S01.E04: Dissonance Theory

[djsunyc]

2 minutes ago, meep.meep said:

 

I want to know why the host servants all got stuck during Ford's lunch with the security chief.

he raised his finger to stop them and then raised them again to start them again.  he was showing off his power.

[dgpolo]

Quote

The little girl didn't mention Orion, she mentioned the Arroyo.  "Follow the Arroyo of blood."  It's a wash or a dry creek bed.

Ah, sorry, hearing must be going.

Also meant to put in my other post that the only music I recognized, or thought I recognized, don't want to be caught out again. Was the Habanera (?) Aria from Carmen. About a rebellious bird?

[CouchTater]

-

Edited October 25, 2016 by CouchTater

[phoenyx]

Just found a video on Business insider that reveals 8 things people may have missed about Episode 4. 2 of them were already figured out by people here, a certain song from The Cure was used, and Ford using his finger to control androids and animal robots...

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[Black Knight]

1 hour ago, meep.meep said:

I want to know why Dolores is always dressed when Bernard talks with her.

I think dgpolo's theory below is why:

1 hour ago, dgpolo said:

When Bernard asked Dolores where she was or what she was doing or something to that effect, she responded 'Dreaming' I'm inclined to believe that. Bernard talks to her in her dreams, or what passes for them. She needn't go to headquarters or whatever.

Since Dolores is in her "dream," her mind has her dressed as she was when she went into sleep mode. On Bernard's end, I think he's interacting with DreamDolores in the form of a hologram he can summon up when she's in sleep mode.

The clothes are the tell, in my opinion. Robots not wearing clothes are physically present in the HQ. Robots wearing clothes are still out in the park and are being interacted with in sleep mode.

[numbnut]

It's interesting that when Bernard asks Dolores about her night, she's upset and mentions running away after her parents are killed but she doesn't mention killing a man. So I'm now wondering how many times she ran away and if Bernard knows about her killing a host. It's also interesting that the MiB ignores Lawrence's suggestion to go to Pariah, the place that Logan is excited about.

Edited October 25, 2016 by numbnut

[DarkRaichu]

4 hours ago, arc said:

3) Honestly, it's not clear to me how often killed hosts are put back into the world. I initially thought they were only replaced at the start of each 28-day cycle, but it seems like some hosts, esp those on short loops, might get replaced more frequently.

Well at least we know they can clean up the mess in less than 20 minutes.  The reason Control jammed the guns and stopped the shooting was a family of guests coming in about 20 minutes.

[phoenyx]

On 10/24/2016 at 10:17 PM, Black Knight said:

I think dgpolo's theory below is why:

Since Dolores is in her "dream," her mind has her dressed as she was when she went into sleep mode. On Bernard's end, I think he's interacting with DreamDolores in the form of a hologram he can summon up when she's in sleep mode.

The clothes are the tell, in my opinion. Robots not wearing clothes are physically present in the HQ. Robots wearing clothes are still out in the park and are being interacted with in sleep mode.

Actually, there was atleast one known exception to this rule. It happened in Episode 3, The Stray:

**
HENRY: Good afternoon, sir.

DR. ROBERT FORD: Why is this host covered?

HENRY: I-I just ...

DR. ROBERT FORD: Perhaps you didn't want him to feel cold ... or ashamed. You wanted to cover his modesty. Was that it? (Ford rips the cover off of the host.) It doesn't get cold -- doesn't feel ashamed -- (Ford picks up a scalpel and makes an incision across the side of the host's face.) -- doesn't feel a solitary thing ... that we haven't told it to. You understand? (Henry nods yes. Ford hands the scalpel to Henry and then walks over to Bernard.)

**

I think it's clear that Bernard has already been breaking the rules. Why else would he constantly be making sure that Dolores isn't telling anyone about some of their secret little chats? And I really don't think that Ford wants any of the current hosts to become free via the maze, yet Bernard has told Dolores she may want to seek it out. Given all of this, I can easily imagine that Bernard might break the rule regarding clothing during maintenance periods as well.

Edited October 26, 2016 by phoenyx

[phoenyx]

2 hours ago, djsunyc said:

was this the last episode they filmed before taking that 1 year hiatus?

No, this was just episode 4, the season will end on December 4th, 2016, on episode 10:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westworld_(TV_series)#Episodes

[Milburn Stone]

Every episode gives me something new to think about, on the theme of "how different are robots from people?"

This time it was in the early scene in which Bernard is quizzing Delores, and she gets all emotional, and he instructs her to limit her emotionality while she answers his questions, and she does. How different is that from an instruction the actress, Evan Rachel Wood, has received from directors countless times in her career, to either dial up or dial down her character's emotionality? Not different at all, is the answer. Bernard is giving Delores direction the same way a director gives an actress direction. Robots respond; actresses respond. I bet that was going through Evan Rachel Wood's mind as she played the scene.

[numbnut]

On second watch, the MiB sounds like he's there to avenge Arnold's death. And if the name Robert Ford is a clue (the man that killed Jesse James), maybe Ford killed Arnold (out of jealousy?) and the MiB wants to kill Ford. If this is the case, I hope they explain why this revenge mission didn't happen sooner (especially since the MiB also mentioned being short on time).

