S01.E01: The Original

[Broderbits]

Add me to the group that wonders what Ed Harris' character is after. But I am pretty sure he's plain old insane and has read "Blood Meridian" way too many times.

[arjumand]

13 hours ago, magdalene said:

I didn't care for it very much.  It's very cold and sterile, devoid of humor. There is not a single human character to care or root for.  Obviously, I am rooting for the Androids.  I will stick with it for a while - largely in the hope that somebody will kill Ed Harris' character.

But what turned me off the most is the inherent sadism of the whole thing.

Yeah. The main thing I took away from the pilot is that I'm going to enjoy watching the human characters being taken apart by the androids - hey, I guess they were right about the sadism.

I guess the nudity is there for the humans to emphasise their superiority over the androids, but it still makes me roll my eyes.

I'll give it a chance - pilots are always going to be clumsy - but it needs to get better. For one thing, it needs to have some human relatable characters.

[Netfoot]

The above-ground western look and feel was just spot on, and the subterranean sci-fi imagery was breathtaking.  Despite the repetitive nature of the daily loops, the incremental advances lend forward motion to the entire plot, and I'm fascinated to discover what comes next.

TMIB being a guest (rather than a host) was a switch, but Ed Harris nailed it. His apparent intent to infiltrate the actual foundation of the park is especially threatening, given his demonstrated penchant for cruelty and brutalism.  He's waaay off-script, and cares nothing for the underlying narrative presented by the park.  The way he treated Teddy with the contempt usually only seen in players of Doom in god-mode.  A truly villainous villain!

Dr. Ford is somewhat of a questionmark.  Obviously, he has great talent in his field, or he wouldn't have been able to found WestWorld in the first place.  Yet he introduces nuanced upgrades without consulting any of his team, and (obviously) without rigorous testing.  Is he losing his touch in his declining years? Or is he deliberately pushing his creations towards sentience under the very noses of the watchdogs that oversee the system?

Fantastic.  Just fantastic.  When that fly landed on her neck, I was all "Wait for it... wait for it..."

 

13 hours ago, benteen said:

Who was the husband who shot the bandit at the end?

Slimy Siletti, from Murder in the First.  Wasn't it?

2 hours ago, Enigma X said:

when the guy (don't remember names) told Dolores to lose the accent. Well, we have accents if we are in a place we are not from. 

But she isn't from anywhere.  The accent and the mannerisms are a layer of software that adds realism to the performance of the host.  I'd imagine that when debugging, you'd want to eliminate as much irrelevancies as you could.

5 hours ago, BookElitist said:

My feelings in part were due to the certainty that humans, indeed, would display and enact extreme grotesque behaviors if left virtually completely unfettered by any just moral compass or code.

I agree, and I'm glad HBO didn't try to sugar-coat this aspect.  We don't need to see it every minute, but we should be reminded that this is the reality of the situation.  The guests come to live out their fantasies, and in some case this equates to savage behaviour.  Which the park is happy to cater for.  They will provide all the gunslingers you could possibly want to kill, and all the dancing girls you could possibly want to rape.  That's their job, and we shouldn't forget this, as we watch them struggle with their software update.

9 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

If this pilot was anything, this show is going for the record with having the most nudity of any HBO show.

I thought the nudity -- while frequent -- was subtly toned down.  No genitalia flopping around in front of the camera.  No raunchy sex-scenes à la the famous Thrones.  True, every host didn't demurely (and unrealistically) have their back to the camera, but the T&A was presented in quite an asexual way.

11 hours ago, numbnut said:

But it's just rich people that can afford to visit the park, right?

Well, only rich people can afford Disneyworld, right?  I certainly can't.

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it, here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

Will You Enjoy Yourself In Westworld's Hellish Amusement Park?

Can a semi-classic sci-fi movie become HBO's newest drama hit?

[BooBear]

30 minutes ago, arjumand said:

I guess the nudity is there for the humans to emphasise their superiority over the androids, but it still makes me roll my eyes.

I thought it had a practical purpose. If they get wiped every night they have to be checked all over, and fixed.   The chaste Dolores can't wake up with pain and markings down there or it will cause problems. I am sure they have to be checked in every fold to ensure their body matches what their story line is before they are put back into service.  Can't have Teddy with a gun shot wound.

[Netfoot]

8 minutes ago, BooBear said:

I thought it had a practical purpose.

When you visit the mechanic, all the cars have their bonnet open.  

I thought it was quite realistic, given they all have to be checked out/serviced.  And don't forget, their role tomorrow may not be the same as it was today, so a complete change of wardrobe might be required.  (Delores suddenly got a new father, played by a host that might have been town preacher the day before.)  Not to mention that even though they are hosts, their clothes still get dirty and will need to be laundered, possibly mended or replaced.

No, I think the nudity is realistic, and HBO avoided making things too prurient in their portrayal.  To a degree I actually find a little surprising, given their past. 

