|
WestWorld
Oct 2, 2016 20:04:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by akbar on Oct 2, 2016 20:04:34 GMT -5
Here we go!
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 3, 2016 10:16:26 GMT -5
When I was a teenager, I really liked Michael Crichton's novels. But then I read a review of one that opened my eyes to his recurrent theme that science and technology is bad. Once I realized this, all his stories started seeming exactly the same, neo-luddite morality tales about how science and technology are much too dangerous for people to mess with.
I don't know how much this new story is going to have in common with the original Crichton Westworld, but for now I'm not too interested in it.
|
|
|
WestWorld
Oct 3, 2016 11:42:36 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by akbar on Oct 3, 2016 11:42:36 GMT -5
Crichton (often attracted ridicule from the high brow) is a little dead at the moment so I don't think he will have much input as to where JJ Abrams, Lisa Joy and Jonathan Nolan take this trainride. It was intriguing last night and I'm looking forward to where the multiple story lines go. Of course in the opener they had to throw a ton at the audience to set the stage. We shall see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 11:59:17 GMT -5
It was odd he was a Climate Change denier. Seems like one of his themes -- good intentions going awry, hubris, etc. But, of course, it was another way to bash science.
|
|
|
Post by Cubicle No More ... on Oct 11, 2016 18:14:54 GMT -5
i was surprised by the first episode. at first, i didn't know what to think, and over the course of the first ep, i was really invested in what was going to happen next.
i thought the characters who are running the "theme park" were a little too one-note (of course, the security people were predictably all about order even if it sacrificed "art," clashing with the "writer" guy overly committed to weaving his artistic narrative).
but i liked the theme park elements, and the merging of this all too modern park that recreated the old west. also it was kind of fun trying to figure out who were robots and who were human. (it made the fly landing on hillary during the last debate all the more hilarious! ... is she a robot!? haha...)
i haven't had a chance yet to watch episode 2. but i want to know and see more.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 12, 2016 6:42:18 GMT -5
i was surprised by the first episode. at first, i didn't know what to think, and over the course of the first ep, i was really invested in what was going to happen next. i thought the characters who are running the "theme park" were a little too one-note (of course, the security people were predictably all about order even if it sacrificed "art," clashing with the "writer" guy overly committed to weaving his artistic narrative). but i liked the theme park elements, and the merging of this all too modern park that recreated the old west. also it was kind of fun trying to figure out who were robots and who were human. (it made the fly landing on hillary during the last debate all the more hilarious! ... is she a robot!? haha...) i haven't had a chance yet to watch episode 2. but i want to know and see more. I just watched all the episodes. OK, I was wrong. I'm interested. In a sense, I was more interested in the "finding meaning for your life" theme than in the corporate warfare theme. The former felt very original. The latter felt like a retread of way too many other stories (some of them by Crichton, which may be part of why I'm not digging it).
|
|
|
Post by gnu2vball on Nov 12, 2016 22:35:12 GMT -5
I like how the show is done. The production values are very high. I think my biggest problem is understanding how "Westworld" can be a business. I can understand that type of theme park in which paying customers (guests) initiate most of the action--as in killing the robots (hosts). But what I've seen is the robots doing most of the killing. It doesn't make sense--in terms of how a business might be run. It's been a slow developing story. Finally, after six episodes, it seems that things are finally coming together.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 13, 2016 3:14:17 GMT -5
I like how the show is done. The production values are very high. I think my biggest problem is understanding how "Westworld" can be a business. I can understand that type of theme park in which paying customers (guests) initiate most of the action--as in killing the robots (hosts). But what I've seen is the robots doing most of the killing. It doesn't make sense--in terms of how a business might be run. It's been a slow developing story. Finally, after six episodes, it seems that things are finally coming together. There was one reference by a guest to "paying 40,000 a day for this". But there are also references to the park having a cash flow problem.
|
|
|
Post by gnu2vball on Nov 13, 2016 10:31:18 GMT -5
Yeah, I caught the $40K-a-day reference.