[phoenyx]

3 hours ago, dgpolo said:

I had not caught that the little girl mentioned Orion when answering the MiB's questions. And despite the 'extra' star in the belt I think it is Orion in the carving, the extra star is probably a clue.

As meep correctly pointed out, the girl didn't mention Orion. That being said, Ashley Stubbs, Elsie and Bernard certainly mentioned Orion. It started in Episode 3, The Stray:

**

ASHLEY STUBBS: Looks like our stray has a hobby. Another one of your fucking backstories? (Stubbs squats down in front of the table and examines the carved figures.)

ELSIE HUGHES: Backstories do more than amuse guests. They anchor the hosts. It's their cornerstone. The rest of their identity is built around it, layer by layer.

ASHLEY STUBBS: Well ... if you're gonna go to all that trouble -- you could've at least given him a steadier hand. This looks like shit. (Stubbs hands Elsie a carved turtle shell and then leaves the tent. Elsie squats down next to the table as she looks at the bottom of the carved turtle shell. There's a carving of the Orion Constellation on the bottom of the turtle. Elsie picks up a carved bear from the table and it also has the Orion Constellation on its back and side. She pockets the turtle carving and exits the tent.)

.....

[Stubbs and Elsie climb the rocks and continue walking. Elsie stares at the Orion carving as they make their way through the rocky terrain.]

ASHLEY STUBBS: Keep staring. Maybe it'll tell you your horoscope. (Elsie stops and turns back to Stubbs.)

ELSIE HUGHES: Come again? (Stubbs stops next to her and looks at the carving.)

ASHLEY STUBBS: The markings on its shell -- look like stars. (Stubbs walks away.) Orion, right? (Elsie turns the carving until she recognizes the Orion Constellation. Then she follows Stubbs.)

ELSIE HUGHES: What, are you Gali-fucking-leo?

ASHLEY STUBBS: Maybe it's in my backstory.

ELSIE HUGHES: Huh.

.....

ELSIE HUGHES: It doesn't make sense. Why the hell would he carve Orion?

ASHLEY STUBBS: You're the ones that programmed him.

ELSIE HUGHES: He wasn't programmed to give a shit about stars.

ASHLEY STUBBS: Maybe he went ... moon mad.

ELSIE HUGHES: See? This is why I hide behind sarcasm. (Elsie strikes off on her own.)

***

It continued in Episode 4, Dissonance Theory:

**

Elsie: I mean, I've got hosts imagining voices and climbing mountaintops to consult their astrological chart.
This is not a fucking glitch.
And for some reason, you don't want me to tell anyone.
It is like everybody around here has got some kind of fucking agenda except for me.
And... what?

Bernard: I remember when I first started here.
The hosts seemed very lifelike.
You begin to read things into their behaviors.

Elsie: Don't be patronizing.

Bernard: Fine. The hosts don't imagine things, you do.
That's not Orion. There are three stars in Orion's Belt, not four.

**

I don't know if it's a modified Orion's belt with an extra star as a clue of some sort, or something else entirely, but there's one thing that seems pretty clear to me: Bernard seems to be set on hiding information from people, so the only thing that we can discern from his dismissive tone to Elsie is that he doesn't want her pursuing the idea that the carving might mean something important.

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[CouchTater]

Is Logan the rep that Ford says was already sent by the board (to Teresa)?

[phoenyx]

19 minutes ago, CouchTater said:

Is Logan the rep that Ford says was already sent by the board (to Teresa)?

Could be. He did say the following in this episode, after all:

**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.**

Read more at: http://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?f=738&t=29245

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[dr pepper]

This week on "I Know What I Drew Last Reset", it seems that operations isn't even trying to make sure that the memory wipes are complete. Also, adding a legend that references the cleanup crew to one of the cultures, really? Even allowing the image to be strong enough that people make dolls that look like them? It's beginning to look less like sloppiness and more like outright sabotage.

[phoenyx]

2 minutes ago, dr pepper said:

This week on "I Know What I Drew Last Reset", it seems that operations isn't even trying to make sure that the memory wipes are complete. Also, adding a legend that references the cleanup crew to one of the cultures, really? Even allowing the image to be strong enough that people make dolls that look like them? It's beginning to look less like sloppiness and more like outright sabotage.

(I know what I drew last reset) Lol :-). I think it's more that there are so many robots needing to be fixed and reset and so little time. Given this environment, mistakes are beginning to happen. As to the legend that references the cleanup crew and how that got in there, that's something we've gone over in this thread. For starters, there actually is a native american tribe that makes carving of that nature, and I think they're playing on that a bit. But regardless of that, I think this goes back to the fact that there are just so many robots that need to be maintained and the indians are probably ones they don't keep as close an eye on, due to the fact that they aren't visible as often. As to outright sabotage, there may be a -bit- of truth to that. I'm thinking of Arnold. Remember he had a very different vision as to how things should be, and it's possible that the code he put in was the cause, directly or indirectly, of those sculptures. 

[dr pepper]

23 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

It's not carelessness, it's actually a neat touch. The doll that the girl dropped was a Pueblo Indian kachina doll, which are pretty freaky looking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kachina

That was my first thought, but on closer look, it doesn't look like any kachina i've ever seen and certainly not like any in that article.

[arc]

5 hours ago, djsunyc said:

was this the last episode they filmed before taking that 1 year hiatus?  i wonder if we see a change in the show going forward.

