My Problems with In Time
Dedicated to vervacious
Plot/script issues:
Mother dies. Nobody cares 10 minutes later.
Two people, one of whom has apparently never used a gun before (but is still shockingly good with it), go around robbing ALL the banks with two handguns.Â
Why did the rich people just let people walk across the borders between zones? They had gates for a reason...
Why did the Timekeepers give up? Oh no! Some civilians walked into a different sector!!! Run away even though we have a bajillion time dollars and weapons and stuff
How did Leon "forget" to replenish his time? And who's brilliant idea was it to make a system that allowed Timekeepers to "forget" about that in the first place?
Similar to #3, they realize robberies aren't useful because the proper market (or centralized economy) response is increased prices. But the prices at the border stay the same?
That should be enough about the plot. How about the premise?
My biggest problem with the premise: It doesn't make sense that the rich people would subject themselves to finite controls on their own time. They have the power to make more time so why would they need to take time from the poor, and why would they need to be in a finite time system in the first place? It's like giving the 1% all the money-printing machines; why wouldn't they just use them constantly? (Same goes for the Timekeepers)
The time is controlled by some kind of technology implanted at birth that allows for wireless transmission of time. In that case, given their vast surveillance network, they should very easily be able to "kill" anybody they want by taking away their time. When the time is stolen, why don't they just take the stolen time back with a couple clacks on a keyboard? Why does crime even exist at all?Â
Why would you store physical quantities of something that isn't physical? Since we've already established that time is transferred via wireless transmission (either by direct contact or the readers seen at the casino and in the Timekeepers' cars), they should just have a computer somewhere control the "money" supply via what is essentially a system of ATMs. There would be no reason for banks to store any time because it's almost perfectly liquid.
Immortality, as shown in this movie, isn't a real thing. You can't just implant a chip. It would require totally revamping how the body works and degrades over time.
Now the movie itself was decent if you're expecting a B-movie. The action is action-y and the story is standard enough, but the incoherence and blunt attempts at philosophical relevance make the movie subpar in my opinion.
(Basically, I'm saying that if I ever rule over a society like this with such massive resources and technology available for surveillance and control, I sure wouldn't be making such amateur mistakes. They got nothing on 1984.)
