In Time is a direct result of the 'Fern Gully' effect, so-called for the film of same name dedicated to not-so-subtly raising a new generation of environmentally-aware/conscious people. By adapting Marx's Criticism of Capitalism into a sci-fi film with a modern twist, In Time attempted to raise awareness of the corruption built into our society while hiding behind a thin layer of smooth action sequences and fast one-liners.
Despite the poor writing, half-baked plot, and near-preachy monologues In Time does honestly function as a simple, easily accessible interpretation of Marx's Criticism of Capitalism. The entire system is set up to generate what amounts to human livestock produced to perform acts of manual labour, create more time for the rich, and live under such desperate living means that acts as population control.
The most interesting aspect of this film is the relationship that develops between Slyvia Weis and Will Solas. The plot of the movie doesn't really take form until Sylvia's introduction and eventual interaction with Will, directing the film into the strange 'bonnie and clyde meets robin hood' theme. Up until Sylvia's arrival Will's actions aren't geared towards using the time he's been given to help others, only how to tear down those who live better. In fact, after Will's initial failed attempt to provide his community more time he's ready to give up. If it hadn't been for Sylvia's temptation of taking the time by force then the film would've taken a totally different turn. Everything that happens after Sylvia's kidnapping is directly related to her idea that the time gap between those in the ghetto and those in New Greenwich was unfair.
The possible implications of such a narrative decision can only really be interpreted as such: for the struggle of the oppressed to be heard, those with privilege must lend their voices. Comparing this idea with Marx's idea that the workers must all ban together to protest their conditions, it poses an interesting question: is it true that the combined voices of an entire workforce still hold no power in comparison to the single voice of a privileged person?
The unfortunate reality is that the people that are the "99 percent" have to go to work to get income to provide for themselves and their family than go and try to beat the system; not a bunch of hipsters. Yes, a single voice of a privileged person, and I'm sure it would have to be the right person, has a lot more power than the larger group. An example to me is when Ferguson first happened and people were on the street corners with signs just protesting that cops need body cameras. I wondered why they were out there because where I was, certainly wasn't going to be seen by anyone in power within Memphis but only harass a bunch of 5 o clock traffic commuters. I didn't see the point, yes it deserved attention but was it really going to do anything other than slow down traffic? The realization was is that we are of that lower class, that it was the ONLY way they could find to do something. They had absolutely no power or pull in the system to get anything actually done and were trying to create attention, which as far as I know did nothing. We may want to do something big but its going to take something or someone to bring attention to whatever we want to change within the system in place and I'm not even sure it would work then because like Dr. Johnson said in class, people are going to be there to take advantage of the situation and move up in life. We are the generation that I believe will change something, we already have spoken to a degree with votes, but just a statistic I heard about some local elections a few months ago was that the voter turn out of that election was the same amount as in 1944, when a good bit of the country was away at war. We just didn't show up for whatever reason, and that was a bit sad to me. Rant is done, but whatever, there it is.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that a privileged individual is needed. This film has a foundation in this idea. That someone needs to make a disruption for everyone to escape. But although Sylvia Weis is the reason that the film took the turn it did, it wouldn't make a less privileged person any less capable of doing so. It did admittedly give her a slight advantage in figuring out how to do stuff like knowing the code. However anyone willing to steal a truck would be just as capable of robbing banks. Also the rebellion wasn't quite as Marxist as it could have been. In a Marxist rebellion everyone would refuse to continue working because the industries are taking advantage of them. So while in this particular it was with the assistance of a privileged person, it is important to know that anyone could rob banks and that a true rebellion would involve a labor refusal and not simply a market disruption
ReplyDelete