Edited October 3, 2016 by Netfoot

[fastiller]

I'm curious as to the layout of the lab as compared to the park.  We see a bunch of (presumably) human employees in the lab, walking around this large round thing that looks to me like a replica of the actual park.  At least I thought it was a replica until part of it dropped away and we saw into it - to the corner where the saloon sits, just before Hector was about to give his speech.  Are the humans in the lab simply looking at a room-sized projection of the park and the park is in some other space?

[Izeinwinter]

It's a hologram of the park. The actual park is a physical location with a lot of cameras in it. I'm not sure that hologram is even remotely sensible User Interface design for monitoring the place, but it probably does wow the shareholders when they drop in. 

Thoughts: Evan Rachel Wood is magical. Astounding performance. 

The show is violent and sexual, but it is rather more tasteful about it than GoT, and there's a lot going on - this was a very effective pilot. I'm sold so far

[TVHappy9463]

As far as the nudity. They are machines, we are looking at them as if human. It's makes no sense to clothe them when back home. 

[DarkRaichu]

So if each host was 1 of a kind (the only reason to keep them in the basement, ie the boss' nostalgia), how did they manage to repair the hosts in less than 12 hours for the next day show?  Some of them got blown up with guts hanging which would need much more maintenance than just bullet holes.

Also, if the scenarios are reset the next morning, presumably all guests were escorted out at the end of the day.  How did Ed Harris not accounted for and could wander off scripts with a host in tow?

[Netfoot]

57 minutes ago, fastiller said:

We see a bunch of (presumably) human employees in the lab, walking around this large round thing that looks to me like a replica of the actual park.

I think of it as similar to the Ringworld map Room, but live.  It allows them to see the park as a whole, or any part thereof.

There is no indication where they are physically, in relation to the park itself.  They could be on another planet!  But it would be more practical if their repair and refurbishment center was conveniently located, so probably close to the center of the park, and conveniently invisible by being underground.  R&D and Admin probably located there too.

[fastiller]

50 minutes ago, Izeinwinter said:

It's a hologram of the park. The actual park is a physical location with a lot of cameras in it. I'm not sure that hologram is even remotely sensible User Interface design for monitoring the place, but it probably does wow the shareholders when they drop in. 

Thoughts: Evan Rachel Wood is magical. Astounding performance. 

The show is violent and sexual, but it is rather more tasteful about it than GoT, and there's a lot going on - this was a very effective pilot. I'm sold so far

Thanks.  I figured something like that but for whatever reason "hologram" never came to mind.

Yes, Evan Rachel Wood is fantastic, as is Louis Herthum.  They both moved into and out of their respective robot-Abernathy personality into straight-up robot seamlessly.

[Miles]

Well I'm in. This was awesome. Let's see if they can keep this up for multiple seasons.

I hope they won't do a big reveal of "this employe has actually been an android this whole time" as it would undermine the overall story. But I fear they might and my money is on the head of security.

12 hours ago, TheOtherOne said:

I always like seeing veteran actors still working after many years, and I remember Louis Herthum when he was Deputy Andy in the later seasons of "Murder, She Wrote." Glad to see he got a meaty role and he was excellent at it. Would love it if he came back.

And yes, he's looking damn good, especially for 60.

He's 60? Daaaaaamn! While watching the episode I thought "isn't he a little young to have a daughter that age" but then I thought "well in those times they started young and maybe if he had her when he was 18-20 it could fit." But damn, wouldn't have guessed that he was that old, that he could have had her when he was in his 30s.

11 hours ago, scrb said:

So it seems the primary motivations of the visitors are sex and killing the "bad guys?"  I don't think westerns are as popular as they may have been when the movie was made.  If people want to enact gunplay fantasies, it isn't some shootout in a mythical West of movie lore.  Today, it would be to re-live something out of some big action or war movie or video game.  Maybe a WWII re-enactment or shooting terrorists.

I guess some guests would care enough about a story so that you have a different "plot" every day and that would make visiting several days or revisiting appealing.

But my suspicion is that most of the clientele would be male and it would be mostly some over the top sex or action scenarios and a lot of them wouldn't care about any storytelling aspects.  Just a higher-end or upscale version of going to some place like Thailand for the sex aspect or much more "real" than going to a shooting range.

It is such an old tired stereotype, that gamers don't care about story and atmosphere. It's the most important part for me. There is a reason my favorite game of all time is still Eternal Darkness, even though it has kinda clunky controls and shitty graphics, even by gamecube standards. And that's the way for most gamers I know.

Regarding gamers not liking westerns anymore. Three words: Red Dead Redemption.

The western is a classic setting. To some extent you can even group Fallout in there, which is really just a scifi western.

Don't get me wrong, in West World I'd certainly have sex with a few cowboys on the way, but if I paid a lot of money (that I don't actually have) I'd be there for the role play and I would be hella annoyed at all these touristy types who seem to break character all the time.

