM (Rian Johnson, USA, 2008) — 7

    Like TOKYO SONATA, this is a great film for much of its running time but loses it at the end. It doesn’t become actively risible (hence the higher grade) … just loses its steam and tries to get serious. But for the first hour or so, THE BROTHERS BLOOM is one of the funniest contraptions you’ll ever see — a story of two brothers who have spent their lives doing cons. I mean it when I call this film a “contraption,” and one very specifically tied to movie-making. For one thing, the film is not remotely realistic — to name one very simple thing, it’s very hard to tell when the movie is taking place. The details of the cars and the technology needed for some of the stunts clearly imply present-day. But in their dress, in their mannerisms and sensibility, and in some of the details of the physical plant in the self-mythologizing montage of their boyhood (Skandies plug for Best Scene), the Blooms more resemble the “heroes” from Lubitsch’s TROUBLE IN PARADISE or some 40s caper pic. They’ve deliberately lived as hyper-conscious performers and see life as a con. But what separates this film from greatness is that, unlike in THE PRESTIGE from a couple of years ago, it doesn’t embrace its status as pomo discourse all the way down and find an ending. Instead, we get a more standard “wanna leave the life / OK, but one last con” conflict between the two brothers (Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo, respectively). And the last 20 minutes consist of more “is this a con or is this not a con” wankery that we’ve seen in a hundred con-men movies. THE PRESTIGE was about performers who valued performance so much that it was the end of their lives (“end” in both senses of that word). If I sound harsh, it’s only because the first hour or so was such an entertaining lark filled with great lines tossed off like the best of Lubitsch, my favorite being: “I would not like to simplistically vilify a whole country. But Mexico is a horrible place” (what’s funny is not only how callously it’s delivered, but the contrast between the labyrinthine first sentence caveat, and the bluntness of the second sentence punch line). THE BROTHERS BLOOM was so funny and “fun” (not exactly the same) that I didn’t want it to end in that tone, or to find a way to search for profundity while keeping that tone. But another awards plug — remember Rinko Kikuchi for what may be the greatest more-or-less mute comic performance in talking-picture history. She’s basically playing Gromit — the sidekick doing all the crazy sight gags, eye rolls and reaction shots at the edge of the frame.

    Advertisement
    Advertisements
    Report this ad
    Report this ad

    Like this:

    Like Loading...

    Related

    September 13, 2008 - Posted by | Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Lance Daly, Matthew Newton, Rian Johnson, TIFF 2008

    2 Comments »

    1. […] some comments that are completely opposite to mine, read this (second review down). No […]

      Pingback by trendaway.com » Kisses (2008) (TIFF08) | July 8, 2009 | Reply

    2. […] Reviews: Christian Toto Kurt Loder Rightwing Film Geek movieguide.org Christian […]

      Pingback by April 9 2010 « Oh For Crying Out Loud… | April 9, 2010 | Reply


    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

    « Previous | Next »

    ...
    (Review Source)
  • What seems to be the trouble, Captain?
    (”Time Out” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    What seems to be the trouble, Captain?

    OK … you never get a second chance to make a first impression. So I won’t bore you with uninteresting biographical details, and instead give you my pitch:

    Flaming Reactionary meets Geeky Cinephile.

    Roger Ailes and Roger Ebert — in one body.

    Imagine Lily Tomlin wanting to yak about Fellini’s camera movements, the Lubitsch touch, and the Dardenne Brothers’ focus puller, while Steve Martin talks about Hugo Black’s dissent in Griswold as the greatest judicial opinion of the 20th century, withdrawing from the United Nations and all international conventions, and the effect of reading Allen Bloom in college. (And if you perfectly understood every reference in that last sentence, plus the opening title, a marriage proposal may be in order.)

    Anyway, what I found in about 15 years of cinephilia is that I may be the only person in the universe who’s both a political conservative and an obsessive film geek. Hopefully, I’m not — otherwise traffic here will be extremely low. I hope to have three types of content here.

    First of all, my own reactions to the films I see or re-see. Second, my reactions to the reviews and criticism that I read. And lastly, some purely political commentary (hopefully with some film-related peg, but we’ll have to see how that works out). I also hope to learn some HTML in the coming months and build a Web site of which this Blog will be one feature and also have links, personal top 10 lists, some longer essays, my published film criticism (yes, I have some), etc.

