|
JUST MAKING CHILI posted:Elsie is dead because she discovered that Bernard is a host. yea this is what i was thinking. she was looking at the old system that ford uses to track his personsl hosts and saw bernard. Bernard wouldn't have seen himself on there because of his programming.
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:12 |
|
|
I was certain that Elsie was dead before this episode, but I don't think that Stubbs scene makes sense as Ford's work. I think they would've shown Stubbs die if the warriors killed him and I don't think Ford would capture him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Lycus posted:I was certain that Elsie was dead before this episode, but I don't think that Stubbs scene makes sense as Ford's work. I think they would've shown Stubbs die if the warriors killed him and I don't think Ford would capture him. but i also think this, so who knows
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Elsie is alive in the only time line, proven; easily: in 5 days time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Elsie got Stannissed....she's dead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Elsie is alive because I really want to see the scene where she and Elsie-bot fight each other in a mirror image karate battle and both knock each other out simultaneously a la Futurama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
I think Elsie is alive. Don't know how it came to be, but I bet there is some timeline trickery involved. At one point there was a discussion where Elsie is talking about rotation plans - in a couple of weeks - but then the plans seemingly get accelerated without raising suspicion. Rotating for leave is a big deal, so to leave without coverage would be weird - especially if her supervisor (Bernard) appears unaware of it. But mainly I like the character and I want her to be alive - as long as the explanation makes sense in context. I like to think she got recruited to the cause by Bernard and in turn recruited Stubbs when they found out he was on to the Cullen deception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Thread, freeze all posting functions Thread, resume unretarded
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Thread, freeze all posting functions **does nothing**
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Elsie survived because she found out Arnold was host and had him 'freeze all motor functions'
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
ArmZ posted:yea this is what i was thinking. she was looking at the old system that ford uses to track his personsl hosts and saw bernard. Bernard wouldn't have seen himself on there because of his programming. Given that Theresa had no clue Bernard was a host, and that Elsie didn't hesitate to phone him with her findings (and not say anyone else to tell them her boss was a robot), it doesn't really point to Bernard's secret being kept on there IMO. e:brevity tooterfish fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Nov 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Maybe Ford is printing the MiB. He's there to try and awaken the hosts which Ford doesn't want. He represents the board which Ford doesn't like. He has learned about the maze and about how to overload the hosts circuits. Ford has decided to deal with the MiB by recreating Escalante and is using the bicameral mind to control Dolores and to move Wyatt's gang into place to go wild and stage an uprising. The MiB is cast as the villain they are attacking because of his atrocities in the past. He is replaced by Ford and forced to forever be a part of the new narrative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I wonder how cheap or expensive that kind of thing is these days. They've been doing it forever, so it must flow more smoothly in post-production. I'm not sure how this show specifically approached it, but this type of effect isn't just a post-production solution. They likely had to plan pretty extensively for it while shooting, staging exactly how the body double and the camera move over the course of the shot so they can meaningfully track how the geometry of his face should change. I've seen how other movies and TV shows have handled this sort of thing, and they basically have to motion-capture and track the stand-in's face and create a CG mesh of the replacement face that corresponds to those track points. There's a degree of actual modeling that needs to happen so the composited face doesn't look like a flat, creepy mask. Something like Ford walking around a corner is insanely difficult just because of the demands of simulating depth and volume across a perspective change. It's definitely cheaper than it would've been in the past due to faster computer vision tools for tracking and what-not, but how good or bad it looks is more likely a condition of how well they staged the shots they're compositing and how much time the effects team has to finesse it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
my summer at fat camp posted:I'm gonna my summer at fat camp posted:So Teddy's memory of Wyatt is definitely based on Dolores shooting up Escalante and executing Arnold.  reading this thread can be pretty funny
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:23
|
|
that Wyatt is the bearded man invented by Ford for Teddy and not loving Delores or Maeve you goony fucks
|
FogHelmut posted:Why do they go out of the way to make CGI young Ford, but then if William is MIB they look and sound and act nothing alike? Because then it would be TOO obvious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
I think Elsie is still alive, and here's what I think is going to happen: Elsie will ultimately play a key role in stopping Ford's insane plans and ultimately getting him arrested and sent to a super-max prison. Next season, she'll reluctantly have to visit him to use his information and guidance to capture a rogue host who is killing guests and using their skin to make a cowboy hat. Teddy becomes a reporter and later gets lit on fire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
I'd have to go back to the episode, but when Elsie is in the abandoned theater at the end, doesn't she yell out "Arnold?" before getting grabbed? Because in Bernard's memory of it, she says his name and not Arnold's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
