Escape to the Movies: In Time

[SandroTheMaster]

Wait, "Not Preachy"? Really? Because the precise impression I got from the trailer was that it was THE preachest anti-technology, anti-science, anti-intellectualism piece ever produced, with all the usual suspects of clichés like "we're meant to die", "heart over mind", "technology will make us slaves", etc...

Really, I didn't notice any capitalist subtext at all from that trailer, I'm actually surprised anyone who isn't from... certain sites and religious inclinations... to say in the end the movie is a good piece of sci-fy. Then again, it is the guy from Lord of War, so anything is possible.

And yep, Lord of War is one of the best movies from the last decade, poignant without being boring, exposing the brutality of the modern political scene regarding Africa and other warring countries without being overbearingly preachy like Blood Diamonds. Anyone who tells me Nick Cage shouldn't still have a job I immediately point towards this piece (and Kickass... and Bad Lieutenant) to show he can be great, if they give some though as to what they're casting him for.

 

[daxterx2005]

I cant wait to see this, thanks for reviewing it bob

 

[ExtraDebit]

Gattaca, one of the best movies ever made. It was well written, well acted and overall philosophical. I'm surprised it didn't get oscar. this episode really brings back memories, thank you Bob.

 

[ExtraDebit]

Here's a thought, our current economy allow us to save. i.e. we work today and spend tomorrow. However that thrives on when we're spending and other people is working while they can spend in the future.

This whole economy breaks down if everyone saved up enough to only spend, as no one is working there will be nothing to spend on. It makes one wonder, can there be an alternative to our current economic system?

In addition this economy thrives on the have nots, or the poor. It's essentially a slave system with it's chains masked in currencies. The ones without money will have to work or they'll stave, usually serving the ones with money.

This economic system like any system developed by man have holes and can be hacked like a computer system, certain aspect are open for exploits. As the ones with money they are essentially holding the chains to the slave that have not.

Bruce lee once said the solution is simply to simplify. To look at this from a simplified point just image there are only 2 person in the world. These 2 people represent our entire population.

In a world without our current economic system of money, they'll both be working. Maybe working together, maybe independently. They could share their fruits or they could just enjoy their own fruits of their labors. Whatever the case, they both will be working.

However, as money is introduced, one of them can save up enough and just do nothing while buying from the one that work. A number of scenarios can happen in this case. The one that work decide to not work in which case they'll both starve.

But what happens if the one that work decide he wouldn't sell anything to the ones that saved up? The one that saved up will have to eat whatever he saved up, this is fine if our current economic system was by the rules and only print what we produce. But we all know this is not so hence the inflation.

Anyway, I'm lost in my own thoughts and is just rambling now. So I'll just end it here, image the screen fades and credit rolls.

 

[Don Reba]

The movie sounds iteresting, but it also has 36% on rotten tomatoes...

 

[adamtm]

Just in case people didn't know of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momo_(novel)

....This pleasant atmosphere is spoiled by the arrival of the Men in Grey, eventually revealed as a race of paranormal parasites stealing the time of humans. Appearing in the form of grey-clad, grey-skinned, bald men, these strange individuals present themselves as representing the Timesavings Bank and promote the idea of "timesaving" among the population: Supposedly, time can be deposited to the Bank and returned to the client later with interest...

Its much more enjoyable and much more subtle than the movie.

Don't get me wrong its a "childrens book" but with a very interestingly conveyed message.

 

[Pandurai]

Just wanted to come here and say, I thought In Time was absolutely god-awful. I am surprised this movie wasn't just shelfed. The acting was awful, there characters were inconsistent and bipolar, the cuts made no sense, the writing was terrible, and the plot just lurched and moved however and whenever it wanted. The only redeeming quality it had to me was an idea that would have sounded good on paper. For example, the conspiracy of how the rich manipulate the poor was laid on very, very awkwardly and very, very early. I just got out of a 10:30 screening (that movie was TWO HOURS), so I'm too tired to go on.

And just for the record, any prejudice I have against this movie is not against the genre itself. I loved Gattaca, and these kinds of sci-fi movies have been of general interest to me for a while. Whatever other biases I might have had are certainly up for speculation.

 

[Baldr]

Classic cinema(Logan's Run) + B-movie or Short(The Price of Life) + Current Social-Political tone = Hollywood originality.

 

[Dhatz]

*adding to my checklist* *putting kamina glasses on*

 

[Stealthfighterx]

So how does people under 25 pay for things without a counter?

 

[Nimcha]

Hm. I was surprised: GATTACA was brilliant, given how well the science actually worked. (My geneticist wife was impressed.) I didn't know that the same guy is directing.

The trailers/marketing really seemed to try to sell this as more of a action film with a trumped-up dystopian premise than a movie with a legit commentary on societal ills.

Definitely will have to check this one out. Probably would've given it a 'pass' without this review. Thanks Bob!

TLDR: both movies should be taken as metaphors for the way society is now, because the scenarios they present are really implausible.