They took a hiatus after episode six to get the last episodes written. Edit: also, from what I read there it wasn't a 1 year hiatus, just a few months.

Edited October 25, 2016 by arc

[Maximum Taco]

On 10/24/2016 at 11:05 AM, numbnut said:

Easter eggs. That's my guess.

How did Logan know William uncovered an Easter egg? Why is a new adventure/mission deemed an Easter egg? (Clearly I'm not a gamer.)

In the gaming world an Easter Egg is a hidden feature that isn't all that apparent to the casual gamer. Unlike other quests which are just posted out in the open, this one requires you to hunt it down, like an easter egg.

In this case, Slim runs his mouth and tries to convince his captors to sell him back to his boss "El Lazo", instead of taking him to justice. Most casual gamers who play this quest will probably ignore Slim, return him to Sweetwater and collect their bounty. Then they'll celebrate their successful quest completion. It's a quest designed for White Hats after all: bring in a dangerous criminal and save that family. It doesn't make sense for the people who would want to go on the quest to side with Slim.

When Slim mentions his boss by name though, Logan recognizes the name and probably knows the narrative either by speaking with other hosts or guests, and obviously he has never found the way to get into that narrative, maybe he's never even found a host who knows El Lazo, or at least not one on friendly terms who would introduce him.

This is an Easter Egg because you have to do conflicting things to trigger the quest. First you have to save the prostitute and get the bounty hunter's respect, and then agree to hunt down Slim. Then you have to do a complete heel turn and go from white hat to black hat, kill the bounty hunter and side with Slim. It's not a natural narrative, and thusly it's not something most people would think to do. Logan only does it because he knows enough about the game to know "El Lazo" by reputation.

Side note: El Lazo translates to "The Loop," is that a reference to him killing people by hanging them? Or could it be a reference to hosts narrative cycles. Hmm...

Edited October 26, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[dr pepper]

13 hours ago, AuntiePam said:

Sooner or later, a guest needs to get hurt.  I hope it's Logan.

I imagine that the liability waiver must be ferocious. There's probably a separate hospital just for humans because no insurance company would be required to pay in that situation.

[Black Knight]

4 hours ago, phoenyx said:

Actually, there was atleast one known exception to this rule. It happened in Episode 3, The Stray:

**
HENRY: Good afternoon, sir.

DR. ROBERT FORD: Why is this host covered?

HENRY: I-I just ...

DR. ROBERT FORD: Perhaps you didn't want him to feel cold ... or ashamed. You wanted to cover his modesty. Was that it? (Ford rips the cover off of the host.) It doesn't get cold -- doesn't feel ashamed -- (Ford picks up a scalpel and makes an incision across the side of the host's face.) -- doesn't feel a solitary thing ... that we haven't told it to. You understand? (Henry nods yes. Ford hands the scalpel to Henry and then walks over to Bernard.)

**

I think it's clear that Bernard has already been breaking the rules. Why else would he constantly be making sure that Dolores isn't telling anyone about some of their secret little chats? And I really don't think that Ford wants the any of the current hosts to become free via the maze, yet Bernard has told Dolores she may want to seek it out. Given all of this, I can easily imagine that Bernard might break the rule regarding clothing during maintenance periods as well.

Yes, I was actually thinking of that scene when I wrote my post. They used that exception to let us know that this rule about the robots not being dressed at HQ exists. Otherwise we wouldn't know that this is the tell that I theorized for whether the robots are physically present or not.

I know there are theories that the scenes between Bernard and Dolores are taking place in a different timeline than other scenes, but I don't subscribe to those theories. So Bernard and Dolores having their conversation, and then Dolores waking up next to William, for me indicates that she was not at HQ for that conversation. They would've had to send someone to retrieve her, and then bring her back, and that's implausible for multiple reasons: William didn't seem to have any awareness such a thing happened, it would break immersion, and it's a fair amount of trouble to go to when nothing had occurred necessitating repairs or a reset, so it would call more attention than Bernard would want to whatever he's up to. Which is also a reason why Bernard wouldn't break the rule at HQ - he knows if Ford walks by and sees him conversing with a clothed Dolores, he's going to interrupt and ask questions. Henry could kinda get away with it because he's apparently pretty new, but Bernard knows better, and Ford knows Bernard knows better.

[Gobi]

I'm not convinced that we are seeing different timelines, per se. I do think that some of the hosts, Delores and Maeve in particular, are having flashbacks that are so real to them that they cannot distinguish the past from the present. 

One thing that I wondered about - Was that Teddy with William and Logan on the bounty hunt? I've watched it twice and couldn't be sure. We never got a good close-up of him. He definitely was similar to Teddy (who was the one who asked William to go on the bounty hunt).

If it was Teddy, he and Delores did not react to each other's presence (not programmed to in that scenario?), and would lend strong support to those arguing that there are different timelines in play. So far as we know, there are no duplicate hosts.

As to always winning - the staff can intervene to have you lose (if not die) and slow you down, as they did to the guests taking part in Hector's shoot up of the town, and considered doing to TMIB at the cantina.

I'm willing to hand wave the guns/bullets for now. Like rayguns in a sci-fi movie, I can just accept it.

One way to avoid injuries to guests would be facial recognition. The hosts probably are programmed to "recognize" all other hosts as such, and react accordingly to those they don't "recognize".

