--- title: "We Live in Time: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/we-live-in-time/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/we-live-in-time" critics_score: 63 critics_reviews: 18 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # We Live in Time (2024): what the critics said Critics' score 63 from 18 reviews: 10 positive, 3 mixed, 5 negative. The reviews split, and widely. Most critics agree on one thing: Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield are the reason to watch, and their chemistry carries scenes that might otherwise tip into cliché. Pugh draws particular praise, with several critics noting how she plays a woman who stays ambitious while facing her own mortality. Beyond the leads, the consensus frays. The non-linear structure is the main dividing line: admirers say it lets the relationship be seen whole and keeps the story unpredictable; detractors call it contrived, gimmicky and a way of disguising a conventional terminal-illness weepie. Complaints about sentimentality recur across the mixed and negative notices. The Telegraph goes furthest, finding the leads lack chemistry, which almost no one else says. The Guardian objects to product placement and a bland score, and The i Paper finds the film’s conclusions regressive. The early festival notices are markedly warmer than the later British ones. ## The Hollywood Reporter — Michael Rechtshaffen Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 7 September 2024. Festival review. The critic praises the achingly resonant performances of Pugh and Garfield and the thoughtful, non-linear structure that creates poignant moments in this romantic drama about a couple facing cancer. [Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-andrew-garfield-john-crowley-1235993707/) ## Empire — Amon Warmann Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2025. The non-chronological structure adds unpredictability to the weepy romcom, and the straightforward story packs a punch thanks to powerhouse performances. Pugh and Garfield are a force with abundant chemistry in this likably earnest, satisfyingly complicated love story. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/we-live-in-time/) ## Little White Lies — Mark Asch Rating 3/4/3. 6 January 2025. The critic sees it as every generation getting the cancer romance it deserves, a brutally efficient but aggressively middlebrow and forgettable tearjerker. Pugh's driven performance gives the melodramatic scope some substantial appeal amid the structural manipulation. [Read the review](https://lwlies.com/reviews/we-live-in-time) ## Time Out — Helen O’Hara Rating 4/5. 13 December 2024. The critic praises the honest London romance in which Garfield and Pugh break your heart, with the time-hopping structure adding value by letting viewers consider the relationship in its totality. Strong performances keep scenes free from cliché and make the film feel real and honest. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/we-live-in-time-review-2024) ## Evening Standard — Tom Davidson Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 18 October 2024. Festival review. It would take a heart of stone to be unmoved by this saccharine time-hopping tearjerker, with Pugh and Garfield on knockout form and their intimacy captured frankly. The structure keeps viewers on their toes, and certain sequences may leave audiences sobbing. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-andrew-garfield-lff-b1188438.html) ## Variety — Peter Debruge Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 6 September 2024. Festival review. The critic praises the genuine chemistry between leads Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield but finds the nonlinear structure contrived and the cancer drama manipulative, reducing it to a run-of-the-mill story despite strong performances. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2024/film/reviews/we-live-in-time-review-andrew-garfield-florence-pugh-1236136066/) ## Slant Magazine — Derek Smith Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 10 October 2024. The critic notes that strong performances and some touching scenes are undermined by a needlessly complicated timeline and overly mawkish elements, resulting in a film that works in flashes but lacks cohesion. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-andrew-garfield-john-crowley/) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 5 January 2025. The non-linear structure and lead chemistry fail to rescue this conventional terminal-illness romance undermined by product placement and a bland score. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/jan/05/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-and-andrew-garfield-star-in-soggy-tearjerker-john-crowley) ## The i Paper — Francesca Steele Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2025. The romantic weepie leans too often on cliche with a startlingly regressive message, feeling contrived rather than clever despite tasteful execution. Garfield and Pugh deliver wonderful performances, and the film is beautifully shot, but the characterisation and conclusions undermine it. [Read the review](https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/we-live-in-time-review-contrived-not-clever-florence-pugh-wonderful-3444055) ## Vulture — Bilge Ebiri Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 11 October 2024. Festival review. The critic finds the film syrupy and overly curated, failing to move despite strong performances, criticizing the contrived structure and lack of raw emotion. [Read the review](https://www.vulture.com/article/we-live-in-time-movie-review-syrupy-syrupy-syrupy.html) ## The Telegraph — Robbie Collin Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 18 October 2024. Festival review. Pugh and Garfield lack chemistry in this lumbering, calamitous romantic weepie that fails to land despite its non-linear ambitions. [Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/we-live-in-time-review-andrew-garfield-florence-pugh/) ## Radio Times — Kevin Harley Rating ★★★☆☆. 21 December 2024. The critic calls it a considered and classy tear-jerker laden with overcooked metaphors and scrambled plot convolutions. The leads' performances are the saving grace in this thoughtful but over-thought film. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/app/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-and-andrew-garfield-thrive-in-thoughtful-but-overcooked-weepie/) ## Sight and Sound 22 October 2024. The critic finds the film an eminently watchable but contrived weepie that never feels grounded in real life. The undeniable chemistry and performances of Pugh and Garfield help sell the time-shifting story despite its structural contrivances and lack of authenticity. [Read the review](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/we-live-time-eminently-watchable-contrived-weepie) ## The Times — Tom Shone Rating ★★★★☆. 5 January 2025. Garfield and Pugh deliver charm and poignancy in this funny, wise and touching non-linear romance that treats its cancer premise with upbeat energy. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/film/article/we-live-in-time-is-a-rom-com-with-a-twist-0q7drnf8c) ## Collider — Ross Bonaime Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 7 September 2024. Festival review. The critic praises the non-linear structure that reveals the evolution of the central relationship across three timelines and highlights the electric chemistry and performances of Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield as they portray a grand, believable love story. [Read the review](https://collider.com/we-live-in-time-review/) ## The Wrap — Steve Pond Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 7 September 2024. Festival review. The critic finds the film a truly charming and surprisingly rich bittersweet romance. Pugh and Garfield are singled out for their enormously charming yet skilled performances that prevent the story from tipping into sentimentality. [Read the review](https://www.thewrap.com/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-and-andrew-garfield-make-a-perfect-movie-couple/) ## Deadline — Pete Hammond Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 7 September 2024. Festival review. The review praises the delicious chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh in this decade-spanning romantic comedy. It highlights the film's effective non-linear structure and the lead actors' appealing performances as key strengths. [Read the review](https://deadline.com/2024/09/we-live-in-time-review-andrew-garfield-florence-pugh-create-delicious-chemistry-decade-spanning-romcom-toronto-film-festival-1236080878/) ## /Film — Witney Seibold Rating 8/10. 10 October 2024. The film is a refreshingly direct and gently moving tear-jerker that avoids sentimentality. Excellent performances by Pugh and Garfield, especially Pugh's nuanced portrayal of a woman facing mortality while remaining ambitious, are singled out for praise. [Read the review](https://www.slashfilm.com/1685569/we-live-in-time-review-andrew-garfield-florence-pugh-movie/) ## The Playlist — Ankit Jhunjhunwala Rating B. 7 September 2024. Festival review. The film is genial mainstream entertainment that benefits greatly from its two leads. Pugh and Garfield elevate the time-hopping romance above its somewhat twee mundanity. [Read the review](https://theplaylist.net/we-live-in-time-review-florence-pugh-andrew-garfield-elevate-a-time-hopping-romance-tiff-20240907/) ## Digital Spy — Mireia Mullor Rating 3/5. 17 October 2024. Festival review. The critic finds the non-linear romantic drama an affecting tearjerker that benefits from Pugh and Garfield's strong chemistry and performances, but notes irregularities in the timeline and some unconvincing character decisions. [Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/bfi-london-film-festival/a62567679/we-live-in-time-review/) ## Paste — Jesse Hassenger Rating 5.6/10. 11 October 2024. The critic finds the scrambled non-linear timeline gimmicky and lacking emotional or narrative depth, resulting in a film that feels like a watered-down version of the screenwriter’s earlier work despite solid lead performances. [Read the review](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/nick-payne/we-live-in-time-movie-review-2024-florence-pugh-andrew-garfield-romance) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/we-live-in-time.md