On Time

From IntegratedMedia

Jump to: navigation, search

On Time is one of the four short films produced for Garage Flicks. Directed by Ted Chung, with the screenplay by David Bradley Halls, and produced by Bianca Bodmer, Rich Ho Kok Tai, Elena Titova, and Vincent Schmitt. The credits also show their 'Project mentor' as Grahame Weinbren, and I would like to explore why.

Contents

[edit]

What is the story?

In my opinion the story of On Time deals with time itself, and the knowledge that it can provide a person. The film presents knowing the events of the future as desirable. This is shown through the objectification of 'time' (and 'future') itself; it has become an item and it is for sale.

Set in an airport terminal, Arthur stares at an engagement ring. His girlfriend has just turned down his marriage proposal. Frank sits beside him and tells him he should have known the outcome before it happened, presenting Arthur with a view of his own world from a new perspective: 30 seconds ahead. Frank entices Arthur with the ability of future knowledge, saying that "Every moment is a chance to get ahead" and that Arthur should indeed "seize the moment". Arthur is seduced by this knowledge: he need never feel sadness or heart-break again as he will always know the outcome by remaining a step ahead. This allows Arthur a meeting with a new woman, where he can do no wrong.

However, after Arthur boards the plane, Frank sees what natural time would have presented. Had he not influenced Arthur events would have turned out differently, possibly even for the better.

[edit]

It's effect

The ability to view 30 seconds ahead in life is appealing...right? Yes, and no.

On Time shows that there are positives and negatives to knowing it all. On one hand, you have the ability to understand and know what will occur before it happens. Even though it's only a 30 second time frame, there is still much that can be learned from this gap in time. For instance, Arthur knew how to impress, thus he became more self-confident, and he was able to find an avenue away from grief. On the other hand, knowledge of the future has the ability to make the possessor act in ways that will only benefit themselves, and can therefore lead to arrogance.

Knowledge of the future is the destruction of 'fate'. Everything can no longer happen for a reason, because each reasoning is self constructed. If you know an event will occur you can rearrange your own circumstances to ensure that you are blessed with the positives. Arthur sees for himself a way to benefit himself and takes it; thus the 'fate' that would have ensued without the distraction of future knowledge could not occur. His intended reality was changed, and his life altered because of it.

Which interactivity would you prefer?

[edit]

On Time and Sonata

Grahame Weinbren is the mentor for this production. His works, in my opinion, share similarities with the story of On Time. Sonata in particular as it experiments with future knowledge, just as On Time does.

Sonata allows viewers interactivity; the ability to affect the imagery that they are viewing. At times this interactivity allows viewers glimpses into the future, therefore building a foundation on which to make a decision. Do they touch the screen now to allow this even to occur? Or do they wait?

This same attitude is evident in On Time, the obvious difference being that it is not for the viewers to decide, but rather for the characters. Still, it presents the same seduction of power. Arthur seeks this power when he purchases his own future (neatly packaged in a briefcase), and viewers (or 'interactors') of Sonata will also feel the same desire to glimpse and possess future knowledge. Frank says: "Every moment is a chance to get ahead." The audience is presented with this desire, and will respond to it faithfully.

Just "seize the moment" why don't you?

[edit]

References

[edit]

External Links

Retrieved from "http://media.rmit.edu.au/students/projects/iiki/index.php/On_Time"
Personal tools