By introducing the key concepts of field, habitus, and capital, Pierre Bourdieu provides a theoretical framework for explaining the dialectical relationship between social structures and individual actions—a framework that enables the analysis of cultural and artistic phenomena beyond the simplistic opposition of agency and structure. Drawing on this conceptual apparatus, the present study examines the characters of Farhad and Gilegol in What’s the Time in Your World? (dir. Safi Yazdanian), aiming to show how differences in habitus and cultural capital shape their actions and relationships within the cultural field represented in the film. The main objective of this research is to elucidate the ways in which cultural, symbolic, and class distinctions are represented through the interactions of these two characters and to analyze their actions within the cultural field of the city of Rasht. The study adopts a qualitative methodology based on an intra-textual analysis of the film’s scenes, spaces, and narrative actions, with a particular focus on a sociological reading of its narrative and visual elements. The findings indicate that Gilegol’s habitus is the result of internalizing two distinct cultural fields—the local field and the Western cultural field. Possessing institutionalized cultural capital and a modern habitus, she represents a subject in search of reconciliation between her indigenous past and her modern lived experience. In contrast, Farhad embodies a local habitus grounded in embodied cultural capital rooted in memory, language, and emotional attachments, symbolizing continuity with tradition and resistance to the linear and accelerated logic of modern time. Within this dynamic, the city of Rasht functions not merely as a spatial backdrop but as an active cultural field that poetically and meaningfully stages the symbolic encounter between past and present. Accordingly, Yazdanian’s film can be understood as a cinematic narrative of cultural reproduction, in which human action acquires meaning through the dialectical interplay of habitus, field, and capital.