Quote

Though are they using real bullets?  Someone said how would guests be able to tell which were robots and which were other human beings.  There would have to be instances of "friendly fire" if it was a free-for-all with robots and humans shooting up the town.  When Teddy tried to shoot the Man in Black, the bullets looked like they magically bounced off so maybe they're special effects?  Maybe all the guns in WW are special effects that made a noise and give a kick but they either bounce off humans or causes effects on robots to simulate wounds and blood.

I asked myself the same and came to the same conclusion. All guns must have blanks and the robots must have a way to simulate wounds.

Otherwise it would be way too dangerous.

2 hours ago, Netfoot said:

(Delores suddenly got a new father, played by a host that might have been town preacher the day before.) 

Wasn't that the bartender?

Edited October 3, 2016 by Miles

[Netfoot]

2 minutes ago, Miles said:

Quote

(Delores suddenly got a new father, played by a host that might have been town preacher the day before.) 

Wasn't that the bartender?

Could be.   Wasn't paying that much attention.  But either way, it helps make the point that a wardrobe change might be required, over and above repairing bullet holes and washing off bot-blood.  Hosts must be pristine for tomorrow.  And dressed in character, too.

[Hanahope]

14 hours ago, Zanne said:

That was one question I had. How do park guests tell the other guests from the hosts? I didn't see anything that set the hosts apart. I actually wondered if dandy-hat-guest-with-wife had shot another wanna-be-bank-robber-guest accidentally before realizing bad guy was a host. That seems like it would happen from time to time if the guests can shoot and rape anyone on whim, and the hosts bleed red just as guests would.

It appears that the "bullets" only work on the android hosts, so two guests could shoot at each other, but wouldn't do any damage (see the "bullets" that hit Ed Harris).  Someone above said paint balls, but I didn't see any paint on Ed.  So its some other tech.

I liked how the androids all drunk milk, and their bodies were made from a white liquid substance, akin to milk.

So Ed Harris' character has been coming to the park for 30 years?  And just now he's noticed 'something odd' or different or wrong or whatever and has to figure it all out?  And is he now living there?  The park doesn't have good security to make sure all guests leave at the end of each day?  Or realize that one of their androids is missing?

I liked how there are the various story lines for the androids to do/say certain things depending on whether and when a guest interacts with them.

I agree with poster above who wondered why in heck they need 83 basements.

[kscoaster]

12 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

I couldn't help but laugh though when crying Dolores was saying to dying Teddy, "We've only just begun!" because of the Carpenters song! That had to be intentional.

I hope so, too.  I guess they're only as good as their scripts!

Are we sure everything resets every day?  Would be weird for guests staying more than one day.  I would think the story lines would be based on the total length of a guest's typical visit - perhaps a week or two?

[Izeinwinter]

Some of the scripts are much longer -The bandit gang had a schedule for robbing that saloon and it was over a week out, which means a cycle at least that long. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Delores herself has several longer backup scripts in the event a guest decides to have their portrait painted or pursue a romance with her or something.  It'd be pretty immersion breaking if she forgot about appointments made by newcomers

[BooBear]

3 hours ago, Netfoot said:

No, I think the nudity is realistic, and HBO avoided making things too prurient in their portrayal.  To a degree I actually find a little surprising, given their past. 

Yes I would also say storage robots would not have clothing because they would want to keep the clothing available for the current robots.

Quote

So if each host was 1 of a kind (the only reason to keep them in the basement, ie the boss' nostalgia), how did they manage to repair the hosts in less than 12 hours for the next day show?  Some of them got blown up with guts hanging which would need much more maintenance than just bullet holes.

I could just imagine that if they had to write someone out due to maintenance they would have a back up story ready to go.  Ie. Dolores just doesn't see Teddy that day and gets home early or the Sheriff is called away to an emergency in another town and his deputy sheriff then takes the lead on looking for the bad guy.   The madam of the brothel is "sick" and her girls know not to disturb her.

But I am willing to hand wave some stuff.  It is Science Fiction after all. I am find with no detailed explanation for how human's don't get hurt and frankly willing to go with the fact that it works because they have been running for 30+ years. I am not sure they keep too close a track on the humans in the park because if I was paying 40 K a day I wouldn't want to be too closely watched. Maybe they can just check in my text or something every night. 

[locomoco]

12 hours ago, Dobian said:

Okay, I saw Westworld as a kid and it was one of my favorites, so of course I wasn't going to miss this reboot.  Intriguing take on it, too early yet to see what they do with it.  Has potential.  I guess they are just keeping it to "Westworld", and not the three theme worlds in the movie (wild west, Rome, Medieval England).  Makes sense, doing the other theme lands would have made the show super expensive.  The actors playing androids did a great job, especially where some of them started glitching.  Some really good cinematography and makeup effects.  Nice twist in the beginning where I thought that Teddy was a guest but he was an android and Ed Harris was the guest.  Different from the movie in that the movie was done from the guests' view, while this one is being done from the behind-the-scenes view.  Anthony Hopkins is interesting in this one.

I'm curious, I'm also someone who saw the original movie as a kid, so I'm wondering if you feel the same way I do in that I felt that the remake doesn't have the same impact that the original film did due to Crichton's other "controlled worlds run amuck" franchise, Jurassic Park? I know the themes are somewhat different, but it almost feels like the TV remake is drawing a bit from JP as well the original WW, and the new show suffers a bit due to that.

I know there will be more plot twists the differentiate the new show from the previous properties, but I'm afraid that the twists will somehow dilute or alter the feeling I had from the original movie - maybe it's just nostalgia on my part, but if they're planning on changing things too much, I almost feel that they might have been better off being inspired by the previous works and not tie it so much to the WW film.

[WaltersHair]

Quote

I'm curious, I'm also someone who saw the original movie as a kid, so I'm wondering if you feel the same way I do in that I felt that the remake doesn't have the same impact that the original film did due to Crichton's other "controlled worlds run amuck" franchise, Jurassic Park? I know the themes are somewhat different, but it almost feels like the TV remake is drawing a bit from JP as well the original WW, and the new show suffers a bit due to that.

I saw West World as a child and was fascinated too. Yes, this iteration has less of an impact, but I chalk that up to being older and watching essentially the same plot in other movies and TV series. Heck, even Frankenstein is a creation gone amok.

About the nudity. It makes sense to me but for a different reason. I remember store mannequins everywhere as a child. They creeped me out back then, but it wasn't a strange thing to see growing up. My favorite Twilight Zone episode is about store mannequins coming to life, so this theme is as old as "After Hours". What I'm interested to see is what a modern take on this theme will look like and where the story goes.

btw,not as old as all that. Have seen reruns like most.

Edited October 3, 2016 by WaltersHair

[fastiller]

44 minutes ago, Hanahope said:

 

I liked how the androids all drunk milk, and their bodies were made from a white liquid substance, akin to milk.

 

Isn't that a call back to the film where the bots bled white blood?

[numbnut]

On 10/3/2016 at 9:19 AM, Netfoot said:

On 10/2/2016 at 9:29 PM, numbnut said:

But it's just rich people that can afford to visit the park, right?

Well, only rich people can afford Disneyworld, right?  I certainly can't.

This park is waaaay more expensive than Disneyworld. I think a day pass in the movie was $1,000, and that was in the '70s, so it's probably at least $5,000 for each person per day in this future version.

Edited October 5, 2016 by numbnut

[blackwing]

I enjoyed the premiere.  It was a little slow and confusing in the beginning, but it picked up.  I'm a sucker for movies and shows set in the Old West, and I loved the depiction of the town.

The thing I am still unclear about is how the human visitors are able to determine who is a host and who is just another human visitor?  So far, it doesn't seem like there were a whole lot of human visitors.  Besides the Ed Harris character, I believe we only saw 1) two guests who were cowering in the corner in the saloon malfunction, 2) the two men in the bathhouse who were saying it was the greatest thing ever, 3) the family who came across Dolores painting by the river, and 4) the couple who went on the ride and the man ended up killing Hector the bandit.  What happens if a guest shoots another guest?  Perhaps it is as people here have said and the guns aren't real, they just fire some sort of virtual bullet.

I haven't seen the original film, but I understand enough about the premise, and based on Dolores killing the fly at the end, I'm assuming the robot hosts will start killing guests.  Should be a fun ride.

Regarding the naked bots, it makes sense to me that they are naked during the debriefing at the end of the day or post-incident.  What I find odd is that the bots have body hair.  I guess we can explain this away by saying that either 1) the park's creators wanted the bots to be as lifelike as possible, and the bots are probably going to be undressed with guests at some point, or 2) they didn't want to make all those extras shave off all of their body hair.

[thenj]

I really liked it. The Intro was great. Though I would like to see more Humor. 

I loved Borgen, looking forward to seeing more of Knudsen.

Do the newcomers get just put into the world/storyline or do they buy a specific one?

[Netfoot]

15 minutes ago, blackwing said:

What I find odd is that the bots have body hair.

What I find odd, is the lack of tattoos.  It's my understanding that it is difficult to find actors -- even simple extras -- that don't have tattoos somewhere.

[blackwing]

3 minutes ago, Netfoot said:

What I find odd, is the lack of tattoos.  It's my understanding that it is difficult to find actors -- even simple extras -- that don't have tattoos somewhere.

Pretty sure they can just use makeup to cover up any tattoos.  I know that Alex O'Loughlin (Hawaii 5-0) has lots of tattoos, including one of some kind of animal biting his nipple and a huge tramp stamp like many young American women get.  The show makes him take his shirt off frequently, and these tattoos are never seen.  Some of his are, but not these weird ones.