    But just as Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit has shown that any honest man can perform the Washington-pundit function to the limits of his knowledge and intellectual power, I believe the same thing about the film-critic function. Which isn’t to say, of course, that I believe all opinions are equal (not at all, as will become obvious soon) — simply that the knowledgeable amateur can be just as valuable as the professional.

    Every year, I typically see about 80-90 new commercially-released; if you toss in repeat viewings, home video, revival screenings, film festivals and so on, I would estimate that I see a film about 180-200 times a year (don’t be impressed; I know people who can double that). My tastes would strike most people as fairly “arty,” though I don’t think so. I think there is more depth of feeling and intellect, more craftsmanship, more substance, more artistry in some “low” works than some “high” froufrou, and more joy and fun in some slowmoving foreign films than Hollywoof product. My critical idol (obviously) is Pauline Kael, and my favorite films from each of the years in the past decade or so are as follows:

    2002 TIME OUT (Laurent Cantet, France)
    2001 MEMENTO (Christopher Nolan, USA)
    2000 DANCER IN THE DARK (Lars Von Trier, Denmark)
    1999 THE END OF THE AFFAIR (Neil Jordan, Britain)
    1998 THE LAST DAYS OF DISCO (Whit Stillman, USA)
    1997 BOOGIE NIGHTS (Paul Thomas Anderson, USA)
    1996 HAMLET (Kenneth Branagh, Britain)
    1995 BABE (Chris Noonan, Australia)
    1994 BLUE / WHITE / RED trilogy (Krzysztof Kieslowski, France / Poland / Switzerland)
    1993 MENACE II SOCIETY (The Hughes Brothers, USA)
    1992 GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS (James Foley, USA)
    1991 BAXTER (Jerome Boivin, France)
    1990 THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE AND HER LOVER (Peter Greenaway, Britain)

    The last of these choices will no doubt point out that at least one rightwing film geek, though he is a practicing Roman Catholic, has nothing in common tastewise with Michael Medved (a whole sequence of Hollywood vs. America is devoted to Greenaway’s film) or some of my ideological compatriots (and they *are* my compatriots) who simply have a revulsion for extreme subject matter and want a G-rated cinema. If your idea of film criticism is a Christianity compatability index, or a count of how many nude scenes or swear words are in a film, I’m not your guy. I don’t mind X-rated cinema at all — I just want good and moral X-rated films– and yes, there *are* such films — as the U.S. Catholic bishops recognize with their A-IV rating.

    And away we go.

    Advertisements
    Report this ad
    Report this ad

    Like this:

    Like Loading...

    Related

    The end of an eraIn "Roger Ebert"

    The music, not the wordsIn "Glomesh Ganesh"

    Nancy Cartwright’s penisIn "David Silverman"

    July 9, 2003 - Posted by | Uncategorized | ,

    No comments yet.

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

    | Next »

    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Top 10 of 2002
    (”Time Out” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Top 20 of all time
    (”Time Out” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    ...
    (Review Source)

Want even more consensus?

Skip Rotten Tomatoes, they’re biased SJWs too afraid to criticize things like the Ghost Busters reboot. Avoid giving them ad revenue by using the minimalist alternative, Cinesift, for a quick aggregate:

 🗣️ Know of another conservative review that we’re missing?
Leave a link in the comments below or email us!  

What’d you think? Let us know with a video:

Record a webcam review!

Or anonymous text review:

Submit your review
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Submit
     
Cancel

Create your own review

Average rating:  
 0 reviews
Overall Hollywood Bs Average rating:  
 
Anti-patriotism Average rating:  
 
Misandry Average rating:  
 
Affirmative action Average rating:  
 
LGBTQ rstuvwxyz Average rating:  
 
Anti-God Average rating:  
 

Buy on Amazon:
⚠️  Comment freely, but please respect our young users.
👍🏻 Non PC comments/memes/vids/links 
👎🏻  Curse words / NSFW media / JQ stuff
👌🏻 Visit our 18+  free speech forum to avoid censorship.
⚠️ Keep your kids’ websurfing safe! Read this.

Share this page:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail