S01.E03: The Stray

[arc]

On 10/17/2016 at 3:29 PM, Gobi said:

I found Ford's attitude towards the hosts odd in this  episode. Previously, he seemed favorably disposed toward them. Here, he was downright hostile. Is he angry because they have not become self-aware, or because they seem to be becoming so?

Ford's new narrative is interesting. Wyatt believes that the land doesn't belong to the original settlers (hosts?), nor to the newcomers (guests?). Is Ford creating some new type of host that will inherit the earth?

On a second watch, I think the interaction between Ford and Teddy is more crucial than it first appeared. Ford: "Would you like that, Teddy? A small part of my new narrative? A fiction, which like all great stories, is rooted in truth? It starts in a time of war, a world in flames, with a villain called... Wyatt." And after uploading the new narrative to Teddy, Teddy exposited: "[Wyatt] claimed he could hear the voice of God."

Then connect that to Ford's explanation of the bicameral mind hypothesis: "[...] and two, the other group who considered their thoughts to be voices of the gods."

(BTW, I think there's a 99% chance that Arnold's last name was Wyatt.)

47 minutes ago, Goatherd said:

Okay, probably a ridiculous thought, but I can’t get it out of my head…

What if the androids were named alphabetically in the order of their creation:

In the pilot, Ford said Old Bill (the bartender) was the second host ever built.

[Bill1978]

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

While Dolores was having her initial heart to heart with Teddy about saying someday instead of tomorrow, I kept hoping that she was about to lean into Teddy and whisper what her Dad said to her and what she said to Maeve. So I was disappointed that Teddy has not had a chance to wake up yet. Although since he seems to be Westworld's Kenny maybe it is a good thing he is aware yet.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Bill1978
Ignore the spoilers, They were an accident and I have no idea how to remove them. There is nothing uder them.

[NutMeg]

So many interesting posts, that since yesterday I'm apparently not allowed to "like". So yeah, a big collective +1 to all of you.

My theory: this whole experiment started as a non profit, then the schism between Andrew and Ford happened, but it still remained a non profit research center. Thereafter, or even during the Andrew/Ford time, costs of development became too high, so they invited investors with the incentive of a money making theme park. Now the seed/outside investors are no longer happy with just the theme park returns and want the technology to have a wider use and better returns. And maybe that's why Ford (who's not motivated by money) has decided to show them how wrong they are and how his creatures could wreak havoc on the world. 

[Gobi]

I don't think Arnold is TMIB or Wyatt (two popular theories), and he's not dead.

Spoiler

He's a Terminator, sent back in time to kill Sarah Connor.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Gobi
Spoiler

[DarkRaichu]

7 hours ago, Goatherd said:

Okay, probably a ridiculous thought, but I can’t get it out of my head…

What if the androids were named alphabetically in the order of their creation:

Arnold —first android, or perhaps, as suggested here, the result of the human Arnold uploading his memories into one

Bernard — because, why not start by building yourself an assistant?

Charlie (Bernard’s "son" — maybe I’ve misremembered the name, but it definitely started with a “C”) — further details still to be revealed

Dolores — fourth android but first “host”, since the others are behind-the-scenes workers

Not sure what this would mean for Elsie…

Interesting theory, but as arc mentioned, Old Bill was the second.  Also, Bernard also said he joined a few years after the park opened.  

So to amend your theory,  I think Bernard is either the 28th or the 54th host.  In other words, like hurricanes, the host names go from a-z then cycle back to a ;)

[numbnut]

On 10/18/2016 at 0:20 PM, arc said:

I was also surprised when Stubbs said they needed to retrieve the chip, or whatever he said, but then instead of opening an access port, he went to saw off the entire head of the stray.

They mentioned that Stubbs couldn't carry the huge robot back to operations so he would just take the head. The robots don't seem to have port holes (so they can look fully human when naked), so access to the chip probably requires some sort of surgery.

[Quilt Fairy]

58 minutes ago, numbnut said:

I was also surprised when Stubbs said they needed to retrieve the chip, or whatever he said,

I think he said control module, which in today's terms would be a chip or a circuit board.

[VCRTracking]

Looking at the animated narrative template for Dolores's day from HBO secret website, I want to believe that at least half the guests just want to "woo" Dolores, but that just might be wishful thinking.

Edited October 19, 2016 by VCRTracking

[numbnut]

2 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

3 hours ago, numbnut said:

I was also surprised when Stubbs said they needed to retrieve the chip, or whatever he said,

I think he said control module, which in today's terms would be a chip or a circuit board.

That was arc's quote about Stubbs, not mine. Weird.

Edited October 19, 2016 by numbnut

[Quilt Fairy]

I think that happened because I was too lazy to go back and find the original post and just quoted it from inside your post, and it attached your name to it.

[numbnut]

On second watch I noticed that in Bernard's flashback of his son's death, the med staff were dressed in red/white just like the park's med staff. Do all hospital staff wear red/white in the future or was the kid a robot in the park? The latter would go well with my Bernard/robot theory. And Ford's description of Arnold sounds like Bernard, so I'm wondering if Ford created Bernard with Arnold's consciousness. Hmm. *more head scratching*

I also wonder if Delores and William will wind up at the sea (the one Teddy described) at the end of the series.

Edited October 20, 2016 by numbnut

[ennui]

14 hours ago, numbnut said:

I also wonder if Delores and William will wind up at the sea (the one Teddy described) at the end of the series.

Now I'm thinking of Splash, with Darryl Hannah and Tom Hanks. These mixed marriages are tough.  

I really want the villains to turn up again. I thought the gun fight was the best part of the premiere. More Hector, please.

Edited October 20, 2016 by ennui

[Milburn Stone]

On 10/17/2016 at 3:24 PM, blackwing said:

I'm still unclear as to exactly what is happening, and who is a host and who is a guest, but I am enjoying the scenery and the exposition.

I'm kind of there with you, except that one other thing I'm enjoying a lot is the philosophical question: If a robot reacts the way she does because she's programmed by Ford & Co. to react that way, with some room allowed for improvisation, then what is the difference between her and me, who reacts the way I do because I've been programmed by DNA and upbringing, with some room allowed for improvisation?

[CrashTextDummie]

I'm very intrigued by this show. I think the most impressive aspect to me is how they manage to make the hosts simultaneously sympathetic and yet faintly menacing. The malfunctions are already pretty severe and even likeable hosts like Dolores, Teddy and Maeve seem like they could be capable of terrible deeds further down the line. Scenes like the one with the stray are already creating palpable tension. I was similarly on the edge of my seat during Teddy's cultist encounter. It seems to be part of Ford's new storyline, but felt "wrong" on several levels: I don't think guests are supposed to be scared shitless the way that poor lady was, I figure quests in WW are supposed to be fundamentally beatable. In general, enough of the show is currently shrouded in enough mystery that events remain unpredictable. 

One of my biggest question marks is about timelines. In particular, I'm not convinced that the "backstage" segments necessarily line up chronologically with park scenes as the show presents them. Do we know how long loops are? Are the loops the same length for every host? We've seen Dolores drop a lot of cans so far, but does that mean that she starts every day like that or did we witness the first day of another seven day loop every time? I missed it while watching, but talk among commenters seems to be that guests sign up for 7 days (and we've seen guests spend the night) and it would kind of break immersion if they saw the same character perform the same thing every morning, wouldn't it? This also raises the question for me if TMIB and William for example are sharing the same timeline. Even though the William = TMIB theory seems to be debunked, I don't think we've seen any evidence that they are at the park concurrently.

Overall, I'm loving the acting and production values, so the show really is working on every level for me so far.

[Gobi]

1 hour ago, Milburn Stone said:

I'm kind of there with you, except that one other thing I'm enjoying a lot is the philosophical question: If a robot reacts the way she does because she's programmed by Ford & Co. to react that way, with some room allowed for improvisation, then what is the difference between her and me, who reacts the way I do because I've been programmed by DNA and upbringing, with some room allowed for improvisation?

There is a whole other thread here to discuss those issues  if you're interested.

[arc]

30 minutes ago, CrashTextDummie said:

Do we know how long loops are? Are the loops the same length for every host? […] I missed it while watching, but talk among commenters seems to be that guests sign up for 7 days (and we've seen guests spend the night) and it would kind of break immersion if they saw the same character perform the same thing every morning, wouldn't it?