As to TMIB not having much time, that could refer to his stay in WW being limited to the maximum time allowed, or, perhaps, he is dying or near death (disease is conquered in this time according to Ford, but people still die) and wants to go out in a blaze of glory in WW.

[Captain Carrot]

It's interesting that (per William) Logan doesn't act like this in the real world. I want to see how he reacts if/when he realizes that Dolores has become (or is becoming) sentient.

[Lamima]

So I was thinking that the MiB is Arnold.

[Uncle JUICE]

2 hours ago, Gobi said:

One thing that I wondered about - Was that Teddy with William and Logan on the bounty hunt? I've watched it twice and couldn't be sure. We never got a good close-up of him. He definitely was similar to Teddy (who was the one who asked William to go on the bounty hunt).

If it was Teddy, he and Delores did not react to each other's presence (not programmed to in that scenario?), and would lend strong support to those arguing that there are different timelines in play. So far as we know, there are no duplicate hosts.

 

If you mean the guy hung up on the tree found by MiC on the way to Pariah, then yes, that was Teddy. It was my favorite line from a guy who's full of classic western lines. Teddy implores him to put him out of his misery, MiB responds "Aw Teddy, looks like misery's all you've got." Its a paraphrase on my part, but Harris is killing it in this role. 

As far as how his new storyline doesn't interact with Dolores, my presumption is that when any single host is programmed with a new story line, their subsequent interactions are concurrently altered, like a cascade effect. Elsie's constantly complaining that they've got so many new storylines out there right now that it's hard to keep up with where any single host is supposed to be or what they're supposed to be doing, inasmuch as any small deviation that might normally ring an alarm at HQ is no longer cause for an alarm. There's just too many of them.

But in other words, Ford reprograms Teddy, and some script in the master code finds all of the hosts along Teddy's default loop and slightly alters their programming so that their story lines can continue, so that Dolores can still find a way to get back to her ranch just before the bad guys kill her family. The problem is that if you alter Teddy, and then alter the bad guy to accommodate a guest, who then inadvertently alters someone else that might interact with that story line, suddenly, you're well outside of the scripted loop and you can't really tell what's a dangerous aberration in the technology, and what's just customer service. 

The more I think about it, the more I like this show. But the response in general makes me wonder: would this current TV environment have supported this show's antecedent, "Lost"? It was a show that was even more supernatural (to my understanding, I never got into Lost), that had similar mystery (and what I learned were really lame resolutions), and a similar 'puzzle' structure that fans could debate on line. These are the very things that seem to be making people lose patience with this show, four episodes in, while Lost went on for more than 5 years. 

[Jack Shaftoe]

Quote

I haven't seen Person of Interest, though I've heard it was good. I'm not sure what you mean by "fun moments". Comedy? If I want to see a comedy show, I can see a comedy show.

Even outstanding drama shows can have plenty of comedy moments without losing the punch of its dramatic scenes - for example The Wire. And fun moments don't have to be necessarily comedy, could be say shootouts where there is actual challenge for the protagonists.

Quote

I don't think Jonathan Nolan made this series to demonstrate what a souped up online game would be like, but rather to ask people what constitutes humanity.

I agree but if some of the guests behave as if they are in a video game, it is the duty of the writers to show us why anyone would bother with some aspect of the Westworld experience which seem far more boring than similar things in video games which do not cost a fortune to play. Plus, the whole "no consequences for  trying to shoot everyone" thing can really ruin the fun of other paying customers - imagine someone who comes for the role playing aspect, tries to resolve all quests peacefully, only to have someone like Logan come out of the blue and shoot the allies he has won over and needs for the final quest (or whatever they call it in Westworld). Though, I guess it's possible that there are financial repercussions for such guests.

[phoenyx]

8 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

In the gaming world an Easter Egg is a hidden feature that isn't all that apparent to the casual gamer. Unlike other quests which are just posted out in the open, this one requires you to hunt it down, like an easter egg.

In this case when Slim runs his mouth and tries to convince his captors to sell him back to his boss "El Lazo", instead of taking him to justice, most casual gamers who play this quest will probably ignore him, return Slim to Sweetwater and collect their bounty. Then celebrate their successful quest completion. It's a quest designed for White Hats after all, bring in a dangerous criminal and save that family. It doesn't make sense for the people who would want to go on the quest to side with Slim.

When Slim mentions his boss by name though, Logan recognizes the name and probably knows the narrative either by speaking with other hosts or guests, and obviously he has never found the way to get into that narrative, maybe he's never even found a host who knows El Lazo, or at least not one on friendly terms who would introduce him.

This is an Easter Egg because you have to do conflicting things to trigger the quest. First you have to save the prostitute and get the bounty hunter's respect, and then agree to hunt down Slim. Then you have to do a complete heel turn and go from white hat to black hat, kill the bounty hunter and side with Slim. It's not a natural narrative, and thusly it's not something most people would think to do. Logan only does it because he knows enough about the game to know "El Lazo" by reputation.

Side note: El Lazo translates to "The Loop," is that a reference to him killing people by hanging them? Or could it be a reference to hosts narrative cycles. Hmm...

