S01.E01: The Original

[Armchair Critic]

Who was in that picture and why did the father robot get upset about it?

[LittleIggy]

Ed Harris has badass down pat! 

The scenery is just stunning. This show is a visual treat on top of everything else.

Didn't know there was another Hemsworth! What a handsome family! :-)

Looking forward to more.

[Zanne]

3 minutes ago, KaleyFirefly said:

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? 

I thought maybe all hosts had blanks and only guests got real bullets, but someone above suggested that maybe it's something in the hosts' programming that reacts to the "bullet" to formulate a wound. I wish Show would give more detail on that just because I want to know the logistics for when I build my own robotic dinosaur gun-slinging theme park of the future!

[AuntiePam]

I like that we won't know if clunky dialogue ("We've only just begun") should be attributed to the WW scriptwriter or the HBO writer.  Is that an example of "meta"?  I'm never sure. 

Armchair Critic, I think Dolores's dad was upset by the photo because of the background -- a modern city, tall buildings.  It was totally outside his experience.

[rozen]

I would say most gamers could identify every NPC of a game they play, by sight if not by name. By the time people have enough money to shell out for Westworld, they probably know the game inside out. I'm sure there are other high-tech mechanisms that let outsiders know who is human and who is a host, but I could also buy that people can recognize the characters of what is probably the most acclaimed "game" on Earth.

Anthony Hopkins' character totally wants his synths to gain sentience. He laid it out while he was watching his newest creation be printed, "we're as good as we're gonna get." He wants to usher in Humanity 2.0 and is hiding behind disheveled brilliance to make it happen.

I think his scientist underling is also in on it, as he gave some sort of message to Dolores's dad as he marched, sobbing, into cold storage. 

[KaleyFirefly]

22 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

Loved the opening credits and the mixture of the old-timey western stuff and sci-fi future bits (and it was kind of disturbing seeing Anthony Hopkins name to a of two robots fucking.)  And I could totally tell the music was done by Ramin Djawadi.

Just looked up Ramin Djawadi. That dude is hot.

Edited October 4, 2016 by KaleyFirefly
make it shorter

[KaleyFirefly]

20 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 was wondering how did the girls on the train know that Teddy was a robot.

[Dobian]

8 hours ago, locomoco said:

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.

The original movie was all action/adventure.  The series seems to be more about exploring consciousness and self-awareness, and what defines being alive or human.  So aside from the premise I don't expect a lot of similarities.

[KaleyFirefly]

15 hours ago, kay1864 said:

And storing them standing makes zero sense.  It takes energy for a robot to balance on two feet.  

Also, why the heck do they need 83 basement levels?  And why the remark of the security guy about the smell (which no one reacted to, btw)?  Androids (presumably) don't decompose or sweat.

(theory) Ford is secretly building a rogue robot army.

[SzmuttyPratfall]

Anyone else notice pauses in conversation, instant tonal shifts in conversations, and shifting attitudes depending on previous statements from the lady head of Security? I don't think she's human. If she's a robot, who else of the staff is?

[fastiller]

On 10/3/2016 at 2:18 AM, thuganomics85 said:

 

Loved the opening credits and the mixture of the old-timey western stuff and sci-fi future bits (and it was kind of disturbing seeing Anthony Hopkins name to a of two robots fucking.)  And I could totally tell the music was done by Ramin Djawadi.

Jonathan Nolan sure did take advantage of wherever they are shooting all the Western scenes.

Another thing Nolan is taking advantage of: all those folks he brought over from Person of Interest.  I recognized the following names in the opening credits: Nolan; Abrams; Athena Wickham; Bryan Burk; Steven Semel; and the aforementioned Djawadi.    Which brings me to:

7 hours ago, KaleyFirefly said:

Just looked up Ramin Djawadi. That dude is hot.

You're right!

[paulvdb]

On 3-10-2016 at 6:26 AM, 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.

There have been many posts speculating about technical solutions to make the guns safe, but what about other acts of violence? We know that some guests rape the hosts, but how would they know that they are not raping another guest?