Maximum stay is 28 days, minimum is 7. It seems fairly likely that Dolores is on a daily loop, but we don't know for sure. Teddy starts on a train, so his minimum loop may be 7 days. The saloon robbers come by in the second week, so their minimum loop is two weeks... but I suspect they don't rob the saloon twice, so probably that's a full month scenario. The cattle drive was late by two days due to the stray, so the cattle drive probably arrives only once or twice. (It makes the most sense to me if each half of the trip and and out takes two weeks or so, so they can get back to the starting point and loop back towards Sweetwater. Maybe.)

I'm on a "loop" where I take the subway about the same time every weekday and get into the office about the same time every weekday. So it wouldn't necessarily be that immersion-breaking for Dolores to buy stuff every day. Seeing her drop the can every day might be, but you'd have to be a pretty obsessed guest to be in the same place every day, because you'd be on vacation and presumably wouldn't be doing repetitive things during your stay.

BTW, it also looks like there are elevators all under Westworld, which implies there's a modern transportation system underground for fast travel from the HQ to any point. But the elevators are regular human size; it would be highly impractical to move a cattle drive back to the starting point even with underground trains while using elevators that size to get them to and from the underground.

[djsunyc]

what's the android's strength level?  are they turned all the way down so they are more human and so guests can take advantage and hurt them?  could they raise up the levels where they can crush skulls with their bare hands?

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, Gobi said:

There is a whole other thread here to discuss those [moral, ethical, philosophical] issues if you're interested.

Thanks for the tip, Gobi. I just went over there to post.

[Gobi]

37 minutes ago, djsunyc said:

what's the android's strength level?  are they turned all the way down so they are more human and so guests can take advantage and hurt them?  could they raise up the levels where they can crush skulls with their bare hands?

That hasn't been addressed so far. The stray lifted a rather large rock, but I'd say it wasn't beyond what a human of his size could lift. I haven't seen anything done by a host yet that was beyond human capability; or beneath, for that matter.

[Quilt Fairy]

10 hours ago, Gobi said:

I haven't seen anything done by a host yet that was beyond human capability; or beneath, for that matter.

Don't forget Delores not being able to squeeze the gun trigger at Teddy's shooting lesson. That was obviously a programming block since she was able to do it later under duress.

[Pippin]

On 2016-10-17 at 0:36 PM, dmc said:

I think is why they don't have a lot of guests...but to your point...how are they paying for it.

I was thinking while watching the scene where they were reconstructing an android's eye that surely there was a lot of medical side benefits from this technology.  The ability to make convincing skin, or replacement organs would be a welcome and sought-after technology and would probably bring in a lot of dollars. 

I'm sure there are military applications as well, and those are probably what the boss lady was cryptically referring to in ep. 1.  Imagine an army that can't be killed and that can be programmed to do anything you want.  Of course, neutralizing that First Law may lead to some unforeseen and messy complications, as any reader of Asimov knows, and that may be the monkey wrench in said plans.

I have to say that if I were living in the "Westworld" universe, I would not find that particular amusement park particularly attractive.  Call me soft, urbanized and spoiled, but I prefer indoor plumbing and air conditioning.  The only thing that I might find mildly attractive is the horseback riding, because I love horses and riding. 

But I'd much rather go on an adventure that had included modern conveniences; say, warping around the universe on the good ship Enterprise, for instance.

And can I just add that I'm loving all the speculation and discussion on these threads?  Reminds me of the salad days of Lost on TWoP.  (*Sigh*)

[ACW]

On 10/21/2016 at 2:13 PM, CrashTextDummie said:

 Even though the William = TMIB theory seems to be debunked, I don't think we've seen any evidence that they are at the park concurrently.

It's not looking good for the theory, but I'm still rationalizing excuses.  We don't yet know for sure that Delores runs into William's camp after the shooting we saw; this could still be a separate incident 30 years previously. We'll probably know for sure (?) tomorrow night.

[queenanne]

On 10/16/2016 at 11:21 PM, bmoore4026 said:

Oh, dear.  Bernard gave Dolores "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland".  Foreshadowing to hell and back because "Little Alice" is waking up, and it looks like Westworld is "nothing but a pack of cards".  Think about it, won't you?  Thank you.