But I do remember reading about the casting call... I believe it specified that extras must not have any tattoos or scars, no fake breasts, and no back hair.  If that's the case, and the show is not willing to use makeup to cover up tattoos or scars, then I agree that it would be hard to find extras.  Back hair can be shaved.  But "no fake breasts"?

[Miles]

40 minutes ago, blackwing said:

What I find odd is that the bots have body hair.  I guess we can explain this away by saying that either 1) the park's creators wanted the bots to be as lifelike as possible, and the bots are probably going to be undressed with guests at some point, or 2) they didn't want to make all those extras shave off all of their body hair.

It's clearly option 1. We have seen multiple times in this episode that the creators strive to make the bots as human as possible. Men who shave their bodies in the wild west would be extremely emersion breaking. So the bots have hair like real men of that time (and mostly even now) would.

19 minutes ago, Netfoot said:

What I find odd, is the lack of tattoos.  It's my understanding that it is difficult to find actors -- even simple extras -- that don't have tattoos somewhere.

We didn't see many of them naked and you can cover that up with makeup. It gets complicated when there is a lot of action and sweating, but for these kinds of scenes it should be fine.
 

7 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Pretty sure they can just use makeup to cover up any tattoos.  I know that Alex O'Loughlin (Hawaii 5-0) has lots of tattoos, including one of some kind of animal biting his nipple and a huge tramp stamp like many young American women get.  The show makes him take his shirt off frequently, and these tattoos are never seen.  Some of his are, but not these weird ones.

Has he done gay porn? Tramp stamps on guys are usually a thing exclusive to gay porn stars.

Quote

But I do remember reading about the casting call... I believe it specified that extras must not have any tattoos or scars, no fake breasts, and no back hair.  If that's the case, and the show is not willing to use makeup to cover up tattoos or scars, then I agree that it would be hard to find extras.  Back hair can be shaved.  But "no fake breasts"?

The back hair one seems weird. It's not like that would be anachronistic. It might even help with immersion. I guess it's understandable that they don't want it on their hot male leads, but even on extras?

I guess with fake breasts it would be obvious if they are too big. But I doubt that if you have sensibly sized fake breast and they like you in casting, they'll send you back home because of them.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Miles

[bmoore4026]

5 hours ago, Broderbits said:

Add me to the group that wonders what Ed Harris' character is after.

A sense of humor?

1 hour ago, Netfoot said:

Could be.   Wasn't paying that much attention.  But either way, it helps make the point that a wardrobe change might be required, over and above repairing bullet holes and washing off bot-blood.  Hosts must be pristine for tomorrow.  And dressed in character, too.

No, it was that one bandit leader from the beginning.  The one who was drinking milk.

[Duke2801]

I found it intriguing and creepy.  I'm in!   I hope they give Thandie Newton some more to do in the coming weeks, though.

I knew she was a 'bot but I still cheered a little inside when that "blonde lady" who was part of the bank robber's posse bit it.  For some reason I just hated her.  More so than the bank robber himself.  I have no idea why.

 

45 minutes ago, Netfoot said:

What I find odd, is the lack of tattoos.  It's my understanding that it is difficult to find actors -- even simple extras -- that don't have tattoos somewhere.

It's easy enough to cover up tattoos. 

[dgpolo]

3 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I agree with poster above who wondered why in heck they need 83 basements.

They've got a lot of junk? they've been around for at least 30 years. Plus equipment?

[Miles]

"The Dollhouse deals in fantasy. That is their business, but that is not their purpose."

I wish I would have seen the paralels, but it took the whattheflick review to point this out to me. This is basically a remake of Joss Whedon's Dollhouse. Including the fantasy-part just being a cover for what is really going on behind the scenes (the scene on the roof made that clear). And I'm all for that. I thought Dollhouse had a ton of potential, that sadly never quite manifested (but I still loved the show). So if HBO can do it bigger and better, by all means.

31 minutes ago, dgpolo said:

They've got a lot of junk? they've been around for at least 30 years. Plus equipment?

Also seemed like that basement used to be the entrance. Did it look like the entrance in the movie? I've never seen it.

Seemed like they just built more and more floors on top of the old stuff, until they had a tower that was higher than the clouds. They are the Aperture Science of this world.

What got me was that they wouldn't even try to repair what was causing all that water get in there. No matter how indifferent you are to the stuff that's down there, you don't want water eroding the foundation of your giant ass building.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Miles

[Jack Shaftoe]

Before watching it, I thought the premise was stupid and tried it only because Jonathan Nolan did such a marvelous job with Person of Interest. I still think the premise is stupid but I will keep watching because the execution has been decent so far. IMO, they tried way too hard to come up with "deep and meaningful" (tm) dialogue and scenes, so it came off as rather pretentious at times but trying too hard is normal for pilot episodes, so...

