Another plot hole - and my thoughts

I don't think this one has been discussed here: is that cutter code of conduct something that is enforced by their company, or is it just some rule they came up among themselves? Maybe it's an union thing? The reason for this question is: if it's enforced by the company, then wouldn't they check the records before hiring Alan to see if he had a Zoe chip already? Or maybe plug in those electrodes just for one second, just to check if he has one? What is the career path for a cutter? Do they hire them from film class? Do they start with Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere before going to that bizarre computer thing?

Also, the dichotomy of technologies was too distracting. They had that chip for at least 80 years (we see that fan edit Alan did of the old man brushing his teeth), so that whole editing technology and analytic separation of video snippets by content should be as old; but the rest of their technology was pretty much what we have today. Did they pour their entire science effort on that Zoe insanity?

And people protesting an 80 year old technology that is optional, privately funded, and can be overriden easily seems like lazy cliched writing. It would be like people protesting against television whenever a TV star gets a new star in the walk of fame.

This film falls in a category I call "Mental Masturbation Screenplay Project". It's those weird or unheard concepts that a writer thinks about and mentally throw in things and tries to make it edgy and have plot twists, thinking it's clever and genius like a Philip K Dick or Charlie Kaufman project, but when established as a movie it falls apart either due to plot holes, inconsistency or bad production. Most are directed by the screenwriter. Other projects like this are "In Time", "The Island", etc.


"You keep him in here, and make sure HE doesn't leave!"