Plus, isn't that "Alice blue" they've stuck her in as her major costume?

On 10/17/2016 at 11:55 AM, Hanahope said:

I think there are some story lines that do play out even if no guest is there to see it.  

I'm no game maven so this won't sound too technical of me, but isn't this a main staple of video gaming as-is?  You can choose to view the benign placid backstory introductions and loops that inform the plot; or you can skim right past them and jump to the action.  You can get caught in a repeating loop and need to figure out "the trick" to get past it, or else you get tossed into a benign sector running/not running down your lives and powers; or, more frequently for a little extra added frisson, be kept in grade-A active play being attacked by said baddies.  Thus it makes sense that Westworld has adaptive storytelling in-game.  It can be interrupted; it may not be interrupted.  It needs to be "there" as an option so that guest-type people don't just wander around.

Tonight I think I finally got it, after being dull about the tale's overarching purpose for the prior episodes:  it's like a continuation of "Memento" for Nolan, isn't it?  All about the stories we tell ourselves, and the stories we tell others; in order to make sense out of the world and to survive.  Our brains collude with programming to write our reality.  I got it when we heard Teddy rewrite his history on the fly, and saw Ford doing the programming.

Miscellaneous:  I think it will be tough for me to care about William inevitably cheating on his fiancé since we don't know the fiancé.  I can see how it would have been difficult to drag her along considering the stated purpose, but since she's not real to me I don't much care if she gets hurt by his actions.  I also feel any consequences that would redound to him from his point of view by "doing her wrong" less sharply, if at all.

I agree overall with the primary meta-objection to the sex-bot purpose as: I'm trying to imagine wanting to have sex with even the most lifelike bot (a) more than once, if it (b) comes with a $40,000/day price tag, and I can't see it.  I might see it at $400 a ride/visit; $40,000 seems untenable.  Then I thought, this could be a good way for Delos to rule the world, by popularizing the technology of the sex-bot outside Westworld, but that doesn't seem financially effective either, plus others have debunked it along these past couple of pages, so. 

[ACW]

1 hour ago, queenanne said:

 

Miscellaneous:  I think it will be tough for me to care about William inevitably cheating on his fiancé since we don't know the fiancé.  I can see how it would have been difficult to drag her along considering the stated purpose, but since she's not real to me I don't much care if she gets hurt by his actions.

Unless Logan was talking about a different sister, we know that William's fiance "rode her share of cowboys" on her own visit. They might not have been engaged yet then, of course.

  In any case, I think we're expected to care about William's (and Delores') emotional state, not the fiancé's.

Edited October 23, 2016 by ACW
Clarification

[Netfoot]

17 minutes ago, queenanne said:

I might see it at $400 a ride/visit; $40,000 seems untenable. 

I agree, but I tell myself this is the year 5678, and a burger cost $224.99 and $299.99 if you want fries.  For all I know.

And after all, people pay tens of thousands of dollars to play a round of golf, and that is today!  And you don't get your rocks off!

[Pippin]

One other thing I wanted to suggest and forgot re raising income:  what about the corporation selling android pets to the outside world?  The programming would be much simpler for one thing.  I bring this up because I just lost 2 kittens to FIP and I have to tell you, at this point in time if someone offered me an android kitten indistinguishable from the real thing, one that would never age, get sick, or die, I'd be tempted.  Same with dogs and horses. (Ultimately I'd probably say "no" because of my ethical concern about the needs of real animals, but I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't have my concerns.)

[numbnut]

3 hours ago, ACW said:

On 10/21/2016 at 11:13 AM, CrashTextDummie said:

Even though the William = TMIB theory seems to be debunked, I don't think we've seen any evidence that they are at the park concurrently.

It's not looking good for the theory, but I'm still rationalizing excuses.  We don't yet know for sure that Delores runs into William's camp after the shooting we saw; this could still be a separate incident 30 years previously. We'll probably know for sure (?) tomorrow night.

The Hart Beat review holds the same hope. He noted that J. Nolan likes to reveal surprises involving timelines, and pointed out how the shiny white train station (where William arrives) looks like a before picture of the crumbling underground area seen in the pilot.