The word Lazo means a fair amount of things in spanish, but loop isn't one of them:

**

bow 

ribbon 

snare 

lasso 

snare somebody

ties, bonds

A few that require a bit more then the word lazo:

lazos familiares - family ties;

los lazos culturales entre los dos países - cultural ties between the two countries;

lazos de parentesco - ties of blood

**

Source: http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/lazo

Based on context, I'd say El Lazo was going for something like ties of blood, a la mafia "la familia".

[dmc]

This is the episode where I realized I had no idea what this show is about.  The first three episodes seemed to be going in the robots realize they are robots direction...this episode kind of stalls all of that.  Now I am wondering where we are being led with this story line. 

 

Also while I never thought William was the MIB.  I do think he will be a MIB so to speak.  We are being shown two characters one who is every stereotype of terrible and one that seems to be every stereotype of decent.  I am betting these roles end up being reversed and Logan turns out to be the decent one and William slowly becomes terrible. 

Edited October 25, 2016 by dmc

[tennisgurl]

I am really fascinated by this show, but it also makes me nervous. I have seen so many shows like this (lots of interesting questions, lots of stupid answers, if they bother answering them at all), that I dont want to get burnt again. However, I am cautiously optimistic that this might not be quite as weird as your Lost or your Battlestar, and they might have a solid idea where this is going. Hopefully. 

So the MIB is some kind of philanthropist in the real world? I kind of figured it was something like that. But now I feel like he has more of an end game outside of just playing the game as nastily as possible. 

[BooBear]

3 hours ago, dmc said:

This is the episode where I realized I had no idea what this show is about.  The first three episodes seemed to be going in the robots realize they are robots direction...this episode kind of stalls all of that.  Now I am wondering where we are being led with this story line.

I felt like that last week. The introduction of "Arnold" is destroying it for me. So much confabulation... so little substance. I feel like the first two episodes had one writer who was working on "world building" and then that person left and the "needless complexity" writer came on board and we got two episodes with needless expansion of aspects of the first two episodes that, look cool, but probably won't mean anything in the end.  I really don't think Arnold adds anything to the story. It might be better if we never find out for sure how the bots are gaining free will or, that the investigation be one for later seasons. Sort of after the fact.  I do know that production was shut down so the writers could catch up, so I do think there could be a major departure soon. But I was under the impression that was for the last few episodes.

Also, just me, or am I the only one that just doesn't care at all about the MIB. Just don't. I don't even care if he finds the deeper level... if I still don't have the slightest hint as to what that deeper level is or what it means for anyone.  It is just the magical mcguffin at the moment.

When the show first started I thought William was going to be the vehicle by which they show us how Westworld was more than the sum of its parts and it could corrupt a good man like William (or anyone) but so far... not seeing it. If I was William I might be bored and have gone home. Dolores can be a little irritating.

Edited October 25, 2016 by BooBear

[dmc]

Just now, BooBear said:

I felt like that last week. The introduction of "Arnold" is destroying it for me. So much confabulation... so little substance. I feel like the first two episodes had one writer who was working on "world building" and then that person left and the "needless complexity" writer came on board and we got two episodes with needless expansion of aspects of the first two episodes that, look cool, but probably won't mean anything in the end.  I really don't think Arnold adds anything to the story. It might be better if we never find out for sure how the bots are gaining free will or, that the investigation be one for later seasons. Sort of after the fact.  I do know that production was shut down so the writers could catch up, so I do think there could be a major departure soon. But I was under the impression what was for the last few episodes.

Also, just me, or am I the only one that just doesn't care at all about the MIB. Just don't. I don't even care if he finds the deeper level... if I still don't have the slightest hint as to what that deeper level is or what it means for anyone.  It is just the magical mcguffin at the moment.

When the show first started I thought William was going to be the vehicle by which they show us how Westworld was more than the sum of its parts and it could corrupt a good man like William (or anyone) but so far... not seeing it. If I was William I might be bored and have gone home. Dolores can be a little irritating.

I agree with everything here.  My best friend and I are watching and we both agree that this show is visually stunning and thought provoking but not ACTUALLY GOOD. 

 

OMG Dolores is so annoying and I think the weakest element here is they have yet to sell us on actually visiting this fantasy park. 

[numbnut]

6 hours ago, Gobi said:

I'm willing to hand wave the guns/bullets for now. Like rayguns in a sci-fi movie, I can just accept it.

One way to avoid injuries to guests would be facial recognition. The hosts probably are programmed to "recognize" all other hosts as such, and react accordingly to those they don't "recognize".

I also don't have a problem with the guns. The show is set in an unspecified future, so the technology can be far beyond what we would think is plausible. Still, I can buy the idea of "smart bullets" being able to pierce robots and things but not humans. I like the facial recognition scenario too.

56 minutes ago, BooBear said:

Also, just me, or am I the only one that just doesn't care at all about the MIB. Just don't. I don't even care if he finds the deeper level... if I still don't have the slightest hint as to what that deeper level is or what it means for anyone.  It is just the magical mcguffin at the moment.

I like Ed Harris but don't care about the MiB yet. While I'm intellectually curious, I can't get emotionally invested in a character whose needs aren't clarified. He's far from why I keep watching.

Edited October 25, 2016 by numbnut

[phoenyx]

9 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Yes, I was actually thinking of that scene when I wrote my post. They used that exception to let us know that this rule about the robots not being dressed at HQ exists. Otherwise we wouldn't know that this is the tell that I theorized for whether the robots are physically present or not.