[paigow]

Teddy Redshirt...now with character development...his AI will eventually tell him crude weapons - club / knife - override the safety protocols...  

[Hanahope]

8 hours ago, KaleyFirefly said:

I was wondering how did the girls on the train know that Teddy was a robot.

My guess is that he was already on the train when they boarded and he was in an inert state, couldn't be "woken up", so they figured it out.

 

38 minutes ago, paulvdb said:

We know that some guests rape the hosts, but how would they know that they are not raping another guest?

I assume the hosts keep to their "part", with language and all.  Another guest would probably be cursing and obviously speaking differently so the raping guest could figure it out.  No doubt they signed some sort of contract against such acts against another guest and if they break the contract, they get kicked out, fined, and possibly criminally prosecuted.

[LadyArcadia]

On 10/2/2016 at 9:14 PM, SeanC said:

When the notes of "Paint It Black" started manifesting in the score, for a bit there I was trying to figure out if I was hearing it properly, but then it became unmistakable.

This isn't exactly a novel premise (even if it weren't a remake), but so far it looks interesting.  Looks to be a real showcase part for Evan Rachel Wood going forward, as her character starts down the path of developing an independent personality.

And Anthony Hopkins actually looked invested in the proceedings.  I'm not sure I remember the last time that happened.

Wait... THAT was Evan Rachel Wood?  Woah.  I didn't pay much attention to the previews, but my husband insisted I watch this.  The entire time I kept thinking how gorgeous that lead actress was and why hadn't I seen her before.

Looks like she grew up! 

[Duke2801]

9 hours ago, KaleyFirefly said:

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? 

The guests aren't toting around "real" guns.  They are guns specifically designed to kill the robots/hosts.

8 hours ago, KaleyFirefly said:

I was wondering how did the girls on the train know that Teddy was a robot.

I think it's fair to assume that - although the hosts look the same to you and me - that there are still differences that "real life TV people" can see.  The girl on the train said (of James M) "He's so lifelike." Not "OMG he looks exactly like a real person."

[sjohnson]

As to the sexual sadism, etc. I imagine that it will be much more controversial in Westworld, because in Game of Thrones, it's all for fun and games (see title!) But in this show, the rapists aren't very nice, and they're us. Also, too much penis, which I expect to disappear. 

As to how this all bears on the future of the show, I'm afraid I'm inclined to think HBO, which is not I think all that great at producing high quality drama, as opposed to selling tits and gore, is altogether too liable to forget that making the people villains makes the robots look good. If the purpose is to have the morality tale saying people should be replaced, it would be much more effective to be a single movie, or at worst a short limited series. Also, the grade Z movie Creation of the Humanoids already did this. 

[LJD]

Guy creates Person of Interest and all he gets credit-wise is "co-wrote some of his brother's movies"? Root would not approve of the missing data.

[Scrappygrrl]

I re-watched this a few times yesterday, while I was home form work nursing a cold. The beginning line of questioning to Dolores, about answering questions correctly so they can wake up from the "dream", was done by Jeffrey Wright's character, but differs from the line of questioning we witness later. It plants seeds of discontent: "What if I told you the newcomers were there for you to play a part" etc. I don't remember the exact phrasing but it was along those lines. I think Jeffrey Wright's character is the one sabotaging the hosts, planting seeds of memories or discontent/rebellion especially when paired with him whispering in Dolores' father's ear before he was put in storage. I can't yet guess his motivation but it may be working to oppose whatever "higher stakes" Westworld is really about (human army, spies, who knows).

[sjohnson]

Yes, the content of the questions does indeed plant the suggestion, even as it ostensibly searches out the subversion. 

Try as I may I cannot figure out how having two different people ask the questions adds any meaning whatsoever, not even as book ends/symmetry.

[BooBear]

3 hours ago, Scrappygrrl said:

was done by Jeffrey Wright's character, but differs from the line of questioning we witness later. It plants seeds of discontent: "What if I told you the newcomers were there for you to play a part" etc. I don't remember the exact phrasing but it was along those lines. I think Jeffrey Wright's character is the one sabotaging the hosts, planting seeds of memories or discontent/rebellion especially when paired with him whispering in Dolores' father's ear before he was put in storage. I can't yet guess his motivation but it may be working to oppose whatever "higher stakes" Westworld is really about (human army, spies, who knows).