I wonder if there are cameras absolutely everywhere in the park and if the guests know that the staff is watching. I would love a scene where one of the guests realizes he is being watched, thinks "who cares that they saw me torture and murder some toasters" and then becomes angry because he realizes they must have also seen him having sex. Kind of like the many viewers who enjoy watching murders and other violence but a naked person on their screens makes them immediately switch the channel (not that HBO isn't overdoing the nudity too often, mind you).

Quote

Only character I did care for was the British guy who kept yelling and complaining about everything.

I kind of liked the British guy. Sure, he was a bit of a jerk but unlike most other characters so far he didn't seem devoid of a sense of humour and he is right that trying to make robots too human-like rarely ends well.

[jcin617]

3 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I agree with poster above who wondered why in heck they need 83 basements.

It almost looked like a lobby to me;  there was a metal sphere at the bottom of a set of (what looked like) escalators.   I'm wondering if they've just kept building newer versions of the park and facilities over and over on top of each other.  

Edited October 3, 2016 by jcin617

[CherryMalotte]

Any show that includes a player piano that has a roll of Black Hole Sun is okay by me.  

[xaxat]

I suppose the biggest problem I have with the premise is that it happens in physical space. I realize that is the premise of the original movie (which I loved as a kid), but it is rapidly being superseded by virtual reality. Why create a robot horse when you can cobble together a haptic feedback suit and a bunch of 1's and 0's?

In addition to the musical references, I thought the visual were references were interesting as well. When you have Monument Valley as a backdrop, I suppose it's hard to not look like a John Ford movie, but I saw The Searchers, Red River, The Big Country, Andrew Wyeth's painting Christina's World. . . 

[sjohnson]

Elmer Bernstein's Paint It Black...glorious!

I think the robots are stripped when they are with the staff so that the staff is comfortably aware of the difference. 

Ford is engineering souls into the robots and Bernie is to choose how far to go along with the plan. Cullen is into shenanigans. All very ho-hum so far, but it's early. 

The thing about robots in SF is they are metaphors for dehumanization. The real question is how we aren't robots too, just programmed by nature (imperfectly at that.) The programming may be biological. Or the robot programming can represent our cultural programming. But there is a strong tendency for robot stories that focus on robots becoming human (instead of humans becoming robots) to be thematically weaker. 

Strongly suspect as time goes on their disdain for "science," aka verisimilitude, will bite them in the ass. They've already had one thing pop up, which is that some guns shoot real bullets (making holes in the robots) and other apparently do not. Maybe they could plausibly prevent robots making mistakes, but there's no way they could prevent human error. Or malice, as in "Gee, I didn't mean to shoot my wife with real bullets!" Everybody has a different tolerance for this kind of foolishness but in a tv series, where people have time to notice things that can slide in a single movie, it does take a toll.

[Netfoot]

25 minutes ago, sjohnson said:

They've already had one thing pop up, which is that some guns shoot real bullets (making holes in the robots) and other apparently do not.

This can easily be explained away in various ways.  For example:  no guns fire real bullets.  There is a muzzle flash, and a discharge of gas, but there is no projectile.  Bot-flesh that is computed to be in the path of the non-existent bullet is triggered to burst open with blood, etc, as if from bullet trauma, but human flesh simply ignores it.  Therefore no guest can be injured by any firearm, but hosts are designed to simulate being hit by a bullet when shot at by empty guns.

Or any of a hundred technical explanations, that don't require excessive handwaving.

[tennisgurl]

I've been looking forward to this for ages, and I was not disappointed! Its a really interesting concept, albeit one that we have seen a few times before. I LOVE the cast, and thought they all did great work. I am very interested in Dolorous especially. I love Evan Rachel Wood, and I thrilled to see more of her. As soon as she slapped that fly, I got chills. Just a great moment.  Plus, I adore James Marsden. I totally did not see the twist of him actually being a robot coming. Well played, show.  

As for the park itself, I feel like it does not really have to be creepy and exploitative. I mean, there will certainly be assholes who see this all as a video game where you can kill your characters over and over to let off steam (or just because your an asshole), but I am sure there are people who see the whole thing as high tech LARPing, where they just want to have an adventure in the Old West. The family Dolorous met seemed normal enough at least. I do hope we meet a few decent human characters. Most all the ones we have met just seem cold or outright nasty, but it is only the pilot. But as of now, Team Robot! Cant they at least start a union? 

I will stick this out, see if they have anything new to add to the robot rights genre. 

[dinkysquid]

Very disappointed. This bored me to tears. If I want an old west fix, I'll watch old episodes of Deadwood. A hell of a lot more interesting. 

I'll give this one more week.

[Tim Thomason]

That family that Dolores met mentioned something about "not going across the river." Since I don't think there's anything dangerous to humans there, I assume he's referencing the town and all the explicit behavior there.