Edited October 23, 2016 by numbnut

[Uncle JUICE]

7 hours ago, ACW said:

Unless Logan was talking about a different sister, we know that William's fiance "rode her share of cowboys" on her own visit. They might not have been engaged yet then, of course.

  In any case, I think we're expected to care about William's (and Delores') emotional state, not the fiancé's.

Are we sure he'd be cheating? Why would it be any different than a woman using a vibrator? I'm not saying it is or isn't, but it's one of the cool questions this show raises. 

[bmoore4026]

10 hours ago, queenanne said:

Plus, isn't that "Alice blue" they've stuck her in as her major costume?

It is indeed

[Netfoot]

9 hours ago, ACW said:

In any case, I think we're expected to care about William's (and Delores') emotional state, not the fiancé's.

It may just be me, but every time his fiancée gets mentioned, he seems to show little real interest in the prospect of marrying her.  

Perhaps the show isn't about the real or synthesized emotional attachments exhibited by the hosts, but about the very real emotional attachments exhibited by the humans towards the hosts?  I mean, can a host fall in love?  Don't know.  Can a person fall in love with a host?  Yes!  And given that the hosts are chattels, and their owner can utilize them as such, how will the human react to see them "abused", even though possibly technically and certainly legally, abuse isn't possible?

[sjohnson]

^^^This is why in my opinion the central characters are Dolores and Maeve. The ones with the real agency are Ford and Bernard of course, but given the covert equation of hosts to slaves, Jeffrey Wright's character is inherently ambiguous while the patriarch Ford, like all good patriarchs, is wonderfully..whimsical. Patriarchal tyranny is displaced onto Johnny Cash. Thus the show can't really center on dramatic choices, which is one reason I think it's not gelling at all. Not for me anyhow. 

The show has also shouted out about its meta nature: Sizemore's stories tell us about him; stories should instead tell about what we could be; stories are about what we want the most and/or have the least; backstories are our motivation; great stories have a grain of truth. I think it's very unlikely that any of the stories we have seen thus far in Westworld exemplify any of this. This is four episodes in, this is very confused I think. 

We've seen mechanical parts in partially disassembled "hosts." We've seen milky plastic (=semen, in symbolism I believe,) as in 3D printing, which is a solid inert material making up parts. And we've heard of organic disease and seen blood, so they are flesh and blood slaves too. This is all so very, very confused. 

[NutMeg]

Why is Dolores the only host who is fully dressed when back for maintenance (for lack of a better word)?

[Gobi]

1 minute ago, NutMeg said:

Why is Dolores the only host who is fully dressed when back for maintenance (for lack of a better word)?

Bernard has been having private conversations with Dolores, that he is is careful to order her not to mention  to anyone else. This is not routine maintenance.

[Mackey]

My biggest hurdle with this show is the "she's in pain/she has MRSA" element. Almost everything else sort of fits together. Questions about what makes a human, human, have been around for so long. But, I don't recall having to philosophically deal with physical pain and bio diseases before in book and film "are they humans?" pieces.  The disease and pain  seems to make an enitity a human-made human. I don't like it. I especially don't like it when we see how they are being made and it's that white stuff and wires. I especially-especially don't like it when we were just shown Ford showing a worker how the hosts don't hurt. 

Sjohnson  has expressed some of the same confusion that I have:

8 hours ago, sjohnson said:

We've seen mechanical parts in partially disassembled "hosts." We've seen milky plastic (=semen, in symbolism I believe,) as in 3D printing, which is a solid inert material making up parts. And we've heard of organic disease and seen blood, so they are flesh and blood slaves too. This is all so very, very confused. 

[Gobi]

4 minutes ago, Mackey said:

My biggest hurdle with this show is the "she's in pain/she has MRSA" element. Almost everything else sort of fits together. Questions about what makes a human, human, have been around for so long. But, I don't recall having to philosophically deal with physical pain and bio diseases before in book and film "are they humans?" pieces.  The disease and pain  seems to make an enitity a human-made human. I don't like it. I especially don't like it when we see how they are being made and it's that white stuff and wires. I especially-especially don't like it when we were just shown Ford showing a worker how the hosts don't hurt. 