Agreed but I think it is him and Ford.  His questions to her were much more elaborate and seemingly designed to turn her against the humans.

Quote

too liable to forget that making the people villains makes the robots look good.

It will remain to be seen but, I was actually surprised and happy about how much the humans mostly who were working there seemed to genuinely have "feelings" for the robots.  Shannon Woodward's character put Dolores to sleep so she wouldn't suffer anymore. I even think the Hemsworth brother seemed to have sympathy for her. Even though, in their mind Dolores is just a robot.  And also the little kid who tried to tell Dolores she wasn't real.  It could be even more interesting if this rebellion would be planned and put in action by sympathetic humans only to have the bots not really see the difference and turn on them.

ETA: Here is my burning question from the premiere. Who would bring a kid here (for 40K per year)? Even if you tried to stay away from violence or rape, it could unfold right in front of you at any time. Geeze.

Edited October 4, 2016 by BooBear

[djsunyc]

quick theories:

1. ed harris either is a spy for someone external to the whole thing (maybe the government?) or was a former employee of west world and is there to delve deeper into a conspiracy he found out about when he worked there.

2. ed harris isn't human - he's a previous android model that's not effected by the gun shots and has become self aware of sorts

3. "host" - i think these bodies will be used to transfer current human consciousness into them so people can live forever.

saw this elsewhere...but what if TMIB didn't rape delores but did something programmatically to her?  like implanted a bug or something?

Edited October 4, 2016 by djsunyc

[djsunyc]

more thoughts...

delores is anthony hopkins attempt at rescuing someone (maybe wife?  daughter?).

[djsunyc]

oh and yeah...that security woman (cullen i think) is most definitely an android.

[Tarasme]

On 10/3/2016 at 1:18 AM, thuganomics85 said:

 Then again, I guess Ed Harris doesn't do cuddly.

See "Milk Money," but, considering that film, your premise still holds.

This show has opened a ginormous can of worms.

But first, Jonathan Nolan and Athena Wickham, I've missed you.

We're all talking about the depravity of humans and human action when allowed to do whatever the hell we want with no consequences (societal though our own souls is another matter). What about what we're causing the tools of depravity to be? We discuss how we rape and kill but we're also forcing- or instilling in them the programming- to rape and kill. The perpetrators are victimized as much as the "victims" with just as much psyche cargo as the others. Louis Herthum (Daddy Abernathy) was AMAZING in his breakdown- he had to be a madman/cannibal, a sheriff, and a devoted- tortured father, among whatever else he was fated to be. These entities have no power to choose good or evil- it's thrust upon them like so much Greco fate. I'm much less interested in the inevitable rebellion than I am in the self-determination of the hosts. If, when given the opportunity, will they choose virtue or depravity? Will they choose healing or sickness?

Will they be better than us?

Cool.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Tarasme

[Broderbits]

12 hours ago, rozen said:

Anthony Hopkins' character totally wants his synths to gain sentience.

Yes, he wants to give them not only sentience but free will. But will Lucifer (The Man in Black) get there first? It's not easy being The Creator!

[numbnut]

3 hours ago, Scrappygrrl said:

I think Jeffrey Wright's character is the one sabotaging the hosts, planting seeds of memories or discontent/rebellion especially when paired with him whispering in Dolores' father's ear before he was put in storage.

I agree. He's the only sympathetic human character for me. I'm also intrigued by him looking at a photo of a boy, which I would guess is his dead son. After a second watch I'm thinking the QA woman isn't human. There was a paused moment between her and Bernard that was strange. Or maybe it's Bernard that isn't human and the photo is a implanted memory (like in Blade Runner) and Abernathy threatened him because he feels betrayed by one of his own.

Edited October 4, 2016 by numbnut

[iMonrey]

Quote

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).

I'd have to go watch the original movie, but yes I believe that was the same set (or a recreation of that set) used in the 1973 film.