I know there are theories that the scenes between Bernard and Dolores are taking place in a different timeline than other scenes, but I don't subscribe to those theories.

One thing I definitely believe, if Bernard felt there was a good chance that Ford would walk in on him, he definitely wouldn't be interviewing Dolores clothed. However, I'm beginning to think that atleast -one- of the private conversations Bernard has with Dolores may be from the past. I'm referring to the conversation that Dissonance starts with:

**

Bernard: Dolores? Yes. Do you know where you are?

Dolores: I... I'm in a dream. Before this, do you know what happened? My parents... They hurt them.
**

Now perhaps this is just the event that happened, but here's why I'm not completely sure about this- we've never seen Dolores' mother, suggesting that this happened at a point in time when Dolores' mother was still around.

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[LittleIggy]

Who do you think is the representative of the Board that Ford said was already there? William? 

[phoenyx]

5 hours ago, Jack Shaftoe said:

Even outstanding drama shows can have plenty of comedy moments without losing the punch of its dramatic scenes - for example The Wire. And fun moments don't have to be necessarily comedy, could be say shootouts where there is actual challenge for the protagonists.

I agree but if some of the guests behave as if they are in a video game, it is the duty of the writers to show us why anyone would bother with some aspect of the Westworld experience which seem far more boring than similar things in video games which do not cost a fortune to play. Plus, the whole "no consequences for  trying to shoot everyone" thing can really ruin the fun of other paying customers - imagine someone who comes for the role playing aspect, tries to resolve all quests peacefully, only to have someone like Logan come out of the blue and shoot the allies he has won over and needs for the final quest (or whatever they call it in Westworld). Though, I guess it's possible that there are financial repercussions for such guests.

I highly suspect that the time of safety for all humans is going to be ending soon. Another thing, from the -androids- perspective, the dangers are pretty real, especially since they are only beginning to realize that death generally isn't a permanent thing for them [there are always the characters that go into 'cold storage', it may not be permanent, but it's certainly indefinite). I also completely agree with you that, game wise, it makes no sense to have all guests in the same place, the rowdy ones that will shoot anything they please, and others that prefer a more sedate approach. This is resolved in online games by having pvp (player vs. player) and pve (player vs. environment) areas in online games. They have a -smidgeon- of this, in the sense that the further away from the town you go, the wilder it can get, but they keep on breaking the rule, with guests and even hosts killing a large amount of androids right in town.

8 minutes ago, LittleIggy said:

Who do you think is the representative of the Board that Ford said was already there? William? 

Possibly, but I also wonder if it might be the Man in Black. 

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[Uncle JUICE]

52 minutes ago, phoenyx said:

 

Now perhaps this is just the event that happened, but here's why I'm not completely sure about this- we've never seen Dolores' mother, suggesting that this happened at a point in time when Dolores' mother was still around.

THe first episode has Dolores' mom already dead when she and Teddy ride up on the place. The guy who drinks the milk says "the body's still warm." And the dead body is in the background, on the stairs, in subsequent episodes. Still, the idea that "before this" exists to this version of Dolores means that she was taken from the scene immediately after it happened, and prior to when her memory should have been wiped out to restart her loop. As far as the locale of the interview is concerned, I think her staring at her reflection in the window last episode immediately prior to interviewing with Bernard, and the fact that she was indeed clothed, implied that her meeting was taking place either virtually, or as I believe, behind the facade of that building whose window she stares into. It's very likely some of those places are coded off limits to guests, but hosts can access them in order to meet with staff. It makes sense that one of these places would be in Sweetwater, where they'd want to do quick maintenance or investigations on units before they meet the train.  

 

ETA my theory on where her latest Bernard conversation takes place doesn't make sense if it's limited to the building outside of which she drops the paint can, because that's the next day, park time beginning of the SAME day for Dolores. It'd have to be someplace physically closer to the Abernathy ranch, but theoretically it's still possible for someplace like that to exist in each of the key "maps" in the game. 

Edited October 25, 2016 by Uncle JUICE

[phoenyx]

16 minutes ago, Uncle JUICE said:

The first episode has Dolores' mom already dead when she and Teddy ride up on the place. The guy who drinks the milk says "the body's still warm." And the dead body is in the background, on the stairs, in subsequent episodes.

Doh, laugh :-). Thanks for pointing that out.

[iMonrey]

Quote

Why the hosts are programmed to think they're 'real': The park doesn't want them to pretend to be human, because that would mean they would be able to break character

The hosts are robots. They are programmed to perform a certain way. So regardless of whether or not they are programmed to think they're human, they are only going to break character if their programming fails.

A poster above made an analogy about Dolores and an actress taking direction. If you were staging a show (and Westworld is, essentially, a show), would it make any sense to have actors who don't know they're actors? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the actors know how to improvise and react on cue? Otherwise they're going to get stumped if their programming doesn't allow them to perceive reality.

There's no real reason to have robots who don't know they're robots, other than "well, otherwise we wouldn't have a show." Because you are just deliberately creating the very moral dilemma the story is struggling with, for no practical reason.