Sjohnson  has expressed some of the same confusion that I have:

They're cyborgs, with both mechanical and organic components. From the look of  things, I'd say that the organic predominates; for them to be so realistic, it would have to.

[Netfoot]

1 hour ago, Gobi said:

They're cyborgs, with both mechanical and organic components. From the look of  things, I'd say that the organic predominates; for them to be so realistic, it would have to.

What appears to be organic material may simply be a amalgamation of nano-technological machines.  The milk-bath may be a suspension of a very large number of nanites in a fluid designed to facilitate their mobility.  The skeletal structure is dipped into a vat of nanite-rich fluid, and the nanites migrate into their final positions and coalesce into larger structures as needed.

The problem with this show, is that we have no idea what sort of era it is occurring in, and no backdrop of technological status-quo to base our suppositions and speculations on.  But given the level of sophistication that we are seeing in the physical bodies of the hosts, and the high order of programming that appears to control them, it seems obvious that extremely advanced technological capabilities are a part of human culture.  Virtually any technological theory we can advanced, is at least possible, to some degree.

[Mackey]

My biggest hurdle with this show is the "she's in pain/she has MRSA" element. Almost everything else sort of fits together. Questions about what makes a human, human, have been around for so long. But, I don't recall having to philosophically deal with physical pain and bio diseases before in book and film "are they humans?" pieces.  The disease and pain  seems to make an enitity a human-made human. I don't like it. I especially don't like it when we see how they are being made and it's that white stuff and wires. I especially-especially don't like it when we were just shown Ford showing a worker how the hosts don't hurt. 

Sjohnson  has expressed some of the same confusion that I have:

13 hours ago, sjohnson said:

We've seen mechanical parts in partially disassembled "hosts." We've seen milky plastic (=semen, in symbolism I believe,) as in 3D printing, which is a solid inert material making up parts. And we've heard of organic disease and seen blood, so they are flesh and blood slaves too. This is all so very, very confused. 

Oops. This is dated. I forgot to submit. 

[dmc]

On 10/22/2016 at 2:10 AM, Pippin said:

I was thinking while watching the scene where they were reconstructing an android's eye that surely there was a lot of medical side benefits from this technology.  The ability to make convincing skin, or replacement organs would be a welcome and sought-after technology and would probably bring in a lot of dollars. 

I'm sure there are military applications as well, and those are probably what the boss lady was cryptically referring to in ep. 1.  Imagine an army that can't be killed and that can be programmed to do anything you want.  Of course, neutralizing that First Law may lead to some unforeseen and messy complications, as any reader of Asimov knows, and that may be the monkey wrench in said plans.

I have to say that if I were living in the "Westworld" universe, I would not find that particular amusement park particularly attractive.  Call me soft, urbanized and spoiled, but I prefer indoor plumbing and air conditioning.  The only thing that I might find mildly attractive is the horseback riding, because I love horses and riding. 

But I'd much rather go on an adventure that had included modern conveniences; say, warping around the universe on the good ship Enterprise, for instance.

And can I just add that I'm loving all the speculation and discussion on these threads?  Reminds me of the salad days of Lost on TWoP.  (*Sigh*)

I do love horseback riding but that's it. Warping around the universe sounds fun.

[arc]

Let's talk a bit about the premise of the show. In this ep, Ford says "The guests enjoyed power. They cannot indulge it in the outside world, so they come here." ... but Westworld costs a staggering amount to visit. It's not so far in the future that inflation has made a $40K/day rate affordable to the public. Nolan has said in an interview that it's the 21st century, which I know isn't as canon as hearing it explicitly on the show, but various guests have also said in-show that it's a lot of money. And yet Westworld has repeat guests; it depends on the few who can afford it to fall in love with the place and come back over and over. That is, their clientele is very rich.

So why wouldn't very rich people be able to indulge the use of power in their real lives? It can't be sex, rich people have their Eyes Wide Shut sex clubs. Shoot, real high-end brothels still don't cost $40K a day. The illusion of murder? I mean, there's paintball and airsoft, plus videogames.