Somehow, the premise doesn't seem as plausible now as it did in the 1970s. With all the technology and video games at our disposal today I don't think a lot of people would be shelling out big bucks to spend a week in the "old west." I think a more realistic scenario would be a park where all the androids are zombies and guests pay to go in with weapons and waste all the zombies. People would be lining up for that shit. But there are already too man zombie shows on TV.

I'm also not sure how long the premise can be sustained. Assuming that the robots are slowly becoming sentient, how much longer can the park function as an amusement park? Things would have to progress either really, really slowly, or else the premise has to evolve really quickly.

It's ambitious and thought provoking, but I don't think HBO has the next Game of Thrones on their hands with this one.

[minirth]

I watched this Sunday night with one friend and Monday night with another and I AM IN.  (Despite my fears that this will only get one season -- I don't think this is going to have a massive audience -- I am willing to fall in love with it.)

Love the dialogue!  I'm fascinated by the way the hosts reuse their scripted language.  I'm very interested in the behind the scenes world -- the intersecting storylines give the hosts a framework to exist in between being used for an 'adventure'.

Love the annoying scriptwriter with the bow tie -- in that room, I would be the one yelling that you can't yank 200 hosts across that many storylines because QUALITY damnit.  Loved that the villain died before he got to give his big speech.  LOVE the tart QA woman -- I think her blend of anger and pragmatism is a good match for her job.  

Ed Harris is definitely my reason to watch -- I can't wait to see his story unfold.  Very interested that there hasn't been a major malfunction for 30 years, he's been coming for 30 years, and that Dolores is the oldest host in the park.  This is going to be fucking epic.  I hope they are given enough seasons to play out the story!!!

The scene of the night had to be Daddy Abernathy's terrifying breakdown.  HOLY CRAP give that man all the awards right now.  I was chilled to the bone.  Beautiful writing, insanely great acting, and heartbreaking in a very strange way.   

At the end, when Abernathy was walking towards his (hopefully temporary) stay in storage, I was rigid with fear that the camera was going to pull back and show him and the others walking into a furnace.  On a second watching, even knowing that wasn't going to happen, I was still absolutely horrorstruck.  Making him walk to his own 'death' -- shudder.

And might I just note, if I was nightly visited in 'dreams' by a voice demanding to know if I question my reality, and repeatedly told that if I don't give the right answers, I won't 'wake up', I think I would start to question my damned reality!

[Netfoot]

2 hours ago, BooBear said:

Who would bring a kid here (for 40K per year)? Even if you tried to stay away from violence or rape, it could unfold right in front of you at any time. Geeze.

Anyone who lets their kids watch TV?

2 hours ago, Tarasme said:

We're all talking about the depravity of humans and human action when allowed to do whatever the hell we want with no consequences (societal though our own souls is another matter).

From our side of the 4th wall, we can see that the hosts are developing/have developed emotions, sentience, etc.  But the visitors to the park see them as little more than washing machines or espresso machines.  Simple appliances.  Now, taking pleasure from beating up my wife may indeed be depraved and reprehensible.  But taking pleasure from beating up a toaster oven that looks like my wife...  is there anything ethically or morally wrong with that?  That, I think, is the primary question this show poses for us. 

[Tarasme]

1 hour ago, Netfoot said:

From our side of the 4th wall, we can see that the hosts are developing/have developed emotions, sentience, etc.  But the visitors to the park see them as little more than washing machines or espresso machines.  Simple appliances.  Now, taking pleasure from beating up my wife may indeed be depraved and reprehensible.  But taking pleasure from beating up a toaster oven that looks like my wife...  is there anything ethically or morally wrong with that?  That, I think, is the primary question this show poses for us. 

I understand. I think we could also consider if the act of "beating up" anything has repercussions for humanity. No matter what way we choose to vent our aggression, there is a wide range of consequences along a gamut of social, moral, psychological, etc points.

It might be worse for me psychologically to choose to ignore my rage. Worse for me socially to take my rage out on my "wife." Less bad- but still damaging- for me to "beat up" the toaster. 