GATTACA was a good movie but it was philosophically stupid. The science behind it was relatively solid, embryonic selection as I recall, not outright genetic engineering which is still probably a century away or more from being used on human beings. But even with embryonic selection there could be long term affects on population genetics, pleiotropy makes everything tricky. The main problem was with the way society was portrayed.

In regard to human beings, hard genetic determinism, as any neuroscientist will tell you, is just plain wrong. A human being's most important trait, intelligence, is heavily dependent upon upbringing. A person's genetic makeup could NEVER replace what we already use in our resumes, i.e. our work experience and education. It would definitely give an unfair advantage, but people wouldn't freaking hire you based upon your genome alone, that's just silly.

The most infuriating part was that he was trying to become A FREAKING ASTRONAUT. If you're going to look at someone's genes for any job, astronaut would be it. What's more is that he actually DID have a heart defect, which should have made him ineligible. There's no way that guy should have been an astronaut, if he dies of a heart attack he would endanger the entire mission and the lives of the other crew members.

There's something to be said about the abuse of genetic information when it comes to things like insurance companies denying coverage because of genetic predispositions, and we should certainly be worried about genetic engineering affecting class structures and inequality, but GATTACA was a straw man argument par excellence.

The same thing goes for this movie. If we really did crack aging then the most likely setup would entail something like restarting the process once you've had children, so people can choose whether to live indefinitely or have children. That way you could keep the population balanced. No one would ever agree to the scenario in the movie, there would be instant revolution.

Very well put, I agree so much. I didn't see Gattaca at all as a commentary on our present but more as just another alternate universe. And then it works pretty well. Everything that happened made sense for that particular universe.

 

[ShAmMz0r]

snip

I guess Bruce Lee is a great authority in the field of socioeconomics now. I get that it may be easer to understand some interactions by simplifying them, but it is not always a good idea. It does not take a genius to realize that a large number of participants introduces some statistical effects. Your example with everyone saving enough to only spend is akin to all molecules of air in a room gathering in one half, while there is none it the other. Is it possible? Yes. Do we need to worry about it happening? No. Sun will probably run out of hydrogen before that happens on Earth even once. In other words modern economic system is not reducible to "two person" level.

And stop it with slavery system analogies. It is not such a system. Don't want to use money? Don't. Go live in the forest somewhere like our far ancestors did. Not to mention there are not really any limits to how high a person can go in modern society. You can start out dirt poor and homeless and elevate yourself quite high. There is vertical social mobility in modern society.

 

[The Philistine]

So how does people under 25 pay for things without a counter?

The movie never really goes into that. Presumably you're still considered a child before 25. It does present the concept that everyone is born with one year that can't be spent until they are 25 (and thus everyone could theoretically live until 26 without exchange). But it never really becomes a major theme and thus only comes up two or three times.

 

[EchetusXe]

S1mone was decent. Had an idea at least about society's obsession with celebrity. But it did feel a little bit, I dunno, a bit like a TV episode. Everything was a bit empty, like they were trying to squeeze every penny and produce the cheapest movie they could so didn't bother hiring extras or making proper sets.

 

[Moeez]

This might as well be that Harlan Ellison short story "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman. Though unlike James Cameron, Nichol doesn't seem like the kind of douchebag who deserves to be chewed out by the gloriously grouchy Ellison

You do know that Harlan Ellison is already suing the movie [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/harlan-ellison-sues-claiming-foxs-235987], you're late on that!

 

[dystopiaINC]

This might as well be that Harlan Ellison short story "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman. Though unlike James Cameron, Nichol doesn't seem like the kind of douchebag who deserves to be chewed out by the gloriously grouchy Ellison

You do know that Harlan Ellison is already suing the movie [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/harlan-ellison-sues-claiming-foxs-235987], you're late on that!

yeah i and i just don't see the copyright violation in this. might bust be me but "repent" seems more like 1984 than "in time"

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

This might as well be that Harlan Ellison short story "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman. Though unlike James Cameron, Nichol doesn't seem like the kind of douchebag who deserves to be chewed out by the gloriously grouchy Ellison

You do know that Harlan Ellison is already suing the movie [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/harlan-ellison-sues-claiming-foxs-235987], you're late on that!

Oh, I already knew. You'd think after James Cameron got caught with his hand in the cookie jar with Terminator people would learn not to rip of Ellison.

This might as well be that Harlan Ellison short story "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman. Though unlike James Cameron, Nichol doesn't seem like the kind of douchebag who deserves to be chewed out by the gloriously grouchy Ellison

You do know that Harlan Ellison is already suing the movie [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/harlan-ellison-sues-claiming-foxs-235987], you're late on that!

yeah i and i just don't see the copyright violation in this. might bust be me but "repent" seems more like 1984 than "in time"

Uh, it's set in a dystopian future where the main gimmick of the story is about the allocation of TIME. The only difference is that in Harlequin time is deducted if you're late, which is a crime.

 

[Primus1985]

Very glad this turned out well, seemed like an interesting concept.


Also I saw Lord of War when it released in theaters...the whole ten of us that where in the theater lol. Seriously one of my favorite movies, one of Nic Cage's best performaces, i almost burned my DVD copy up playing it so much