[phoenyx]

On 10/29/2016 at 3:34 AM, arc said:

Let's talk a bit about the premise of the show. In this ep, Ford says "The guests enjoyed power. They cannot indulge it in the outside world, so they come here." ... but Westworld costs a staggering amount to visit. It's not so far in the future that inflation has made a $40K/day rate affordable to the public. Nolan has said in an interview that it's the 21st century, which I know isn't as canon as hearing it explicitly on the show, but various guests have also said in-show that it's a lot of money. And yet Westworld has repeat guests; it depends on the few who can afford it to fall in love with the place and come back over and over. That is, their clientele is very rich.

So why wouldn't very rich people be able to indulge the use of power in their real lives? It can't be sex, rich people have their Eyes Wide Shut sex clubs. Shoot, real high-end brothels still don't cost $40K a day. The illusion of murder? I mean, there's paintball and airsoft, plus videogames.

I think you make some good points, with one caveat- paintball and airsoft isn't nearly as realistic as what happens in Westworld to the androids. It's more than that too- Westworld is tailor made for guests.

Spoiler

 

I think Logan says it best in Episode 4, after he realizes that William likes Dolores. His belief that Westworld staff had arranged for her to come is clearly mistaken, and I also think he's wrong that staff watch people's every move (I think there's just way too many people and staff also have to make sure the androids are doing their proper routines as well), but I think it's also clear that Logan is aware that Westworld staff -do- shape events in Westworld to give a better experience to the guests. Here's Logan's conversation with William in Episode 4:

**

Logan: Oh. Oh. Now I get it.

William: What?

Logan: The park sent her so that you will finally have something to give a shit about.

William: Oh, yeah, I'm sure the people at the controls are monitoring my every mood.

Logan: That's exactly what they're doing. Come on, you really think it's a coincidence that the only thing that you even smiled at back in Sweetwater just happened to drop into your lap? This is why the company needs to bump our stake in this place. They can even give you a sense of purpose.

 

***

Edited December 13, 2016 by saoirse
Please spoiler tag future ep info

[jeansheridan]

I also think there's a prestige to going to Westworld.  It's like some of the super wealthy people who hope to go to the Space Station someday.  And I actually think there are currently plenty of people right now who could spend $40,000 a day for such an experience.  Star football players, Serena Williams, big movie stars, tech millionaires, etc ...And imagine if a corporation offered it as a perk to their executives?  Apple, Microsoft, Walmart, etc.

The blackmail potential however seems very high to me.  Clearly the park films everything.  The data they have would clearly be worth a lot in the real world so corporate espionage seems likely.

My big beef is that it is the old West, a time period I especially loath.  It's right up there with Europe's Plague Years for me in terms of time periods I would not want to visit.  

[phoenyx]

For those who have only seen up to episode 3 so far, I think the following is a good article as it was written right after that episode. It outlines the birth of the 2 time period theory. Also for those who just like reading good articles on Westworld, regardless of what episode the author was on :-p...

DOLORES IS KEY TO A 'WESTWORLD' TWIST YOU MAY HAVE MISSED

[jeansheridan]

Rewatching while digesting my cranberry tofu meal and Ford casually says to Bernard that is is so hard to weave the old with the new!  Gah.  So meta if the nonlinear time line is true.  

Edited November 25, 2016 by jeansheridan

[kieyra]

Just now catching up with the show. I watched this episode last night, and had the same reaction as many initial posts on page 1: I was both confused and had trouble staying awake. They're also not giving me enough to reasons to care about playing "spot the cylon". (I'm also having some tech and world-building grouchiness, but I suppose that's nit-picky.)

Briefly, can anyone let me know if they clean some of this stuff up on later episodes? Someone on page one mentioned a problem with reshoots. We're trying to decide whether to continue watching. Thanks in advance!

[okerry]

Did you start with episode 1? If not, be sure to watch them in order - and also remember that you are watching a story from one of the Nolans, who are known for non-linear storytelling.

Just stay with it and let it take you for a ride. Keep your eye on Maeve. Things do pick up after episode three. (Most) all is made clear by the end of episode 10. Give it a chance! It's some of the most sophisticated, and genuinely moving, pieces of TV storytelling that I've ever seen.

Would you like to see one of the hosts walk through the underground labs and find out the truth of what they really are? Keep watching!