[djsunyc]

http://www.slashfilm.com/westworld-logistical-questions-answered/

[Netfoot]

5 minutes ago, Tarasme said:

No matter what way we choose to vent our aggression, there is a wide range of consequences along a gamut of social, moral, psychological, etc points.

Agreed, but we already thrash the living daylights out of cricket/tennis/golf balls, etc, and partake in violence and bloodshed vicariously in our enjoyment of cinema, literature, even video games.  

Is venting our aggression -- howsoever we choose to do so -- positive?  Or negative?  So long as we don't distress other people in the process, it may actually be beneficial.  And beating up or sexually "abusing" a machine built for that very purpose -- is it actually causing distress to other people?

[locomoco]

15 hours ago, Armchair Critic said:

Who was in that picture and why did the father robot get upset about it?

It was a picture of a woman taken in the outside world in a modern metropolitan city - something that could not exist within the confines of Westworld's scripted reality. That lead the father robot to question his reality and he got caught up on some sort of loop that he was unable to resolve.

34 minutes ago, Tarasme said:

I understand. I think we could also consider if the act of "beating up" anything has repercussions for humanity. No matter what way we choose to vent our aggression, there is a wide range of consequences along a gamut of social, moral, psychological, etc points.

I end up coming here to post snarky comments... :D

[DarkRaichu]

23 hours ago, blackwing said:

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

I actually found the lack of pubic hair and armpit hair weird.  Nobody shaved those areas back in the 1800s.  IIRC, Deadwood made a point to show armpit hair on a woman in 1 of the episodes. 

23 hours ago, Miles said:

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.

Real but not too real :P

[SeanC]

2 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

I actually found the lack of pubic hair and armpit hair weird.  Nobody shaved those areas back in the 1800s.  IIRC, Deadwood made a point to show armpit hair on a woman in 1 of the episodes. 

That would make sense since the robots are effectively tailored to modern tastes, so if you get to the point where you're taking the robot's clothes off to have sex with them, the designers would want you to find them sexually appealing.

Unrelatedly, I belatedly realized what caused the sheriff robot to shut down mid-conversation:  the fly landed on him, and his programming melted down because he was experiencing the urge to swat the fly.  That reinforces the theme with Delores.

[minirth]

Is venting our aggression -- howsoever we choose to do so -- positive?  Or negative?  So long as we don't distress other people in the process, it may actually be beneficial.  And beating up or sexually "abusing" a machine built for that very purpose -- is it actually causing distress to other people?

I think venting one's aggression can be positive or negative depending on the person.  There's the idea that releasing aggression by pursuing violent experiences acts as a pressure valve, bleeding off excess aggression, and then there's the idea that the wolf you feed is the one that grows, demanding that each subsequent experience be more intense, more violent, more destructive.  I think the show will explore both of these ranges of response -- remember the guy on the train casually recounting his second trip as "straight-up evil", smiling as he said those were the best weeks of his life?  I don't think his fundamental moral nature was changed; he seemed to have a 'healthy' psychological remove -- or is it healthy?  I love the nesting questions this show offers.

And what about the causing distress to 'people' issue?   Is it possible to sever the brutal act from the recipient of the violence?  Is the sin the act of hurting another person, or is the sin simply the commission of the crime?  Can you do something to an AI that would forever change you if you did it to a person, without having it shape the rest of your life?  Or is it a poison that slowly spreads?

*I missed the original Robot Rape Debate back in the day on televisionwithoutpity's Battlestar Galactica forums, and I'm looking forward to seeing how the show and we as commentators explore it.

[calliope1975]

If this is a continuation from the movie, maybe Ed Harris was there during the first meltdown. 

[WaltersHair]

Quote

ETA: Here is my burning question from the premiere. Who would bring a kid here (for 40K per year)?

The parents say something about not crossing the river because it would be too adult for the kid. So there must be areas for kids only or G rated.  And it took an entire conversation before the kid realized Delores wasn't real, so I don't think guests have a chart of hosts.  Too many unanswered questions.

[CofCinci]

I'm going to guess that while the Ms. Cullen HBIC character comes across as robotic, she's human and the twist is that Jeffrey Wright's chatacter is Anthony Hopkin's robo-son.  Most likely modeled after Hopkin's dead son who is the kid in the old picture.