I've been reading the AV Club reviews for Westworld and it reminds me really strongly of the criticism in this thread: most of the review inches seem to be focused on what the reviewer fears the show might become, having obviously been burned by investment in previous "puzzle box" shows. There are episode reviews where he barely mentions the episode at all, instead preferring to talk about the implications of the episode on future possible future "twists" and whether the show will "pay off." It reminded me of the criticism people have expressed in the thread here that seemed to be more about their future expectations than what they were watching on the screen. Once he started thinking of the show as a puzzle box, all his comments on the thematic content of the show dropped off. He had been making observations like "Thesis statement!" at Angela's "If you can't tell, does it matter?" line and just dropped all of that when he decided reveals and twists were important. That also reminded me of some attitudes in the thread. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Nov 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Unfortunately some of the AV Club's better reviewers have left for various reasons and it is a simple shame.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
I am going to laugh my rear end off if Maeve hijacks the entire cold storage room for her army. I'm starting to think that's her plan.ashpanash posted:I think Elsie is still alive, and here's what I think is going to happen: That would be my guess too, though I am not entirely convinced. I'm sure it's going somewhere though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:It reminded me of the criticism people have expressed in the thread here that seemed to be more about their future expectations than what they were watching on the screen. I can't speak for anyone else, but my concerns have always been about the emphasis on storytelling twists that feel inorganic because the character motivations are not well established or the characters themselves feel poorly drawn and incomplete. I should note that I actually always liked the two timeline aspect - I was an immediate fan of it when I was exposed to the theory. I think it's a really clever idea and while not a stunningly new idea, it's a good idea and its potential for storytelling is exciting. The problem, recently, has been that the two timelines have not been illuminating at all, it's felt more as if the plot is being stretched thin and reveals are being held back while we wait for other things to happen. Things like Maeve's journey, which started out on a fantastic tear but quickly became overwrought and, in this episode, downright silly. When it comes to storytelling, I believe it's about characters foremost, and the characters should drive the plot rather than the plot driving the characters. I understand there are other views, that's mine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
the problem is that once this season is over and all the timeline trickery and gimmicky editing to amplify "twists" is over, will the story still be interesting. For example, try watching Memento in chronological order. Its not very good. Plots shouldnt have to rely on deception on the part of the producers and while it is interesting now, where will they go from here? Will every season have deceptive timelines to make mysteries interesting? I'm looking forward to finding out, but I really don't think it will maintain its momentum for the long haul.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
TommyGun85 posted:the problem is that once this season is over and all the timeline trickery and gimmicky editing to amplify "twists" is over, will the story still be interesting. I mean I had no idea about the two-timeline theory until catching up with the show last week with episode 7, so yes it's a pretty good show even if there isn't any hidden puzzles going on (or ones you know about).
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
I think the show uses editing "tricks" or nonlinear presentation in order to serve the story. I'm not at all concerned that this season won't hold up in the future--the style reinforces the hosts' confusion and helplessness when it comes to their sudden, terrifying memory recall. To me it's a very elegant way of doing this even if it's not immediately evident to a viewer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
Old James posted:Because then it would be TOO obvious. I need internal consistency above all else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:When it comes to storytelling, I believe it's about characters foremost, and the characters should drive the plot rather than the plot driving the characters. I understand there are other views, that's mine. I don't see how Westworld violates any of this. The characters are experiencing their lives in a disjointed way, with critical details hidden from them and then discovered in shocking moments. The plot and its "twists" are organic to the characters. I'm having trouble seeing how you would shoot and edit Dolores' story, for example, with a completely straightforward narrative. I've already written some paragraphs about how Dolores, Teddy, and Bernard comment on the human condition. Ditto for Maeve and Hector, who explicitly have and discuss religious experiences. The main characters aren't human, and yet by placing them at a remove from ourselves, we see the human condition more clearly. This is like philosophy of literature 130. TommyGun85 posted:the problem is that once this season is over and all the timeline trickery and gimmicky editing to amplify "twists" is over, will the story still be interesting. You see what I mean about people talking about their future expectations more than the content of the show that's in front of them? It's like you sit down and watch an hour of television, stand up and go "I wonder if that will be good?" So to circle back around to my earlier comment about missing the point if you think Charlie doesn't have any narrative weight: I'm not saying that you aren't understanding the narrative, I'm saying you're looking in the wrong direction. Ford even explicitly says "Pain is in the mind, for humans as well as hosts." Charlie being real or fake doesn't matter in the slightest, as far as I can see. The only character we're with is Bernard, and he's literally built to carry the pain of Charlie's death as the central fact of his life. Knowing that Charlie isn't real is about as relevant to his pain as knowing Charlie died in a different country. Ford goes out of his way to observe that Bernard's self-concept is as valid as anyone's. So where did the pathos go? What about Charlie's death makes it less compelling?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:You see what I mean about people talking about their future expectations more than the content of the show that's in front of them? It's like you sit down and watch an hour of television, stand up and go "I wonder if that will be good?" I was directly responding to you and the review. I didnt say I dont enjoy the show or watching it, I said people may be turned off because the style of storytelling with the editing and timelines cant hold up in future seasons so it will be interesting to see if people who are drawn to it for those reasons will stick around once the mystique has worn off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Can't wait to watch "Chronologically Westworld"