[kieyra]

5 hours ago, okerry said:

Did you start with episode 1? If not, be sure to watch them in order - and also remember that you are watching a story from one of the Nolans, who are known for non-linear storytelling.

Just stay with it and let it take you for a ride. Keep your eye on Maeve. Things do pick up after episode three. (Most) all is made clear by the end of episode 10. Give it a chance! It's some of the most sophisticated, and genuinely moving, pieces of TV storytelling that I've ever seen.

Would you like to see one of the hosts walk through the underground labs and find out the truth of what they really are? Keep watching!

Sorry, yes, we watched all three in order. If you read the first ten or twenty posts of this thread, my reaction was similar to the posters who were somewhat nonplussed and had trouble engaging with the episode. (Also I genuinely had trouble staying awake.) The lack of consistency in world-building is also bugging me. (Extravagant levels of wealth and technology, but they keep the retired bots in a moldy flooded basement? Huh? They can't even afford afford some spare body bags like Wild Bill got? And the techs carry the inert bots around by their arms and legs? Because they can't afford stretchers or even just a wheeled cart? Huh?)

I'm admittedly not a Christopher Nolan fan, but I did enjoy Person of Interest quite a bit. I can do "high concept" if there appears to be a clear story behind it all and not just a buildup for some mindfuck/"gotcha!" thing.

Anyway, will give it another episode.

(I think I already did see the host walking around the lab, if you mean the one who was inexplicably having surgery for MRSA.)

[ElectricBoogaloo]

The line from episode 2 ("The only thing that keeps the hosts from killing us all is one line of your code. So yeah, I sleep with my gun.") made me wonder if the gang that Teddy couldn't shoot was made of hosts who had somehow had that one line of code altered. I don't know by whom, but just an alternative to the gang all being human.

During this episode, I realized that when Bernard peers through his glasses a certain way, he reminds me of Laurence Fishburne when he plays Pops on Black-ish, so I clapped my hands with glee when I saw that Gina Torres was Bernard's ex-wife (she played LF's wife on Hannibal).

Edited December 13, 2016 by ElectricBoogaloo

[theatremouse]

17 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

The line from episode 2 ("The only thing that keeps the hosts from killing us all is one line of your code. So yeah, I sleep with my gun.") made me wonder if the gang that Teddy couldn't shoot was made of hosts who had somehow had that one line of code altered.

Were that one line of code altered, it'd imply the hosts could kill humans, not that they couldn't kill other hosts...although I suppose one would need to see the line of code in question to know for sure. I guess it could go either way, and depends on if the way the hosts can kill each other is some sort of "only kill things if they have X beacon" or something and, being hosts, they all have those but humans don't because they're human, so if that were deleted it'd let them kill anyone; but you could theoretically convince a host another host were human (or just unkillable) by turning off their "I'm a host" signal, if such a thing were possible. Still sounds like that'd be a different line of code...

I am overthinking this.

[SlackerInc]

On 12/10/2016 at 7:21 AM, kieyra said:

Just now catching up with the show. I watched this episode last night, and had the same reaction as many initial posts on page 1: I was both confused and had trouble staying awake. They're also not giving me enough to reasons to care about playing "spot the cylon". (I'm also having some tech and world-building grouchiness, but I suppose that's nit-picky.)

Briefly, can anyone let me know if they clean some of this stuff up on later episodes? Someone on page one mentioned a problem with reshoots. We're trying to decide whether to continue watching. Thanks in advance!

I'm just now catching up myself, three months after you.  My initial reaction to this episode was exhilaration: any concerns I had previously about where they might be going were (at least for the nonce) wiped away.  Definitely my favorite of the three I've seen so far.  So I was surprised to see that as you say, a lot of people thought it was disappointing.  Apparently this was true among critics as well; Alyssa Rosenberg of the Washington Post opened her review as follows:

Quote

For some of my critic friends who liked “Westworld” less than I did, this episode seems to be where they started to feel like the show was going off the rails. But for me, “The Stray” is the episode where “Westworld” started to feel special, where the show fully committed to the sadness that’s connected to its mystery.

I'm with Rosenberg, obviously; but maybe this episode is a kind of litmus test.  All I know is that I hope it continues (continued) in this vein and not in the direction the people who don't like the episode want(ed) it to go.