Ed Harris' character may be a sadist, but perhaps he has begun to uncover what Westworld means to the shareholders and the managers -- and is actually the hero?. Higher-level game play.

[Gobi]

I agree with those who think that Hopkins' character is trying to bring about  the singularity.

I wondered about the guns/bullets, and was able to justify it as have  others here. Knives, axes, etc., however, are another question. Presumably, the penalties for violence against humans are the same in and outside West World. After all, it's not as if people are continually being shot at rifle ranges IRL.

I wonder if we'll learn anything about the outside world? It seems that the hosts would be ideal for work people didn't want to do or was too dangerous. Are there robots in the outside world, or is the cost prohibitive?

[Miles]

10 hours ago, sjohnson said:

Also, too much penis, which I expect to disappear. 

Where? The only ones I saw were in the room with the decomissioned androids and those were from very far away.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Miles

[Marsupial]

I'm ambivalent. It's got a great cast; I adore Evan Rachel Wood in everything I've seen her in and this is no exception. Same for Ed Harris and Anthony Hopkins. That said, I can see it going the same route that made me stop watching GOT, an overemphasis on sadistic and/or sexual violence at the expense of story, character and everything else.

Quote

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

Same here. And as I said, being HBO and seeing the ongoing popularity of GOT, I predict that will only get worse. Besides, if I need a good androids-vs.-humans story I'll watch "Humans."

I don't think I'll be back.

[MissScarlett]

Mr. Scarlett and I just finished watching the first episode. I was drawn in from the very first scene to the last! I am definitely all in for this season. Great premise, great cast, good storytelling so far!

I also wonder, how can you distinguish the newcomers from the hosts? Aside from hosts not being able to shoot / kill humans and humans being able to shoot / kill hosts. Couldn't humans get a little too caught up in the game and start going after other humans?

Edited October 5, 2016 by MissScarlett

[atomationage]

I think the newcomers recognize the hosts as stock characters like in a video game, or they could be in the brochure for the resort.

[call me ishmael]

8 hours ago, calliope1975 said:

If this is a continuation from the movie, maybe Ed Harris was there during the first meltdown. 

I think that that is really possible.  I can't believe that the fact that he has been coming for 30 years, that there hasn't been a breakdown in 30 years, and that it is roughly 30 years since the movie is a coincidence.  I wouldn't be surprised if the photo that Delores' father found isn't tied to the Ed Harris character and possibly to whateve happened 30 years earlier.

Also wasn't the design inside the scalp the same as a design within the park that we saw in the coming weeks previews.

I assume that Anthony Hopkins is trying to get the androids to up their sentience.  After all, wasn't the point of his natural selection spiel that you need error to evolve?  He clearly wants there to be some further evolution and since he thinks humanity has reaches its limit...

[minirth]

Also wasn't the design inside the scalp the same as a design within the park that we saw in the coming weeks previews.

Yes, it appeared on top of a plateau somewhere, like it was burned into the earth.

Btw, my friend last night immediately said "circuit board" when she saw the scalp design.  

[WaltersHair]

Quote

Also wasn't the design inside the scalp the same as a design within the park that we saw in the coming weeks previews.

Yes, it appeared on top of a plateau somewhere, like it was burned into the earth.

Btw, my friend last night immediately said "circuit board" when she saw the scalp design.  

Pima Indian design. Interesting information on that. Man in the Maze.

[numbnut]

On 10/3/2016 at 1:11 PM, numbnut said:

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.

I just found out that it will cost guests $40,000 per day to visit this Westworld. Holy crap!

[KaleyFirefly]

19 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I assume the hosts keep to their "part", with language and all.  Another guest would probably be cursing and obviously speaking differently so the raping guest could figure it out.  No doubt they signed some sort of contract against such acts against another guest and if they break the contract, they get kicked out, fined, and possibly criminally prosecuted.

This can't be true, though, because when Evil Ed Harris was dragging Dolores off to rape her, she was crying and screaming just as a real person would be.