Quote

 But given that the original movie was about the robots going nuts and killing people, given that Arnold seems crucial to the plot here and it's very important that he died, in a park ("world") where he and Ford were "as gods"... the whys of how killing humans is and isn't prevented are pretty important.

That's exactly so. I've said from the start I'm not sure a concept that worked in 1973 works now. They didn't have the kind of video games back then we have now, so Westworld in 2016 seems like a pretty tame concept. Lots of people are gun enthusiasts to the extreme. They're going to want to know how the  guns work, and aren't going to spend big bucks for a lame simulation.

Quote

This is not fundamentally a well-written TV show, sorry. This is a melodramatic, sensational series with lots of feints at a plot, fleeting allusions to something that might actually matter, tits, gore and production values. Half of its art lies in Ramin Djawadi's opening credits theme. 

Sounds like we're on the same page. The AV Club review made an apt comparison to Lost: throw everything but the kitchen sink at it, and watch the audience go nuts trying to figure it all out. Mind you, Lost still has a devoted fan base, and this show seems to be engaging a lot of people, so apparently that's a valid form of entertainment. Doesn't really work for me though.

[BooBear]

28 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

Sounds like we're on the same page. The AV Club review made an apt comparison to Lost: throw everything but the kitchen sink at it, and watch the audience go nuts trying to figure it all out. Mind you, Lost still has a devoted fan base, and this show seems to be engaging a lot of people, so apparently that's a valid form of entertainment. Doesn't really work for me though.

I cut some slack to Lost because they were on ABC and stuck with the rules of dragging plots out for "network" and also, imho, the audience guessed the big twist the writers thought was so un guessable so they were left scrambling (everyone was in Purgatory).  But here there isn't any excuse. I also feel "shades" of Lost in that it seems like the audience is smarter than the writers and have actually made BETTER plot guesses than the writers probably even thought of. (William is MIB.) Every time someone comes up with a theory on the fan boards I just have a sinking suspicion it isn't right because the writers didn't think that far up.  I could be wrong.  I doubt it.   And come to think of it, this show seems shockingly lacking in any sort of innovative narrative technique.. flash forwards or some such. Ok sure maybe Lost broke us all on that but as the fans noted, it could have worked really well here.

I think if the show was compelling people would hand waive the tech of it... how the guns work. But when I am bored senseless watching Ford be cagey with long speeches I start wondering.

Edited October 25, 2016 by BooBear

[arc]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

The hosts are robots. They are programmed to perform a certain way. So regardless of whether or not they are programmed to think they're human, they are only going to break character if their programming fails.

A poster above made an analogy about Dolores and an actress taking direction. If you were staging a show (and Westworld is, essentially, a show), would it make any sense to have actors who don't know they're actors? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the actors know how to improvise and react on cue? Otherwise they're going to get stumped if their programming doesn't allow them to perceive reality.

If you had actors who didn't know they were actors -- who somehow had scripts pre-programmed in them but otherwise believed they were bandits, ranchers, bartenders, etc, with all the (implanted) life experience and knowledge that entails -- then they would absolutely know how to improvise, because a lot of improvisational acting is about reacting as if it were real. So it is real to the hosts, and so they can and do improvise.

Also, Ford literally said the hosts can improvise in the previous episode.

[DarkRaichu]

1 hour ago, phoenyx said:

One thing I definitely believe, if Bernard felt there was a good chance that Ford would walk in on him, he definitely wouldn't be interviewing Dolores clothed. However, I'm beginning to think that atleast -one- of the private conversations Bernard has with Dolores may be from the past. I'm referring to the conversation that Dissonance starts with:

**

Bernard: Dolores? Yes. Do you know where you are?

Dolores: I... I'm in a dream. Before this, do you know what happened? My parents... They hurt them.

Not necessarily.  Dolores going home to dead parents was a valid scenario for her and we already watched at least 5 iterations of it:
- When MiB dragged her to the barn
- When the bandit dragged her to the barn
- When Dolores found a gun and shot that bandit in the barn
- When the bandit on the porch shot her
- When she escaped the bandit on the porch unharmed

 

Bernard & Dolores conversation might just happen remotely, ie Bernard accessing Dolores core memory via computer at the HQ.  The room with 2 chairs is just a virtual reality representation of their wireless connection.

[djsunyc]

16 hours ago, phoenyx said:

No, this was just episode 4, the season will end on December 4th, 2016, on episode 10:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westworld_(TV_series)#Episodes

EDIT: sorry, answered above.

Edited October 25, 2016 by djsunyc

[phoenyx]

9 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

Not necessarily.  Dolores going home to dead parents was a valid scenario for her and we already watched at least 5 iterations of it:
- When MiB dragged her to the barn
- When the bandit dragged her to the barn
- When Dolores found a gun and shot that bandit in the barn
- When the bandit on the porch shot her
- When she escaped the bandit on the porch unharmed

 

Bernard & Dolores conversation might just happen remotely, ie Bernard accessing Dolores core memory via computer at the HQ.  The room with 2 chairs is just a virtual reality representation of their wireless connection.

Yeah, my theory was hinging on the notion that Dolores' mother wasn't in the present time- I'd clearly missed the dead woman in more then one instance, Uncle Juice set me straight on that in post #136 :-p...