The dramatic change of viewpoint in the series compared to the movie has taken some getting used to. So far, we only have visitor storylines for Ed Harris, and we know precious little about what's driving him other than the cryptic "maze" references and the two guys who will be future brothers-in-law. We do have some good storylines among the park operators and only now are we starting to get a feel for who's on which side.(I think there are more than two sides) And finally, we've got several robots with storylines.
Obviously, one season isn't going to come close to resolving the story--I don't even know if we'll have a good idea what the story "is."
I'm going to keep watching, but I'm haven't bought in.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 14, 2016 4:27:03 GMT -5
OK, now they are really f*cking with us.
After reading through some of the fan theories after tonight's show, I realize I haven't been thinking nearly suspiciously enough about what we are being shown versus what is the "real" story.
|
|
|
WestWorld
Nov 14, 2016 21:55:30 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by akbar on Nov 14, 2016 21:55:30 GMT -5
It took a very nice step up last night.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 15, 2016 1:07:22 GMT -5
I went back and watched some of the earlier episodes tonight. I believe the so-called "two-timeline" theory is 100% correct. There are at least two timelines being shown to us. Probably more. The scenes with William and Logan and Delores take place many years before the scenes with the Man In Black. This raises the possibility that William and The Man In Black are the same person.
The other theory that seems to make a lot of sense is that Barnard is Arnold. Or at least a copy of him. And those chats that Barnard has been having with Delores? Well maybe that's actually Arnold having those chats, 30+ years ago. Maybe it's Arnold whose son Charlie died, and maybe it happened so long ago that it was before they cured all disease (something that Ford claims to Barnard).
Maybe Delores went off-loop with William in a pretty epic way, and so Teddy was invented to keep her in her place. But now that Teddy has been retasked to the Wyatt narrative, Delores is free to go off-loop again.
And we don't see Maeve anywhere in the William and Logan scenes, which would make sense because she's only been running the Mariposa for 10 years one year. (She thinks she's been there 10 years.)
|
|
|
Post by gnu2vball on Nov 15, 2016 18:08:32 GMT -5
I went back and watched some of the earlier episodes tonight. I believe the so-called "two-timeline" theory is 100% correct. There are at least two timelines being shown to us. Probably more. The scenes with William and Logan and Delores take place many years before the scenes with the Man In Black. This raises the possibility that William and The Man In Black are the same person. The other theory that seems to make a lot of sense is that Barnard is Arnold. Or at least a copy of him. And those chats that Barnard has been having with Delores? Well maybe that's actually Arnold having those chats, 30+ years ago. Maybe it's Arnold whose son Charlie died, and maybe it happened so long ago that it was before they cured all disease (something that Ford claims to Barnard). Maybe Delores went off-loop with William in a pretty epic way, and so Teddy was invented to keep her in her place. But now that Teddy has been retasked to the Wyatt narrative, Delores is free to go off-loop again. And we don't see Maeve anywhere in the William and Logan scenes, which would make sense because she's only been running the Mariposa for 10 years. Could you recommend what you believe are some of the better fan sites?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 15, 2016 18:59:01 GMT -5
I literally just googled Westworld and started clicking on interesting links. This stuff is out there.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 21, 2016 1:43:43 GMT -5
Lessons learned from tonight:
MIB is definitely William. Notice how he recognized the host who was the woman in the dressing room the first time he entered the park.
Bernard killed Elsie. Damn. I liked her a lot more than Teresa. Ford sucks.
Head of security knows something is up with Bernard now. He's sharper than he pretends to be.
MIB/William triggered Maeve's awakening by accident, just because he wanted to see what it felt like to do something really evil. Now that Maeve can kill humans, I think that's going to be an issue for him.
Maeve has admin privileges for the hosts. AKA "God mode". MIB also called himself a god. And Ford has made references to being a god inside the park. Non-coincidences.
I am starting to think Ford may be an "awake" host.
I think Logan died in the park 30 years ago. I'm not certain if William killed him or maybe Delores did. William somehow got control of the company he and Logan work for, which I think is probably Delos, the same corporation that now owns the park.
The MIB is now facing an urgent deadline to find the maze, and the board is trying urgently to steal all the data so they can get rid of Ford (and likely get rid of the park, too). These are likely also non-coincidental.
|
|