Presumably there's a family-friendly zone on the one side of the river. Maybe it's cheaper or more adjacent to HQ (maybe only allowing day trips and no overnight stays?). That kid seemed surprised at Dolores being a humanoid robot, suggesting that he wasn't dealing with them on a constant basis.

----

There are 100-plus narratives going on in the park, but I think only some of them are week-long or longer narratives, while a few repeat themselves day-after-day. Dolores and Teddy seem to be on a day-long narrative, the equivalent of minor NPCs you might run into on an RPG. Those two might be pulled out every evening, cleaned up, and placed back to repeat the story. Others, like perhaps some of the saloon robots (outside of their interactions with Teddy), might be held out longer, the better to service the guests who come a courtin'.

There is an element of immersion, but I think all the guests are probably well-prepared and told what to expect, and are under no illusion (outside of that kid) that they are dealing almost solely with robots. There are 1400 guests in the park at any time, which implies way more territory than that one podunk town we saw.

But then they also mentioned 200 robots being 10% of the total count. 2000 robots for 1400 guests doesn't give a very good ratio. I imagine the town itself has a higher robot-to-guest ratio, but what are other parts like? My hypothetical kids zone apparently doesn't have very many robots (maybe no human ones at all, and maybe animals weren't counted), but I'd be annoyed if I payed my $5000 and didn't get to the big robot area of the park.

[Black Knight]

1 hour ago, xaxat said:

I suppose the biggest problem I have with the premise is that it happens in physical space. I realize that is the premise of the original movie (which I loved as a kid), but it is rapidly being superseded by virtual reality. Why create a robot horse when you can cobble together a haptic feedback suit and a bunch of 1's and 0's?

I'm excited about VR, but there are definitely issues: Getting sick, for one (yes, it's still happening), and for another, the (physical) ramifications of being in VR for more than a certain length of time. There are already studies suggesting prolonged exposure does a number on your vision, for instance. Now maybe all that'll get fixed...then again, maybe not. Maybe our eyes will never be able to tolerate a VR headset for hours and hours and hours on end, or maybe people just get fed up with wearing something on their head for that long. And VR is probably never going to be 100% like physical reality - think of how you have to use controllers to move, instead of moving like you actually would in physical space. Plus, this park is for rich people, who want experiences that aren't available to everyone else. If I was rich and had a choice between this Westworld or a VR Westworld, I'd pick this Westworld. VR is for worlds that don't exist IRL or that you can't afford to visit.

[Lebanna]

2 hours ago, jcin617 said:

It almost looked like a lobby to me;  there was a metal sphere at the bottom of a set of (what looked like) escalators.   I'm wondering if they've just kept building newer versions of the park and facilities over and over on top of each other.  

I also wondered if the basement had been the entrance to the original park, from 30 years ago, especially since they mentioned that there hadn't been a problem the robots for over 30 years - meaning that something did go wrong, a long time ago. It might suggest that this show might be a sequel to the movie, not a full reboot.

In the lower basement level, the big metal globe had the company name from the movie - 'Delos' on it. Perhaps this was supposed to be a version of the original basement level in the movie where they arrive before dressing up for the park and going outside? (Although it's not really outside, of course).

Which would suggest that there might be a way out into the park from the basement. Where they keep the malfunctioning models. Hmm.

I think there was a tiny shout-out to the movie besides the Man In Black twist - in the film, the only way you could tell a robot from a human was that their hands were wrong. In the new version, they point out that even the slightest twitch of a little finger is perfectly modelled on a human behaviour. I wonder if at any point, someone will insist that 'Nothing Can Go Wrong'.

This show was great, I loved it, but now I have all kinds of questions.

I wonder if the robot's brain has to go along with the body or if they can swap it out? They were talking about Dolores' brain being the oldest in the park, while her body was practically brand new. Perhaps it would be too confusing, even for a robot, to wake up in a new body that was a different shape or gender than the one you were originally designed for. Would that be worse than having your entire personality rewritten?

If Dolores' father had his personality rebuilt from cannibal to sheriff to devoted father, I expect that Dolores and the others have played many roles as well. The Man In Black has been visiting the park for thirty years, so he would know Dolores' history and all the characters she's been built as before. Do the robot's programmed feelings of love and hate for other host robots models stay with them, along with their previous personalities? Did Dolores' father used to butcher her, when he was a cannibal? What was Teddy and Dolores' relationship like, when they were built as other people? Did they always love each other, or did they used to murder each other every afternoon for entertainment?

Equally, I wonder if we'll ever get a sense of who the Man In Black is outside the park. I bet it turns out that he's a total sweetheart who does nice, kind things for poor human children, or something, and just tortures robots for kicks in his free time to decompress.

Did the photo get there by accident, or was it placed on the farm deliberately? And what does the programmer whisper to Dolores' father before he walks into the robot store? We saw that the robots have code words and phrases for different actions - was it one of those? If so, what does it make him do? Are any other robots in the basement sentient?