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I am going to laugh my rear end off if Maeve hijacks the entire cold storage room for her army. I'm starting to think that's her plan. [the iPad IprovTree app reveals the same response]
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I don't see how Westworld violates any of this. The characters are experiencing their lives in a disjointed way, with critical details hidden from them and then discovered in shocking moments. The plot and its "twists" are organic to the characters. I'm having trouble seeing how you would shoot and edit Dolores' story, for example, with a completely straightforward narrative. It doesn't have to be straightforward to her; it still could be more straightforward and forthcoming with us. As it is, holding back critical information that we could use to understand the character and her past can be a useful storytelling device when used on a single character. When used for all of the characters throughout the narrative, it starts to take its toll. We talked about Lost earlier. Lost definitely pieced out its reveals about its characters, but it did reveal them, step by step, episode by episode. In contrast Westworld seems to be content to constantly hold back and for at least half the season, nearly every character remained almost entirely mysterious. We still don't know what Ford is after, what the MiB is after, what Dolores's function is, what Teddy has to do with any of this, what happens to William that turns him into the MiB, what the board wants... I could go on. Each character is presented to us in tiny, bite-sized pieces and then the show moves on. The pieces have been largely compelling and well acted, but as they start to add together, as we build the characters, they feel very stitched together and not cohesive. The seams are showing, the seams where the characters had to do the service of the plot. Sometimes this worked, but many times it made characters we thought we understood either do very stupid things, or very out of character things, in order to move the plot forward. Maeve is the perfect example of this, where her voyage of discovery was quite quickly undercut by the need to give her superpowers in order to advance her piece on the chessboard, in service of the plot, but not of legitimate and organic character growth. Hiding it all up with  only works if you're at least willing to meet the viewer halfway. It feels like the writers are much more content to keep their cards close to their chest in the hopes that shocking reveals will substitute for genuine character growth. Maybe for some viewers; not for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Elsie is alive because I really want to see the scene where she and Elsie-bot fight each other in a mirror image karate battle and both knock each other out simultaneously a la Futurama. And then they kiss
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
stannis is dead. elsie is dead. trump is gonna be president.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I am going to laugh my rear end off if Maeve hijacks the entire cold storage room for her army. I'm starting to think that's her plan. A wonderful big penis army
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:It doesn't have to be straightforward to her; it still could be more straightforward and forthcoming with us. As it is, holding back critical information that we could use to understand the character and her past can be a useful storytelling device when used on a single character. When used for all of the characters throughout the narrative, it starts to take its toll. Lol Lost didn't give many details on a lot of characters the first season and by the time they did that generally meant they were gonna die or the writers would just forget about them for awhile. We're 9 episodes in to a so far awesome show and each episode we learn more details about major characters. Not sure what you expect out of this show.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
etalian posted:A wonderful big penis army They are not programmed to use weapons, so she had to find an army that carries their own weapons
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
santanotreal posted:Lol Lost didn't give many details on a lot of characters the first season and by the time they did that generally meant they were gonna die or the writers would just forget about them for awhile. We're 9 episodes in to a so far awesome show and each episode we learn more details about major characters. Not sure what you expect out of this show. ?? We got Locke's wheelchair in episode 4. Episode 4. So far, in 9 episodes, the only major character we actually have a good handle on is Bernard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:?? We got Locke's wheelchair in episode 4. Episode 4. Ah yes, character development = finding out he was paralyzed before. That's not development, that's opening up questions of "why is he able to walk on this island" which goes along with the millions of other questions Lost begs you to ask but refuses to sufficiently answer. If that's what you want out of character development and story, thank god Westworld isn't following in the footsteps so far.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
The greatest character study of this show are the people in this thread. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
I'm still not getting how Bernard was able to kill Elsie and be in Theresa's office at the same time. The incoherent storytelling started off interesting, but now when you see the flaws people start insisting "It's not a bug, it's a feature"
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:12 |
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I am going to laugh my rear end off if Maeve hijacks the entire cold storage room for her army. I'm starting to think that's her plan. When. Not if. You don't put a cavernous derelict train station full of naked androids on the wall in Season 1 unless you're gonna militarise it in Season 2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:41
|
|