Edited October 25, 2016 by phoenyx

[Netfoot]

25 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

Bernard & Dolores conversation might just happen remotely, ie Bernard accessing Dolores core memory via computer at the HQ.  The room with 2 chairs is just a virtual reality representation of their wireless connection.

I didn't see any indication that this might be true.

Occam's razor suggests that Delores is being interviewed in an underground facility, like all the other scenes where hosts interact with support/tech.  I don't think holograms or teleportation or psychic robots are involved at all.  My only query is that in her conversations with Bernard, she appears fully clothed.  I suspect that she is being interviewed "off the record", at a time when she has been cleaned, serviced, recharged, re-clothed, and is awaiting redeployment. It wouldn't make sense for him to undress her, chat with her, and dress her again. 

[paigow]

On 2016-10-24 at 0:13 AM, phoenyx said:

Which leads me to wonder- did Arnold and Bernard work together, or did Bernard find the maze himself? Also, how much does Bernard know about the maze? Also, anyone else seeing a similarity between the maze and the Matrix?

Bernard knew nothing about Arnold...multiple choice:

A: Bernard worked with Arnold but his memory was wiped

B: Bernard never worked with Arnold and was legitimately curious

[okerry]

3 hours ago, LittleIggy said:

Who do you think is the representative of the Board that Ford said was already there? William? 

Logan. He said to William that he was there for work as much as for a vacation. It's Logan.

[parandroid]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

A poster above made an analogy about Dolores and an actress taking direction. If you were staging a show (and Westworld is, essentially, a show), would it make any sense to have actors who don't know they're actors? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the actors know how to improvise and react on cue? Otherwise they're going to get stumped if their programming doesn't allow them to perceive reality.

There's no real reason to have robots who don't know they're robots, other than "well, otherwise we wouldn't have a show." Because you are just deliberately creating the very moral dilemma the story is struggling with, for no practical reason.

It _is_ a show. But the actors don't know they are in the show. This isn't a new concept nor a strange one. "The Truman Show" in recent memory, did this. And  as far back as the 16th century, Shakespeare said "All the world is a stage..." - implying that we are all in a show even though we may not realize it.

It is advantageous to have performers who don't realize that they are in a production. It makes improvisation in character much easier. You don't have to wonder about "what would my character do" because as far as you know, you are that character, and whatever you do is what your character would do. Further, the audience of the show is treating the whole park as a novelty because the performers don't know that they are performers. If the lion knows that it is destined to die at the hand of a hunter, would big game hunting be attractive at all? I'm not saying I'm attracted to big-game hunting. I'm saying that part of the attraction of big-game hunting is that the lion would fiercely fight to stay alive, while the robot lion (or cowboy) may choose to simply say "oh well, its time for my loop to end. You may as well kill me now".

[DarkRaichu]

1 hour ago, Netfoot said:

I didn't see any indication that this might be true.

Occam's razor suggests that Delores is being interviewed in an underground facility, like all the other scenes where hosts interact with support/tech.  I don't think holograms or teleportation or psychic robots are involved at all.  My only query is that in her conversations with Bernard, she appears fully clothed.  I suspect that she is being interviewed "off the record", at a time when she has been cleaned, serviced, recharged, re-clothed, and is awaiting redeployment. It wouldn't make sense for him to undress her, chat with her, and dress her again. 

I mainly brought up a possibility.  Control can access a robot and override its regular loop in an instance from a remote location.  Bernard should have similar remote access with his position in the organization.

Otherwise, the park workers would need to sneak in while William and Logan were sleeping outdoor, pick Dolores up, do maintenance, and leave some moments for Bernard to chat with Dolores...  

Edited October 25, 2016 by DarkRaichu

[Gobi]

9 hours ago, Uncle JUICE said:

If you mean the guy hung up on the tree found by MiC on the way to Pariah, then yes, that was Teddy. It was my favorite line from a guy who's full of classic western lines. Teddy implores him to put him out of his misery, MiB responds "Aw Teddy, looks like misery's all you've got." 

No, not the guy in the tree, I know that was Teddy. I meant the bounty hunter with William and Logan when they take on Slim's gang, who is later killed by Logan.

More thoughts on TMIB. He wants to face death, whether he actually wants to die or not. He explicitly told Snake Woman that you could do anything in this world but die. He knows Arnold did, and wants to face death himself. He wants to show he can win, even when there's a chance he could lose.

I think it's significant that Dolores is clothed when she talks to Bernard. As we've seen in the preview, she's naked when Ford talks to her. I also think her talks with Bernard (or at least some of them) are face to face. This is because at the end of one, he told her to go up top before she was missed. If he was interacting with her by remote while she was in sleep mode, he would have told her to wake up.

Edited October 25, 2016 by Gobi

[DarkRaichu]

21 minutes ago, Gobi said:

No, not the guy in the tree, I know that was Teddy. I meant the bounty hunter with William and Logan when they take on Slim's gang, who is later killed by Logan.

Definitely NOT Teddy.  It's the same host that caught the bandit which William shot in ep3. 

 

21 minutes ago, Gobi said:

This is because at the end of one, he told her to go up top before she was missed. If he was interacting with her by remote while she was in sleep mode, he would have told her to wake up.

Unless she was NOT in sleep mode when the conversation happened.  Control would notice a robot that all the sudden went to sleep mode by itself in the middle of the park. ;)

Edited October 25, 2016 by DarkRaichu