I was getting a real 'Blade Runner' sense from Dolores' father. I was half expecting him to start talking about tears in rain. I suppose Shakespeare will have to do.

And I suppose, we have to keep in mind that while 'Dolores' sounds a little bit like 'Delos', the name literally means 'pains'. When pain is the undercurrent and purpose of Dolores' entire existence.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Lebanna

[WaltersHair]

One of my posts disappeared.

To add to the weird pop culture references such as when Dolores says "We've Only Just Begun." I hear Babs from Animal House scream "Teddy".

Quote

And I suppose, we have to keep in mind that 'Dolores' literally means 'pains'. When pain is the undercurrent of Dolores' entire existence.

Dolor, calor, rubor and tumor.

Edited October 4, 2016 by WaltersHair

[CabotCove]

Quote

It's very cold and sterile, devoid of humor.

Really, I thought humor was one of the pilot's strength

[magdalene]

21 minutes ago, DCLeague said:

Really, I thought humor was one of the pilot's strength

Yes, it was very funny to see sentient beings repeatedly violated and tortured.  Only not so much.

And when it wasn't show casing its sadism it was pretentious and derivative - these themes have been explored to better effect in movies and books before.

[Paws]

So I just rewatched  the first episode (because there were parts where I wasn't paying attention) and now I am obsessed and fascinated. But my big question is this:

For me, it would be a very disappointing vacation to arrive at Westworld and find out the Janes Marsden was in love with Dolores. Would they change the program for me?

[atomationage]

On 10/3/2016 at 8:21 AM, BeatrixK said:

So each week, I'm going to end up shouting ' Oh my God!  You killed Teddy!  You Bastards!', aren't I. 

IKR.  I liked the show.  The "Paint It Black" part, with the guy from the wanted poster that got killed by the guest and never got to give his speech,  was the best part of it for me.  They could have cut most of the last ten minutes.  Anthony Hopkins doesn't do anything for me.  I'm interested in James Marsden and Thandie Newton.  I hope they have more scenes together.   One thing I'm not going to like is Ed Harris wandering around being evil.   I hope he isn't featured that much, or his character gets killed off in the next episode.   I do think they spent too much time behind the scenes at the park.  Maybe that's just to establish the world.  There are so many questions.  I'll have to watch some more. 

Edited October 4, 2016 by atomationage
Paint It not Painted

[CabotCove]

Quote

For me, it would be a very disappointing vacation to arrive at Westworld and find out the Janes Marsden was in love with Dolores. Would they change the program for me?

LOL

Quote

Yes, it was very funny to see sentient beings repeatedly violated and tortured.  Only not so much.

Look Im not a fan of violence either but if you really pay attention to the dialogue there is some ironic or twisted humor in there. Maybe its because I read reviews before watching pilot, so maybe I knew what to look for, a lot of reviews I read talked about the meta jokes in the pilot. Yeah I found some of the violence  and nakedness unpalatable, but its HBO we all sort of knew what we were signing up for going into this show.  The premise, humor, action, scenery is intriguing enough for me to continue watching, so far.

Edited October 4, 2016 by DCLeague

[blugirlami21]

I think they would.   I feel as if Teddy and Dolores only fall in love when they are unoccupied by guests.  I really like what we've seen so far of Teddy and Dolores.  Their love story is very old fashioned and over the top but its very sweet.  I only thought Teddy was a guest until he actually interacted with the saloon girls.  His dialogue seemed very rehearsed.  I thought it was very interesting that Teddy also seemed to have a moment of awakening when he checked the place where he died of the gunshot wound when he woke up on the train.  I feel a little bad for him though, he seems to get killed on a regular basis.

I really liked the show.  It was sometimes very disturbing but I feel that's to be expected with this subject matter.  Anytime there's sentient like beings being controlled by humans there's bound to be some squickiness and/or sadism.  I was surprised by the level of it in the Ed Harris' character.  But I think that may be the point.  The guests seemed to revel in their freedom from rules and conformity and its interesting/disturbing to see the levels to which they push the limit of it.

I do wonder at the level of freedom the man in black has considering how quickly the programmers found other glitchy hosts.  Why did no one notice that Kissy the card dealer was missing?  Especially considering the big scene they had play out at the saloon.

[KaleyFirefly]

23 hours ago, Zanne said:

That was one question I had. How do park guests tell the other guests from the hosts? I didn't see anything that set the hosts apart. I actually wondered if dandy-hat-guest-with-wife had shot another wanna-be-bank-robber-guest accidentally before realizing bad guy was a host. That seems like it would happen from time to time if the guests can shoot and rape anyone on whim, and the hosts bleed red just as guests would.

I was wondering that, too. How do they prevent the guests from shooting each other? When they check in do they get a pamphlet telling them who the robots are?